19_45 :congressional record-senate - Congress.gov

19_45 :CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6409" 977. By Mr. COCHRAN: Petition of J. W.

Lawrence and 295 other citizens of Missouri, protesting against the passage of any prohibition legislation by the Congress; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

978. Also, petiticm of Henry L. Schnellmann and 333 other citizens of Missouri, prote3ting against the passage of any .prohibition legislation by the Congress; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

979. By Mr. HART: Memorial of the Societa Di Mutua Soccorso "La Giovine-Sicilia" of Hoboken, N. J., urging that the United States Government and other Allied Nations recogniZe Italy as an ally; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

980. Also, memorial of North Arlington Regular Democratic Club, of North Arlington, N. J .. urging that January 31 be designated as a national holiday, in honor of the late President Franklin Delano Roosevelt; to the Committee on "the Judiciary.

981. By Mr. HESS: Petition of sundry citizens of Hamilton County, Ohio, urging the enactment of legislation for the renewal of the Price Control Act without weakening amendments, and the appropriation of sufficient funds to permit the OPA to function effectively; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

982. By Mr. LYNCH: Petition of Bronx County Bar Association, urging enactment of House bill 2181 to increase the compensation of Federal judges; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

983 . . By Mrs." RO,GERS of Massachusetts: Petition of the General Court of Massachusetts in favor of the transfer to the sev-

\ eral States of the administration of the Federal social sec-qrity law so far as it relates to old-age benefits and survivors' insurance; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

984. By Mr. WELCH: Petition of California Legislature concerning Senate Joint Resolution 32, ·relative to memorializing the Congress of the United States to investigate through its appropriate committee the proposed c~nstruction by the War Department of an ammunition loading facility in the county of Marin a:nd to demand of the War Department that activities in connection with said proposal be discontinued pending such investigation; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

985. Also, petition of the California Legislature concerning Senate Joint Resolution 20, relative to endorsing and urging the passage of House bill 2081, to permit the use of live decoys in the taking of ducks; to the Committee on Agriculture.

986. By the SPEAKER: Petition of the pres:dent, women's Bible class, Methodist Church, Marion, S. C., petitioning consideration of their resolution with reference to their request for 'legislation 'providing that the supply of sugar now being allocated to distillers for the making of alcoholic beverages of all kinds be henceforth terminated, and that such supply, be equitably apportioned among those who ~esire its use for the purpose of canning and preserving our perishable fruits and vegetables; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

987. Also, petition of the Secretary, United States-Mexico Border Public Health Association, petitioning consideration of their resolution with reference to their endor~ement of House bill 592; to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors.

• 988. Also, ' petition of Armand May and various · cftizens· of 'the ·state of Georgia, petitioning consideration- of their resolution with reference to the -pending legislation to establish a permanent Fair Employment Practice Commission; to the Committee on Labor. ·

XCI-404

SENATE THURSDAY, JuNE 21, 1945

The Chaplain, Rev: Frederick Brown Harris, D. D., offered the following prayer: ·

God of our fathers, above all the commotion and confusion of the busy present

· with its bewildering demands, we would now turn aside to seek the quietness of Thy presence. Following the example of the Nation's founders, we pause at midday to lift our thoughts above all press-

- ing cares .and public concerns into · the contemplation of Thy infinite calm. In the secret of Thy pavilion we take refuge from the strl.fe of tongues. By tasks

"too difficult for us we are driven unto Thee for strength to endure and wisdom to rightly interpret the signs of trying times.

In these hallowed Halis may we serve with fidelity_ the cause of our country and of our common humanity and so help to

. build the city of · God on the ruined wastes of this disturbed and disordered world. We ask it through riches of grace in Christ J es:us our _Lord. Amen.

THE JOURNAL

On request of Mr. BARKLEY, and by unanimous consent, the reading of hthe Journal of the proceedings of the calendar day ·wednesday, June 20, 1945, was dispensed with, and the Journal was approv~d.

DEATH OF LT. COMDR. THOMAS C. HART

Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, I announce to the Senate with very deep regret the death of Lt. Comdr. Thomas C. Hart, United States Navy, the son of our colleague the junior Senator from Connecticut. [Mr. HARTL Lieutenant Commander Hart died as the result of an illness contracted in the South Pacific.

I wish to advise Senators that funeral services will be held in the chapel at Fort Myer at 1 p.m., Saturday, June 23, and interment will follow at the Arlington National Cemetery. The lieutenant commander will be buried with full military honors.

PETITIONS

Petitions were laid before the Senate by the President pro tempore and referred as indicated:

A resolution adopted by the women's Bible class of the Methodist Church of Marion, S. C., favoring the enactment of legislation providing that the supply of sugar now being allocated to distillers for the making of alcoholic beverages be terminated and that it be apportioned to citizens for the purpose ot canning fruits and vegetables; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

· to our late President, Franklin D. Roosevelt, which I ask may be printed in the

. RECORD. There being no objection, the resolu

tion was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

Whereas the life of Franklin Delano Roosevelt was characterized by a magnificent and unswerving devotion to the service of his fellowmen; and

Whereas his compassion embrac~d all mankind, and especially the poor, the weak, the sick, and the afflicted-the subject of our special concern; 'and ·

Whereas in his release from earthly bounds the American Foundation for the Blind has suffered grieviously in the loss of its beloved honorary president, and the blind of America have lost an ardent and devoted champion of every measure designed to enrich their lives; and

Whereas his unfaltering and indomitable courage in the face of every adversity has been and will continue to be an unexampled

- inspiration to every human soul: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That profoundly con~cious of our own great lo~s and of the loss of the entire world which mourns him, we reaffirm

- our faith in his philanthropic works and · rededicate ourselves to services for the handi

capped which . he so nobly consecrated, believing this to be the one sure way in which he would have us justify his faith in us; and be it further

Resolved, That we convey to Mrs. Franklin Delano Roosevelt and to the other members of his family our deepest sympathy in their tragic bereavement and our eternal gratitude for the inspiration of his noble life.

M. c. MIGEL, President.

GABRIEL FARRELL, Secretary.

COMPULSORY MILITARY TRAINING

Mr. CAPPER. Mr. President; I have received a letter from Dr. Nelson P. Horn, president of Baker University, Baldwin, Kans., in which he offers a strong argument in opposition to compulsory military training in peacetime. I ask unanimous consent to have it printed in the RECORD and appropriately referred.

There being no objection,' the letter was referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

BAKER UNIVERS!TY, Baldwin, Kans., June 14, 1945.

Senator ARTHUR CAPPER, Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR CAPPER: 1 am Writing to ex

, press my opposition to the present proposal , for compulsory military training in peace

time . . It is no pacifist protest that I make. The issue demands the calm, unprejudiced thinking of every freedom-loving American, The real conflict of thought is not . the extremes of pacifism and militarism. It is between the basic ideologies of democracy on the one hand and those of totalitarianism on the other. The petition of James D. Burns, of Tucson,

Ariz., praying for the enactment of House I

bill 3035, providing for an increase in the wages of postal employees; ordered to lie on the table.

The quest!on does nQt demand a choice between disarmament and continued compulsory military training, as some would have us think. I am altogether in fa.vor of America taking her part--an a voluntary basis for the individual-along with all of our allies who will join in providing adequate world police forc.es. America can keep a million trained men under arms as part of such a provision without becoming a military nation. Such a force can be prepared to say 1mm£diately to a Hitler, a Mussolin1, or ~

TRIBUTE TO FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

Mr. WAGNER. Mr. President, I present a resolution adopted by a Pleeting of the executive committee of the board of trustees of the American Foundation for the Blind paying an eloquent tribute

6410 CONGRESSIONAL . RECORD-:-SENA TE JUNE 21 Tojo, "You can't behave like that in a civilized world."

If we are to have peace in the world, however, the dominant preparation of the masses of our young men must be for peace and not for war. "But we must see to· it that there are no future Buchenwalds, Nordhausens, and Dachaus. That will be worth any price that compulsory military training in time of peace may impose." Thus spoke :1.

good friend to me the other day. I ad vised him not to overlook the fact that it has been the mind of Germany and Japan, steeped in decades of militarist propaganda through programs of training wl1ich have involved all of their young men, that has produced individuals capable of such atrocities. Give us time and the same training and we will be capable of the same atrocities. You can't consistently teach all of our young men the various methods of killing with bare hands, knives, grenades, bombs, and all the rest, without everlastingly impressing on the minds of many that human life is very, very cheap and insignificant. '

Furthern:wre, we have had enough experience now to know that such a policy does not keep nations out of war. Nations that have followed that program have been the ones that have started world wars; Japan against Russia in 1904; Germany and Austria in 1914; Japan against China in 1935; and Germany again in 1939. On the other hand the democratic, noncompulsory training nations have been the dominant forces in winning world wars; the United States and Great Britain in 1914-18, and again in 1939-. Boys who grow up in the free atmosphere of a democracy where individual rights and responsibilities and freedoms are emphasized, when they must fight, have the courage, the versatility, the determination, and know-how to win. Surely, if continuous, compulsory military training would keep nations out of war or guarantee that they would win wars, Central Europe should be the most peaceful or the most victorious place in all the world . . They have had compulsory military training for nearly 150 years.

This war has also demonstrated that men can be trained for war as rapidly as up-todate fighting equipment can be produced. And there is no economy that can produce continuously, adequate equipment for allout war on a world basis. Furthermore, if there were, the equipment, for the most part, would be obsolete when war came.

I am opposed to this thing as a citizen in a democracy for it is altogether inconsistent with everything democracy implies. A democracy in her policies of education encourages youth to ask questions, to think fc themselves, to seek the truth. A dictator·Ship with its esseential compulsory military training, tells youth what to think and not to ask why. I am opposed to it as a father who has three sons and a son-in-law in this war and three little grandsons growing up. I am opposed to it because I am opposed to

·the dictatorial mind from which my boys and my neighbor's hays are fighting to help set the world free.

Isn't it strange and tragic that we kill and maim a million and more of our finest young men in order to defeat enemies who have forfeited their rights to participate as nations in the affairs of the world, and then turn around to propose that we ourselves adopt the very practices which, more than any others, made them what they were? If there is any one thing that was "made in Germany" it is this military program we now propose to take over and make our own.

Let us be Americans. History has adequately demonstrated that we can fight when it is necessary. But let us continue to

do our fighting from the starting point of democracy and not of dictatorship. If we would endure there is no other way. "He that taketh up the sword shall perish by the sword," is not just a nice saying. It is an indestructible law of human life. It has proved true in every ancient_ civilization. It has just been demonstrated in Italy and in Germany and soon will be proved in Japan. It will be true of us in the end just as certain as we put our basic trust -in armed might and the militarizipg of the entire American mind.

Sincerely yours, NELSON P. HoRN, President.

NATURALIZATION OF FILIPINOS

Mr. BUTLER. Mr. President, I present for 3,ppropriate reference a resolution adopted by the delegates of the Filipino Territorial Council of Hawaii and the Washington representative of the Inter-Filipino Community Organizations of the Western States, favoring the enactment of House bill 776, to authorize the naturalization of Filipinos, and ask unanimous consent that It be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection~ the resolution was referred to the Committee on Immigration and ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: Resolution petitioning the honorable mem

bers of the Senate Committee on Immigration for prompt consideration of the pending bill which seeks to naturalize citizens of the Philippines • Whereas for almost half a century citizens

of the Philippines who have been lawful"ly admitted to the United States for permanent residence have been treated "neither citizen nor aliens" of the United States; and

Whereas these law-abiding citizens of the Philippines who· are now residing in continental United States, Alaska, and Hawaii proved themselves to be industrious, and have devoted their utmost efforts to the prosecution of the war, either by joining in the armed forces or in working in essential industries for the production of food or ammunitions; and

Whereas today, as for many years, Filipinos are adopting American ideas on all phases of their lives-economic, cultural, social, and political, and a great many of them have raised respectable American families by virtue of their marriage with the Americans; and

Whereas on April 17, 1945, the House of Representatives unanimously approved a bill (H. R. 776) to authorize the naturalization of Filipinos who have been lawfully admitt.ed to the United States for permanent residence; and

Whereas the said bill (H. R. 776) is now in the hands of the Senate Committee on Immigration for consideration: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the delegates of the Filipino Territorial Council of Hawaii and the . Washington Representative of the Inter-Filipino Community Organizations of the Western States, That the members of the Senate Committee on Immigration be respectfully requested, as it is hereby requested, for prompt · c:onsideration qf the bill (H. R. 776) to authorize the naturalization of Filipinos; and be it further _ Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded to the chairman, Senate Committee on Immigration and to all the members .of his committee, to the President of the United States Senate, to the President of the United States,

Adopted this 18th day of June 1945 in the city of Washington, District of Columbia. ·

Respectfully submitted by: Delegates, Filipino Territorial Coun- -

cil, Hawaii: Philip P. Gamponia, Chairman, Committee on Political Status of Filipinos; Cayetano R. Ligot, Chairman, Committee on Economics; JuanS. Regala, Chairman, Committee on Labor; Fortunato G. Teho, Chairman, Committee on Education; Josephine E. Gamponia, Chairman, Committee on Welfare; Filipino Inter-Community Organizations of the Western States; Diosdado M. Yap, Washington Representative.

PROTECTION OF RIGHTS OF SERVICE MEN AND WOMEN UNDER FEDERAL FARM MORTGAGE ACT

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, I present for appropriate reference and printing in the RECORD a resolution adopted by the boards of directors of the Wahpeton National Farm Loan Association and the Silver Lake National Farm Loan Association at .Lidgerwood, N. Dak., favoring an amendment to the Federal Farm Mort-

. gage Act so as to protect the rights of returning service men and women.

There being no objection, the resolution was referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency and ordered to be printed in the RE<::ORD, as follows:

Whereas a great number of young men and women from the State of North Dakota now engaged in the armed services of the United States will soon be returned to their homes; and ·

Whereas it is known that the great majority of such returning servicemen will return to their own State to engage in their former occupation; and

Whereas North Dakota is chiefly an agricultural State, depending almost exclusively upon farming to give employment to such returning servicemen; and

Whereas a great majority of these men have indicated their desire to own and operate their own farms and have a right to expect that such opportunities will be available to them; and

Whereas a soldier's pay is not sufficient to . permit accumulation of funds with which to purchase farms; and

Whereas it is the duty of the Congress of the United States, and of every man and

·woman within its borders, to assist all such returning servicemen; and

Whereas it is necessary that funds be made available to assist such returning servicemen in purchasing their own farms and to help them rehabilitate themselves; and

Whereas there is now no lending agency operating in the State of North Dakota offerin:g to lend money on real-estate security, Wlth the exception of a few private individual lenders; and

Whereas such private funds are loaned at an interest rate greater than our men now in the armed services can afford to pay; and

Whereas the Federal Land Bank of St. Paul has funds on hand for such purpose, which it urgently desires to lend on such security; and

Whereas the laws of the State of North Da.kota conflict with the Federal Farm Loan Act in that they do not recognize any personal liability on the part of the borrower; and

Whereas it is not possible ·at this time to amend the present State laws of North Dakota: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the ·boards of directors hereinafter named adopt -a resolution recom·

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6411 mending and urgently requesting that the Federal Farm Mortgage Act be amended as to any and all features now in conflict with the laws of the State of North Dakota to protect the rights of such returning servicemen, and to make available to them firstmortgage farm loans through the medium of the Federal Land Bank System; be it further

Resolved, That this resolution be mailed to the Governor of the Farm Credit Administration, with copies to all Members of Congress from this State.

L. 0. KRETCHMAN, Secretary-Treasurer, National Farm

Loan Associations. A. W. LUICK,

President, Wahpeton National Farm Loan Asociation.

JESSE B. OLSON, President, Silver Lake National Farm

Loan Association. LIDGERWOOD, N. DAK.

APPEAL OF HELLENIC AMERICAN RIGHT CLAIMS ASSOCIATION TO ALLIED REP· RESENTATIVES AT SAN FRANCISCO CONFERENCE

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the body of the REcORD a brief letter addressed to me by the Hellenic American Right Claims Association, of Mobile, Ala., together with an appeal to the Allied representatives at the San Francisco Conference, relating to the prosperity and happiness of Greece.

There being no objection, the letter and appeal were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,. as follows:

HELLENIC AMERICAN RIGHT CLAIMS ASSOCIATION,

Mobile, Ala., May 25, 1945. Hon. LISTER HILL,

Senator from Alabama, Washington, D. C.

YOUR HONOR: Enclosed you will find an official copy of our appeal to the allied representatives at the San Francisco Conference.

. We like to believe that you will bring the same to the Senate at your first opportunity with ycur own extension of remarks.

Although most of the subjects are not ripe for discussion at the present time, our desire is to have the case entered into the CoNGRE.SSION AL RECORD.

Thanking you sincerely, Very truly yours,

H. A. R. C. A. SPECIAL COMMITTEE, HARRY ScouFos, Chairman, GEORGE PAPAGEORGE, Secretary. ASTERIOS ASTERIOU,

Special Legal Adviser.

THE GRECIAN CASE_:AN APPEAL To the Chairman of the San Francisco Allied

Conference, the President of the United States and Secretary of State, the Prime Minister of Great Britain and Foreign Minister., the Prime Minister ot Russia and Foreign Minister, the Prime Minister of France and Foreign Minister: We, the undersigned special committee

and the members of the organization we represent, as American citizens from Grecian descent, living in the State of Alabama, having a general meeting especially for the purpose with the cooperation of many other GreekAmericans of all the neighboring communities, met this 4th day of April 1945, at 8 p. m., in Mobile, Ala.

After an extensive discussion, b-egun by Mr. A. Asteriou, introducing the case concerning freed Greece, old country of ours and father ... land of the free democracy, it was resolved that the following appeal be made to the

great powerS' of the world to establish the prosperity and happiness of Greece by the adaptation and immediate application of these- fundamental and radical needs:

1. To be immediately liberated from the invaders, the districts of Grecian lands where such invaders are still remaining, like in the Dodecanese, Crete, and any place else, by the combined Allied forces and established Greek administration.

2. To be permitted to the Gre.ek forces to occupy the Grecian · soils of northern Epirus (so-called southern Albania) recognized by many treaties and the United States Congress, and to establish a Greek administration from Chimara to Korytsa included.

3. To be annexed to Greece from now on all Provinces of Macedonia and Thrace, including the so-called east Roumelia, which Provinces before th3 last century's wars used to be inhabited by a majority of Greek population, chased away by the invaders, especially the Provinces of Monastir (Bitolia), Stroumnitsa, Philippopol, Pyrgos (Bourgas), etc., and all the intermediate districts.

4. To be conceded to Greece from now on the isle of Cyprus by Great Britain, which may keep any naval base necessary for the preservation of peace in the future.

5. To be established immediately to all such Provinces and islands an administration imposed by the Greek Government.

6. To be adjusted immediately the national boundaries in the Balkans from the Adriatic to the Black Sea in favor of the Greek State, which adjustment may insure the security of Greece from sudden attack in the future by any enemy.

7. All neighboring countries in which had been previously, during the past century,

·Greek populations as their normal inhabitants, chased forcibly or by fm·ced treaties, especially in Bulgaria before the annexation of eastern Rqumelia and in Turkey before the catastrophe of Asia Minor, all such neighbors to be forced to accept back in their old homeland all such refugee populations and their descendants and legal successors.

8. All neighboring countries which still have old Greek colonies, especially like in Sicily and southern Italy, to be forced to give the permission to the residents of such colonies to restore their Greek language by schools and teachers imposed by the Greek Government; to restore their old Greek religion of the Greek Orthodox Church by priests and theologists sent by the Oecumenical Patriarchate ,of Constantinople and the Church of Greece; to restore their old individual and social habits and community administration, which all such colonies were forced to quit by the nationalistic Fascist system of Mussolini and his previous prcde- . cessors or anyone else.

9. To be given back by the Turkish Government to the head of the Greek Orthcdox Church, the Oecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople and his clergy, the old rightsracial, religious, and administrative-which the Greek Church had even from its first contact with the Moslem Government, with the first successor of Mohammed, the founder of the Moslem religion state, and from Mohammed the Conqueror. Such racial and religious rights were abolished unilaterally by Turkish Government decrees or by forced treaties (1922).

10. To be returned immediately and right now, by the Government of Italy, Germany, and Bulgaria to their former owners and inhabitants of the invaded Greek provinces any property seized or pseudo-bought by false money, or in case of wreckage and destruction of such properties to be restored by the same kind of articles, animals, and commodities, especially immediately by Bulgaria to the inhabitants of invadecl Macedoni~ and Thrace.

11. To be returned to their homes· those who have been dislodged as hostages, prisoners, war workers, or for other military or political reasons and especially those retained in Egypt and the Jewish Greeks who are sent in Poland and elsewhere; and for those who are lost or killed, their farr.ilies or their communities to be paid indemnities, pro rata to their social and business status.

12. To be annexed to Greece the ancient Greek colonial country Cyrenaica (Libya) for the purpose of habilitating the overabundance of the Greek mainland, so they may earn their livelihood.

13. The Allied relief of the UNRRA to be distributed by the United States officers in Greece, since this is almost all American donations and to be given to all needed people without any discrimination in regards to their polit!cal and social ideals, or race or religious differences.

The four great powers, the United States of America, Great Britain, Russia, and France, to undertake together, without permitting to any one of them alone, the immediate appliance of these just and most needed claims to show that the real democracy shall exist in this land, the mother of democracy and civilization.

Having utmost faith and trust that our Government of the United States will intervene for the successful execution of said claims, we remain,

Very truly yours, H. A. R. A. ORGANIZATION

SPECIAL COMMITTEE, HARRY SCOUFOS, :

President. GEORGE PAPAGEORGE,

Secretary. ASTER !OS ASTERIOU,

Special Legal Adviser.

REPORTS OF A COMMITTEE

The following reports of a committee were submitted:

By Mr. WILSON, from the Committee on Claims:

S. 573. A bill for the relief of Lee D. Horseley; with an amendment (Rept. No. 394).

By Mr. ELLENDER, from the Committee on Claims:

S. 136. A bill for the relief of the Oregon Caves Resort; without amendment (Rept. No. 395) ; and

S. 929. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Marie J. Huffman; with amendments (Rept. No. 396).

BILLS INTRODUCED

Bills were introduced, read the first time, and, by unanimous consent, the second time, and referred as follows:

By Mr. PEPPER (for himself and Mr. MORSE):

S. 1178. A bill providing equal pay for equal work for women, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Educatiqn and Labor.

By Mr. BUSHFIELD: S. 1179. A bill to provide for the enforce

ment of the penal laws of the States on Indian reservations, and for other purposes; to the Committee on IniJian Affairs.

By Mr. LANGER: s. 1180. A bill for the relief of John H.

Sigloh; to the Committee on Claims. (Mr. WAGNER introduced Senate bill1181,

which was referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency, and appears under a · separate heading.)

INCREASE IN LENDING AUTHORITY OF EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF WASHINGTON

Mr. WAGNER. Mr. President, I introduce for appropriate reference a b:ll

6412 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21

to provide for increasing the lending authority of the Export-Import Bank of Washington, and for other purposes, and ask unanimous consent that the bill together with an explanatory statement be printed in the RECORD.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill introduced by the Senator from New York will be received and appropriately referred, and, without objection, the bill together with an explanatory statement will be printed in the RECORD.

The bill (S. 1181) to provide for increasing the lending authority of the Export-Import Bank of Washington, and for other purposes, was read twice by its title and referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That section 9 of the act of January 31, 1935 (49 Stat. 4, ch. 2), as amended, is further amended to read as follows:

"SEc. 9. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Export-Import Bank of Washington, D. c., a banking corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia as an agency of the United States, pursuant to Executive order of the President, shall continue, until the close of business on January 22, 1957, or such earlier date as may be fixed by the President by Executive order, to be an agency of the United States, and in addition to existing charter powers, and without limitation as to the total amount of obligations thereto of any borrower, endorser, acceptor, obligor, or guarantor at any time outstanding, Sf!,id banl{ing corporation is hereby authorized and empowered to discount n·otes, drafts, bills of exchange, and other evidences of debt for the purpose of aiding in the financing and facilitating exports and imports and the exchange of commodities between the United States and any of its Territories anC: insular possessions and any foreign country or the agencies or nationals thereof, and to borrow money and rediscount notes, drafts, bills of exchange, and other evidences of debt for the purposes aforesaid. During the continuance of such agency, it is l:creby authmized to use all of its assets, including capital and net earnings therefrom, and to use· all moneys which have been or may hereafter be allocated to or borrowed by it, in the exercise of its functions as such agency."

SEC. 2. Export-Import Bank of Washington shall have a capital stock of $1,000,000 ,000 subscribed by the United States of America, payment for which shall be subject to call at any time in whole or in part by the board of trustees of the bank. Payment for $1,000,-000,000 of such capital stock shall be made by the surrender to the bank for cancellation of the common stock heretofore issued by the bank and purchased by the United States of America. For the purpose of making the balance of the payments, including the payment to Reconstruction Finance Corporation provided for in section 3 of this act, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to use as a public-debt transaction the proceeds of any securities hereafter issued under the Second Liberty BoJ.¥1 Act, as amended, and

, the purposes for which securities may be issued under that act are extended to include such purpose. Payment under this section of the subscription of the United States to the bank and repayments thereof shall be treated as public debt transactions of the United States. Certificates evidencing stock ownership of the United States of America shall be issued by the bank to the President of the United States or to such other person or persons as he may designate from time to time to the extent of payments by the United States of America and for the surrender of common stock heretofore issued.

SEc. 3. All of the common stock and all of the preferred stock heretofore issued by Export-Import Bank of Washington shall be

transferred by whomsoever held to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay to Reconstruction Finance Corporation the par value of the preferred stock, such payment to constitute a payment to the bank under the provision of section 2 of this act. Any dividends on the preferred stock accumulated and unpaid to the date of its surrender to the Secretary of the Treasury shall be paid to Reconstruction Finance Corporation by the bank. The Secretary of the Treasury shall surrender all common and preferred stock to the bank for cancellation and the bank shall issue to the President of the United States or to such person or persons as he may designate a certificate as provided for in the foregoing section, which shall evidence stock ownership of the United StatEs of America to the aggregate amount of the par value of the common and preferred stock so surrendered.

SEC. 4. Export-Import Bank of washington is authorized to issue from time to time for purcha~e by the Secretary of the Treasury its notes, debentures, aonds, or such other obligations: Provided, however, That the aggregate amount of such obligations outstanding at any one time shall not exceed two and one-half times the subscribed capital stock of the bank. Such obligations shall be redeemable at the option of the bank before rna turity in such manner as may be stipulated in such obligations and shall have such maturity and bear such rate of interest as may be determined by the board of trustees of the bank with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury. Such obligations may mature subsequent to January 22, 1957. The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to purchase any obligations of the bank issued hereunder and for such purpose the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to use as a public-debt transaction the proceeds of any securities hereafter issued under the Second Liberty Bond Act, as amended, and the purposes for which securities may be issued under that act are extended to include such purpoEe. Payment under this section of the purchase price of such obligations of the bank and repayments thereof by the bank shall be treated as publicdebt transactions of the United States.

SEc. 5. Export-Import Bank of Washington shall not have outstanding at any one time loans and guaranties in an aggregate amount in excess of three and one-half times the subscribe~ capital stock of the banlc

SEc. 6. The provisions of thE; existing charter of Export-Import Bank of Washington relating to capital stock are superseded by the provisions of this act and the bank shall be exempt from compliance with ·any provisions of law relating to the retirement or increase of stock of District of Columbia corporations and from the pay ent of any fee or tax to the Recorder of Deeds of the District of Columbia determined upon the value or amount of capital stock of the bank or any increase thereof. Except as they may be in conflict with the provisions of this act, the provisions of all acts with respect to Export-Import Bank of Washington shall r&ain in full force and effect. ·

SEc. 7. The Export-Import Bank of Washington shall transmit to the Congress semiannually a complete and detailed report of operations under this act. The report shall be as of the close of business on June 30 and December 31 of each year.

SEc. 8. The act of April 13, 1934 ( 48 Stat. 574, ch. 112), is hereby repealed.

The explanatory statement presented· by Mr. WAGNER is as follows:

I have today introduced a bill which will increase the lending authority of ExportImport Bank of Washington to $3,500,000,000. At present the bank is authorized to have not in excess of $700,000,000 of loans outstanding at any one time, which amount is tor the most part now loaned or committed.

In addition the bill provides that the life of the bank shall be extended for a period of 10 years; that it shall make semiannual reports to the. Congress with regard to its activities; and that the Johnson Act ~:hall be repealed. Further, it is provided that the bank shall obtain its funds through the sale of stock directly to the Treasury and through loans from the Treasury instead of the p:·esent method of obtaining funds through the medium of Reconstruction Finance Corporation.

Since its inception I have observed the development of Export-Import Bank. In its early years it cooperated with our commercial banks and exporters in financing the shipment of our raw materials and finished products to many countries on terms not otherwise available. Following the advent of war in Europe the activities of ExportImport Bank were limited principally to the Western Hemisphere and to China. It made loans to United States firms with respect to specific foreign orders and it extended credit to the foreign purchaser to enable it to purchase United States products. During the war it has assisted in the development abroad of sources of strategic materials required by our war industries and has, to the extent possible under wartime conditions, -attempted to lceep open established trade channels. Tlie op3rations of the bank have at all times been self -sustaining.

With the end of the war in Europe the United States is met with an unpi·ecedented demand for the products of its farms and factories. Faced with this opportunity the Export-Import Bank should be placed in a position to continue, as in the past, to assist in the continuo_us development of our foreign trade. In carrying out this policy of enlightened self-interest, the United States will promote permanent and fundamental trade relationships in a world which we hope will be drawn closer together through the operation of machinery for international cooperation liO insistently demanded by the American people.

EDUCATIONAL BENEFITS FOR VETERANSSUMMARY OF SENATE BILL 1176

Mr. PEPPER. Mr. President, yest«~rday I introduced Senate bill 1176, to amend Public Law 346, to bring about, if enacted, certain changes in the GI law. I ask that there be incorporated immediately following my remarks a summary of what that bill, if enacted, would do in relation to the GI law.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The summary is as follows: · S. 1176, the bill to amend Public Law 346,

would effect the following changes in educa tiona! benefits:

1. The bill removes reference to interruption of education and malces benefits available regardless of whether or not education was impeded, interfered with, etc., by reason of induction into the service.

2_. The bill removes the requirement that the educational course shall be initiated not later than 2 years after discharge or termination of the war. The reason for removing this provision is that veterans may wish to take Jobs when they first come back in order to earn some money. It is just as desirable to have education available 2, 3 , and 4 years after the war as during. the first 2 years.

3. The provision limiting the period during which benefits can be obtained to 7 years after the termination of the war is removed.

4. The distinction between veterans over 25 years at the time of induction and those under this age is removed. It has no further meaning when the provision regarding interruption of education is taken out.

5. Reference to "refresher or retraining course·~ is removed in line 8, paragraph 2.

1945 ·CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6413 part VIII. The phrase seems to have no meaning, and only creates confusion. A veteran should be entitled to benefits regardless of whether the course he wants is labeled education, training, retraining, or refreshing.

6. The 4-year limitation on educational benefits is removed and veterans are given entitlement to 1 year of education plus a period equivalent to the length of service.

7. Special provision is made in this bill for qualified veterans who wish to complete preprofessional add professional courses of education. For such veterans, the maximum benefit is increased to 7 years, regardless of length of service. The purpose of this pro-

. vision is to encourage professional training which is so important to the future of the country.

8. Monetary dependency benefits to veterans obtaining education are increased by this bill. It provides 4il00 for two dependents, $125 for three, and $150 for four or more.

9. This bill requires that the Administrator shall arrange for educational and vocational guidance for veterans. According to the present law the Administrator is empowered to do so if he sees fit. This bill also stipulates that the Administrator shall obtain a list of counseling agencies from the States and that the Administrator shall make 'information on the need for trained pzrsonnel available semiannually instead of as he deems necesEary.

10. Section 1505 is changed so as to make it clear that educational benefits will not be deducted from any future benefits the veteran may obtain.

HEALTH ASPECTS OF SENATE BILL 1176

Mr. PEPPER. Mr. President, immediately following the summary I have just bad printed in the RECORD I should like to insert a statement as to how Senate bill 1176 would affect the health aspects of the GI bill.


The statement is as follows: HEALTH ASPECTS OF S. 1176, A BILL TO AMEND

GI BILL OF RIGHTS, PUBLIC LAW 346, THE

SERVICEMEN 'S READJUSTMENT ACT OF 1944

In view of my interest in health as chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Wartime Health and Education, I wish to submit the following summary of what I feel are some health aspects of the proposed bill to amend the GI bill of rights. It is not primarily a health bill, but its effects on health could be far-reaching, and I feel they are worth pointing out.

1. It would make a medical or dental education available to many who otherwise would not be able to afford it.

The provision in the amendment which allows continuance of qualified veterans in professional or preprofessional work up to 7 years will allow many veterans to undertake medical and den tal courses who otherwise could not afford the long, expensive training necessary in these fields. During the· war many Medical Corps enlisted men have acquired both invaluable experience and a deep interest in medicine. The amendment would enable them to obtain the :full professional training they so deeply desire. The same is true for the many premedical and predental students whose training was interrupted by the war. It is certainly in the interest of the N"ation that such veterans get full medical or dental training. Yet, unless the bene-fits provided under the present GI bill are extended, many will not be able to obtain it.

2. It would enable many medical veterans to take advantage of the educational benefits of the GI bill of rights who would otherwise not be able to do so.

A. The vast majority of armed forces doctors and dentists are over 25 years of age, or

will be at the time of their discharge. Under the GI bill of rights as it is interpreted now, all are entitled to 1 year of education at Government expense, but in order to obtain more those over 25 must prove their education was interrupted. Since many over 25 years old did not have their education interrupted, or would have a .hard time proving it, the present act limits most of them to 1 yea~ .

B. While taking this postgraduate education, the veteran would, under the present bill, receive a subsistence allowance of $50 a month if single, or $75 a month if he has one or more dependents. Most doctors are married, are over 30, and have children. It is hard to see how the current subsistence allowance of $75 a month ($900 a year) would be adequate for such men. It would appear to be more of a "malnutrition allowance." The current average net income of civilian doctors is $9,000 per year, the prewar average $4,500. As a result of the low allowance in the current GI bill, many medical veterans, especially those with families, would have to forego postgraduate training. Many of them have undergone considerable financial hardships during the war and would not be able to continue this sacrifice much longer. The proposed amendment would increase the subsisterlCe allowances to $125 a month ($1 200 a year) for a veteran with three dependents, and to $150 a month ($1,800 a year) if there were four or more dependents. This is certainly a modest in· crease.

3. It would encou_rage training of auxiliary medical personnel.

By requiring the Administrator to arrange for educational and . vocational guidance, a chance is created for channeling promising veterans into vitally needed auxiliary medical fields . Examples of such fields are physical therapy, dietetics, psychology, medical social work, public health nursing, medical and hospital administration, and the like. In this connection it should be recalled that many thousands of veterans will be women. Certain of the auxiliary medical fields have been traditionally staffed by women, and the amendment would be most valuable in this regard.

. The amendment requires the Administrator to make available information on t::.e need for trained personnel twice yearly instead of "as he deems necessary." Thus, the need for personnel in the medical shortage fields would necessarily be brought to the attention of the public and of the Veterans' Administration.

4. The vast majority of armed forces doctors want further training after their dischatge.

The American Medical Association and the armed forces cooperated recently in sending a questionnaire to each medical officer on duty with the Army, Navy, United States Public Health Service, and Veterans' Administration. Over 21,000 replies were received representing 35 percent of all medical officers on duty in Septem~er 1944.1 The returns showed that 81.3 percent of the total wanted some postgraduate medical training. Nearly 60 percent (12,534) wanted courses of 6 months or longer; the other 21 percent

' (4,563) courses of 6 months or less duration. The results of a smaller pilot question

naire under the same auspices (1,000 returns) showed that of the 53 percent requesting long courses, 32 percent wanted 2 years of training and an additional 21 percent wanted 3 years or more.2 This means that 28 percent of all men replying wanted 2

1 Lt. Col. Harold Lueth, Postgraduate Wishes of Medical ·omcers, Final Report on 21,029 Questionnaires, Journal of the A. M. A., v. 127, p. 759, March 1945.

2 Victor Johnson & F. H. Arestad, Educational Facilities Required for Returning Medical Officers, ibid., v. 126, p. 253, September 23, 1944.

years or more training. Similar breakdowns are not available on the larger sample, but they would almost certainly be in the same range.

Thus, we can conclude that the returning medical veterans want considerable further education. If it is made readily available to them, they are almost certain to take advantage of it.

Unfortunately, we cannot be quite so confident they will automatically select the fields where the need for personnel is greatest. The questionnaire showed that very few men in proportion to the need signified their desire for courses in psychiatry, public health, industrial medicine, hospital administration, and certain other shortage fields. This is another problem-that of making these fields attr!tctive to the returning medical veteran.

5. The broadening of educational benefits of the GI bill is necessary to meet the health needs of the Nation.

A. The Nation's supply of medical personnel is not adequate. Veterans should be attracted into the medical and allied professions, and educational benefits are neczssary to accomplish this.

B. A maximum number of medical veterans (doctors, dentists, etc.) should receive postgraduate medical training. Many have been in jobs completely different from their civilian practices and need refresher and retraining courses. Medical officers are continually calling this matter to my attention.

C. Personnel is needed acutely in certain fields requiring extensive postgraduate training. Psychiatry, orthopedics, pediatrics, pu.blic health, physical therapy, and medical administration are a few examples. Such training takes from months to years, depending on the individual's qualifications. and nonGovernment funds are not adequate to finance the long periods necessary. The proposed amendment would help meet this need.

D. The whole educational level of the medical and allied professions should be raised ~ Those practitioners .who have lost contact with the main stream of modern, scientific medicine should have an opportunity for iiberal postgraduate and refresher training opportunities .

E. The acute civilian need for doctors should not dictate the restriction of postgraduate medical training courses. It might be said that the civilian need for doctors and other medical personnel is so great that we should not divert any into postgraduate medical courses. It would be very shortsighted, however, to say this. The ultimate good obtained from the training courses will greatly outweigh the temporary continued loss of these men to the civilian population.

In addition, it should be remembered that most postgraduate medical training such as hospital internships, residencies, fellowships, clinical refresher courses, and the like, all involve examination and treatment of patients, so the personnel is not really lost to the civilian population.

In addition, the proposed amendments would minimize the continued withdrawal of medical personnel from civilian life by allowing nien to take advantage of the educational provisions of the GI bill later than 2 years after their discharge. Thus, the withdrawal would be spread out over a period of time and the load on educational institutions eased.

To summarize, it is my opinion that the proposed amendment would help meet some of the major health problems in the reconversion period through its educational provisions.

ALL-NAVY BASEBALL GAME AT GRIFFITH STADIUM

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, 1 wish to make an announcement, which I believe will be of interest to all Members of the Senate.

6414 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21

On the evening of June 27, 1945, at 8:30 o'clock there will be held an allNavy baseball game at Griffith Stadium. No charge will be made. The boys are anxious to have as many Members of the Senate and of the House of Representatives attend as possible. The game will be played primarily for the benefit of disabled soldiers. It will be participated in by the Bainbridge Commodores and the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts. Many former big-league stars will be present.

Mr. Biffie, Secretary of the Senate, will have the necessary tickets, and Senators may take their wives and other members of their family, as well as the members of their office staffs. Scats will be reserved for Senators, who will indicate to Mr. Biffie how many tickets they will need. As ! -have already said, no charge will be made for the tickets.

I may say that a similar announcement is being made today in the House of Representatives. THE MEAT SHORTAGE-LETTER FROM

ASSISTANT DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR RATIONING

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, I present and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a letter addressed to me by Mr. John J. Madigan, Assistant Deputy Administrator for Rationing, Office of Price Administration. The letter relates to the meat shortage, wit'l especial reference to the situation in Rhode Island, but it applies to the country generally and will, I think, be of widespread interest. ·

There being no objection, the ·letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D. C., June 21, 1945.

The Honorable T. F. GREEN, United States Senate.

DEAR SENATOR GREEN: I appreciate the opportunity of talking with you at length on the meat situation in Rhode Island in our conference this morning. I should like to outline briefly to you the action that has been taken by the Office of Price Administration to deal with the meat situation not only in Rhode Island, but in many other sections of the country.

We have issued control order No. 1 which was effective April 30, 1945, and which sets restriction per:centages upon the slaughter of livestock by all non-federally inspected slaughters and by farmers. The purpose of this order is to force a reasonably normal percentage of the civilian meat supply into the hands of federally inspected slaughterers who are the only slaughterers who are permitted by law to ship meat across State lines. These are, of course, the slaughterers who supply the bulk of the meat for deficiency areas such as Rhode Island. It was apparent that the first step in any correction of the . maldistribution of meat was to place a reasonably normal percentage. of the supply in the hands of those slaughterers who normally ship to deficiency areas.

A second step in dealing with this problem was the issuance of amendment 8 to control order No. 1, which requires that all • slaughterers in the United States resume the same geographical pattern of distribution as they followed during the first three months of 1944. During those three months there was a flush production of meat and we feel, in general, that there was a reasonably equitable geographical distribution of meat at that time. Even though the total civilian supply currently is substantially lower than

the supply during those three months, the resumption of the same pattern will go a long way toward bringing about an equitable distribution of a short supply. This same order requires slaughterers to file with the Office of Price Administration reports showing their pattern of distribution. These reports when analyzed will provide this office with the information necessary to make sound supply determinations for any area of the country.

We are confident that these steps will show considerable improvement in the distribu- ' tion of meat. We would like to point out, however, ti at even after these orders have their full effect the meat supply for civilians will still be relatively short, both in relation to what it was last year and in relation to what the consumer would like to purchMe with his current high level of earnings.

Sincerely, JOHN J. MADIGAN I

Assistant Deputy Administrator for Rationing.

DECLARATION OF PEACE FUNDAMENTALS

Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, · an outstanding contribution toward creating support for a proper international organization for peace was carried through by Judge Ewing Cockrell. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the declaration of peace fundamentals which Judge Cockrell worked out and which were accepted as objectives by many persons be printed in the RECORD with the names of the persons who allowed their names to be signed to the objectives.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With- · out objection, it is so ordered. The declaration, with the names signed thereto, is as follows:

DECLARATION OF 10 PEACE FUNDAMENTALS We approve in substance the following 10

fundamental policies or foundations for postwar peace. They are, expressly, only policies, do not include the forms of international organization to carry them out nor exclude our support of other policies or measures:

1. Disarmament of Axis or aggressor nations.

2. Maintenance of international authority with power to prevent aggression and to preserve the peace of the world.

3. Fair treatment of Axis or aggressor nations.

4. A body or procedures to secure peaceful settlement of any international dispute.

5. Victorious allies to hold armaments and decrease them as they feel secure.

6. The peace to bring more freedom to peoples.

7. Mutual aid between nations, especially to the weak.

8. International ~cooperation for betterments in all fields of human life.

9. Special postwar cooperation by the United States, Great Britain, Russia, and China, with the other United Nations.

10. International organization on a wide and voluntary basis.

Senator Warren R. Austin, member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; joint author Mackinac Declaration of Republican Postwar Advisory Council.

Senator Joseph H. Ball, joint author of Four Senators' Resolution on Postwar International Cooperation; member bipartisan campaign committee 1943 for international cooperation.

Senator Harold H. Burton, joint author same resolution and member ,same biparti~ san campaign committee;

Senator Theodore Francis Green, member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; United States delegate to International Red Cross Convention, 1912.

Senator James F. Guffey, member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Senator Carl A. Hatch, joint author Four Senators Resolution and member bipartisan campaign committee.

Senator Lister Hill, joint author same resolution and member bipartisan committee; Democratic whip, United States Senate.

Senator Burnet R. Maybank, member same bipartisan committee.

Senator Richard B. Russell, chairman, Senate Overseas Committee.

Senator Elbert D. Thomas, of Utah, member Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, chairman, Senate Committee on Education and Labor; vice president, Amer.ican Society of International Law; member, Committee on Intellectual Cooperation of Interparliamentary Union. •

Senator Harry S. Truman, chairman, ~Special Committee to Investigate the National Defense Program; member, bipartisan campaign committee for international cooperation, 1943.

Senator Robert F. Wagner, member, Seriate Committee on Foreign Relations; former justice, New York Supreme Court.

Senator Wallace A. White, Jr., member, Senate Committee on Foreign Relations; assistant Republican leader, United States Senate.

Former Senator George W. Norris (Independent), former chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

Representative Charles A. Eaton, ranking Republican member, House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

· Representative Richard P. Gale, member, bipartisan campaign committee.

Representative Robert Hale, member, bipartisan committee (M. A., Oxford).

Representative Christian A. Herter, member, bipartisan campaign committee; member, United States Embassy staff in Berlin and Belgium, 1916; secretary, American Peace Commission, 1918.

Representative Walter H. Judd, member, bipartisan campaign committee; China medical missionary and superintendent of hospitals, 1925-38; speaker against Japanese mllitary menace, 1939-40.

Representative Charles M. LaFollette, member, bipartisan campaign committee.

Representative Clare Boothe Luce, former foreign correspondent.

Representative Howard J. McMurray, mem• ber, bipartisan committee.

Representative Robert Rams;peck, member, bipartisan 'committee; Democratic whip, House of Representatives. '

Representative James A. Wadsworth, mem- , ber, Committee on Foreign Affairs; former United States Senator from New York

Justice Owen J. Roberts, United States Supreme Court; chairman of board that investigated Pearl Harbor disaster.

Chief Justice D. Lawrence Groner, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Judge Calvert Magruder, Boston, senior (presiding) judge, United States Circuit Court of AppE'!als, First· Judicial Circuit; former professor and vice dean Harvard Law School.

Judge John J. Parker, Charlotte, N. C., sen• ior (presiding) judge, Fourth Judicial Circuit Court of Appeals; medalist American Bar Association 1943 for conspicuous service in the cause of American jurisprudence.

Judge OrieL. Phillips, Denver, senior (presiding) judge, Tenth Judicial Circuit Court of Appeals.

Judge Herbert F. Goodrich, Philadelphia, United States Court of Appeals, Third Judicial Circuit; former president American Association of Law Schools.

Judge Justin Miller, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

Judge John C. Knox, senior (presiding)" judge, United States. District Court, Southern District of New York; chairman Federal

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6415 Courts Committee on Jury Selection, appointed by Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. ·

Judge Albert L. Reeves, senior judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.

Gov . E. P. Carville, Nev.ada. Gov. Prentice Cooper,· Tennessee. Gov. Colgate W. Darden, Virginia. Gov. Sam C. Ford, Montana. Acting Gov. WalterS. Goodland, Wisconsin. Gov. Bourke B. Hickenlooper, Kansas. Gov. John Moses, North Dakota. Gov. Henry F. Schricker, Indiana. Gov. Sumner Sewall, Maine. ·Gov. Edward J. Thye, Minnesota. Joseph E. Davies, former Ambassador to

Russia. · · John W. Davis, former Ambassador to Great

Britain, Democratic Presidential nominee, 1924.

Admiral William H. Standley (retired), former Ambassador to Russia,. United States Delegate to Disarm·ament Conference, London 1934.

Ferdinand Q. Blanchard, moderator, Con.:. gregatiohal Christian Churches.

Chancelor Harry Woodburn Chase, New York University.

President Frederic R. Coudert, American Society of International Law; commander,

. French Legion d'Honneur; ofilcer, Crown of Belgium; former chairman, New York League of Nations Association. . George Creel, former editor, Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News; chairman, Committee on Public Information, .First World

.. War; former chairman, San Francisco Regional Labor Board.

President Frank P. Graham, University of North Carolina; chairman, National Advisory Committee on Social Security; public member, War Labor Board.

President William Green, American Federation of Labor; former member, governingboard of the International Labor Organization.

Dean A. J. Harno, University of Illinois College of Law; former president, American

. Association of Law Schools, and- director, Illinois Association for Criminal Justice.

Most Rev. Robert E. Lucey, archbishop of San Antonio; former president, California Conference of Social Work, and director, Catholic Welfare · Bureau of Los Angeles; organizer of Welfare Bureau of San Antonio.

Chairman Robert A. Millikan, California Institute of Technology; former president, American Academy of Arts and Sciences and American Physical Society; ·Nobel Prize winner; member, League of Nations Committee on Intellectual Cooperation, Order of the Jade, of China, and Chevalier de l'Ordre National de Ia Legion d'Honneur, of France.

President Julian Morgenstern, the Hebrew Union College, Cincinnati, Ohio.

President John L. Newcomb, University of Virginia.

Rev. Frederick E. Reissig, executive secretary, Washington Federation of Churches.

Chester H. Rowell, delegate, International Labor Conference, Geneva, 1939; delegate, International Congress Penal Affairs, 1924; former member, National Crime Commission, and pre.sident, California Conference on Social Work; former teacher, Illinois University; and editor, San Francisco Chronicle.

Rt. Rev. Msgr. John A. Ryan, former professor sociology .and economics, Catholic University and Trinity College; director, social action department of National Catholic Welfare Conference.

Bishop P. A. Wallace, African Methodist Episcopal Zion Churches, Brooklyn.

Robert J. Watt, international representa tive, American Federation of Labor; American Workers' delegate to Geneva, 1936-40; member, National Labor Relations Board; chairman, Labor Advisory Committee, Federal Communications Commission.

Dr. Mary E. Woolley, president emeritus, · Mount Holyo~e · College; delegate, Conference for the Reduction and Limitations of Armaments; former honorary moderator, Congregational-Christian General Council; former -president, American Association of University Women, and chairman of its committee on international relations.

RECONVERSION PRICING PROGRAMLETTER FROM AND ADDRESS BY CHES• TER BOWLES [Mr. BARKLEY asked and obtained leave.

· to have printed in the RECORD a letter addressed to him by Han. Chester Bowles, Administrator of the Office of Price Administration, with reference to the reconversion pricing program, and an address delivered by Mr. Bowles, which appear in the. Appendix .. ! ADDRESS B¥ SENATOR WAGNER BEFORE

NATIONAL PUBLIC . HOUSING CONFERENCE

[Mr. WAGNER asked and obtained leave to have printed in the ·RECC>RD an address delivered · by him at the fourteenth annual

. meeting of the National Public Housing Conference, June 19, 1945, at the Mayflower Hotel, Washington, D. C., which appears in· · the Appendix.]

DUMBARTON OAKS~ADDRESS BY SENATOR BUSHFIELD. .

[Mr. BUSHFIELD : asked and oJ;>tained leave to have printed in the &ECORD an address on "Dumbarton Oaks," delivered by him before the Sons of the American Revolution at Harrisburg, Pa., June 14, 1945, which appears in the Appendix.]

WORK OF ·SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR IN CONNECTION WITH WARTIME HEALTH [Mr. PEPPER asked and obtained leave

to have printed in the RECORD an editorial from the Wisconsin Medical Journal relative to the work of the Committee on Education and Labor in connection with wartime health and also on editorial entitled "No More 'Patchwork' Medicine" from the same journal, which appear in the Appendix.] ·

COLUMBIA RIVER AUTHORITY-EDiTO-. RIAL AND EXPLANATION OF A BILL

[Mr. MITCHELL asked and obtained leave to have printed in the RECORD an editorial on the subject of the Columbia River Autho'rity~from the Wenatchee Daily World, and an explanation of Senate b:ll 460, which appear in the Appendix.]

PEACETIME MILITARY CONSCRIPTIONEDITORIAL FROM THE JAMESTOWN (N. DAK.) SUN

[Mr. YOUNG asked and obtained leave to have printed in the RECORD an editorial entitled "Let's Go Slow on Peace-Time Draft," from the Jamestown (N. Dak.) Sun, which appears in the Appendix.]

The PRESIDENT· pro tempore. The routine morning business is concluded.

ORDER FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE CALENDAR

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the calendar for bills to which there is no objection, beginning where we left off at the last call, which is Calendar No. 280.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? The Chait hears none,

· and it is so ordered. LIVING CONDITIONS UNDER OP A

REGULATIONS

Mr. '\TILEY. Mr. President, I received in the mail today a few communi-

cations from my constituents that cause me to pause and wonder if we in the Congres~ are meeting four-square the obligations upon us.

A few moments ago the distinguished majority leader put something into the RECORD from Mr. Bowles, the Price Administrator. I have a letter- here from a union in Milwaukee. I have another letter from a businessman. I desire to · read only two of the ·paragraphs merely to show the sentiments and thoughts not simply of one group of our people, but. of many, for apparently the views expressed · are quite generally held. Here is a letter from the secretary of a prominent union · in Milwaukee:

At a recent meeting of this council, the delegates representing the union carpent~rs of Milwaukee, Waukesha, Ozaukee and Washington Counties really "let loose" and

' took their "flings" on living conditions forced on them through no fault of their own by the point system of OPA .

They agreed to protest to their Congressmen and Senators requesting them to use their influence and vote to immediately displace the yoke forced on the citizens by the OPA regulations so they may again be able to live and act as free American citizens and not be compelled to ,feast on jelly bread sandwiches morning, noon, and evening . .

The letter proceeds. Listen to this paragraph:

Unless Congress takes a firm stand and immediately- remedies this situation, don't be surprised if something will take _ place among the workers that will not to the best interest of our citizens and the "good old U.S. A."

Expecting _your immediate cooperation in this very urgent matter we remain-

It is signed by the Carpenters' District Council of Milwaukee County and Vicinity by its secretary .

In the same mail this morning I received a letter from a businessman who says:

I . realize that OPA is a necessary war evil and am not as Walter Winchell says of all who think ~s I do, trying to :;;abotage the whole program. However, it could be done more simply. There is hardly a day-

Listen to this. It portrays the condition of the average little-business man.

There is hardly a day I do not receive one ceiling or amendment from OPA . . I can't make head or tail of the things and neither can the local OPA ofilces give me any information. I haven't the time to study them or comply with them. I haven't the ·help to

' keep the records they require or the filing equipment to file them, and you can't buy it. As a result, I am constantly under the fear that the enforcement division will fine me and put me out of business. I have never willfully violated a ceiling, and get mighty sick of watching business go to competitors who pay more for eggs or have chickens to sell because they are paying over ceiling prices. Yet I am in the same jeopardy they are only because of the physical impossibility to keep up with all the ceilings and I am working about 100 hours per week.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. As the Senate is now proceeding under the 5-minute rule, the Senator's time has expired.

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, · I ask unanimous ·consent to speak for 3 minutes longer. I merely. want to finish this letter.

r

6416 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 2J . The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is

there objection? The Chair hears none, and the Senator may proceed.

Mr. WILEY. Listen to this: If our economy isn't soon taken out of the

hands of the bureaucrats and returned to those who know how to run it, we are likely to face an. uprising. In a re~ail store, you learn the temper of the people. You must know the facts so it is not necessary to go into further detail.

Mr. President, that is a letter from a businessman.

In the same mail today there came to me a clipping from an article written by Cedric Adams' column, In This Corner, discussing the situation in Canada. I ask that the a-rticle by Cedric Adams be printed in full in 'the RECORD.

There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the REco~D, as follows:

IN THIS CORNER (By Cedric Adams)

Let's talk about the meat situation as an opener today. A group of eastern butchers, who, like most butchers, have been unable to obtain meat, decided to pool their funds and send two representatives up to Canada just to see what they could buy. Before going to Canada, the pair went to Washington to learn the lay of the land. They were told by the DeP.artment of Agriculture it had no objection to the deal. The Department even went so far as to say . it would inspect the meat they might buy for free. The Canadian Embassy even gave its 0. K. to the proposed plan. An attache of the Canadian Embassy said, -"Yes, we have plenty of meat. All you have to do is find it. If the Canadian Government doesn't need it, you may get a permit to ship it to the United States." The Americans went to Montreal and purchased 10 cars of prime dressed beef and veal and 6 cars of livestocka total of 640,000 pounds. The ·meat cost 19 cents a pound-2'(2 'cents less than the OPA ceiling price in this country.

The Montreal packers said they're anxious to do business with Americanst They explained the price they get from the British is 3 cents less than the American butchers paid them. After the meat was sealed in refrigerator cars the whole deal was canceled by a high Canadian food official who told the buyers he acted at the request of the United States State Department. When the butchers returned to the United States they were told by tl;le State Department the deal was held up by the War Food Administration, These men, however, brought back some other interesting information from Canada that might interest you and the OPA: They saw huge quantities of cheese with a 21-centa-pound price tag against a 45-cent ceiling here. Butter up there was 36 cents a pound compared to our 51 cents a pound. There are more than 56,000,000 pounds of butter in storage for Canada's 11,500,000 population.

Eggs in Canada sell from 20 to 24 cents a dozen compared with a retail ceiling here of 49 cents. And in Canada the supply is so great farmers are killing off laying hens to prevent a further price drop. Chickens are so abundant across the border that you can buy all you want at any price you're willing to pay. Here chickens are almost unobtainable except in the black market. One more item that should interest you in this little comparison is this: The only two major items that are rationed up there are gasoline and. butter and the Canadians expect gasoline rationing to be entirely removed on or before July 1o • • • There may be a thousand and on~ reasons behind, shall we say, this maladjustment. I hope the OP A doesn't think we're needling the Office.

We're simply reporting what two butchers found in Canada. Don't you think the facts are interesting?

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, in the same mail there came a clipping under the headline "Says meat cut to force cafe closings."

I merely bring this to the attention of the Senate because we cannot become irresponsive to the present condition, apparently a pretty dangerous one, whicp is becoming apparent to people who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

Mr. President, in the same mail came a clipping from a newspaper with the headline "WLB defied by Higgins' ship workers," and at the top is typewritten "Montgomery Ward was taken over by the Government, but Lewis got away with it."

I ask that this clipping be printed in the RECORD in full.

There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

WLB DEFIED BY HIGGINS' SHIP WORKERS NEw ORLEANS.-A labor-management con

troversy which paralyzed activities in at least two plants of Higgins Industries, Inc., which built invasion boats and other war material, continued deadloc}{ed today despite a War Labor Board directive ordering the appro~imately 5,000 workers back to their jobs.

The men, affiliated with the New Orleans Metal and Building Trades Council ( AFL) voted yesterday to disregard the WLB order and the next move appeared to be up to the Government. · ·

Officials previously hinted there was a possibility of the Government taking over and operating the . plants.

The men failed to report Monday as the result of the cancellation of a closed-shop agreement by the company. The shipbuilding commission of the WLB upheld the cancellation. The contract was negotiated in 1940 and was t'o expire September 13, 1945 ..

In announcing the union's vote yesterday not to return to work, C. E. Alexander, Jr., secretary-treasurer of the trades council, said "our position is unchanged. No agreement-no work."

Andrew J. Higgins, company president, said the controversy resulted because "I am giving returning servicemen jobs without forc-ing them to join any union." ·

Alexander declared Higgins was using the servicemen factor "as a smoke screen to block out the union,'! and asserted that negotiations toward a new contract broke down when the .company refused even to .consider a clause providing benefits for returning servicemen.

OFFICE OF WAR INFORMATION-ARTICLE BY MAJ. GEORGE FIELDING ELIOT

Mr. MEAD. Mr. President, yesterday, very wisely, the Committee on Appropriations reported the appropriation bill covering the OWI and · recommended an increase in the appropriation for that agency.

In that connection, I quote the following statement from Maj. George Fielding Eliot:

OWl TERMED VITAL AT PRESENT (By Maj. George Fieldi~g Eliot) .

It is to be hoped that the Senate will restore the appropriation for the European and domestic activities of the Office of War Information eliminated by the House.

This is not a plea for the perpetuation of OWl. It is a war agency, and as the war draws to a close arrangements should be made for transferring such of its activities as

may be needed in the post-war period to other departments of the Government. But the sudden chopping off of the appropriations before such arrangements for transfer of needed work have been made simply means that the work will stop, and it should not stop. ,

As to th~ necessity of most of what the OW! now is doing, especially in Europe, there is very little room for doubt. The late .President Roosevelt emphasized on many occasions that this is a war. where ideas are weapons, and where the stakes are the minds of men. America has a message for the world. The OW! is the agency by which that message is transmitted-by which the American story is told. We can, if . we desire, silence the voice· of America in Europe. But we shall do so at the risk of losing all influence with peoples who, in millions, look to us for guidance and hope, and of losing all influence in the vital task of reshaping the German mind.

To be specific, here is a telegram sent to OW! Chief Elmer Davis by Brig. Gen. Robert A. McClure, Chief of the Psychological Warfare Division of Supreme Allied Headquarters (referred to in the message as PWD SHAEF). and now designated to serve in the Ameri• can zone of occupation in ·Germany:

"In view of the recent publications of some rather conflicting articles concerning the relationship between the civilian agencies and the PWD SHAEF, I tried to clarify these relationships at a recent press conference.

"I stressed the fact that on the United States side the State Department developed the basic political policies and that the OWI developed the propaganda policies which stem from these political policies. Also, that the policy guidance which OWl sent to PWD

, SHAEF comes through military channels. At the time when the United States group control council becomes operative this same relationship will continue.

"It is obvious that as long as information controls operate in Germany it will be necessary to have United States Government policy guidance. Also, PWD SHAEF for the re-· mainder of the SHAEF period and information control services of the United States group control council will depend on OWI for civilian specialists, technicians, and special supplies and equipment for the operations of information control. OW! will be expected to continue to furnish the following:

"1. Special newsreel compilations and doc• umentary films. • • •

"2. Magazines and booklets, specially prepared, for distribution in Germany as approved by United States or requested .by United States. The atrocities pamphlet KZ is an example.

"3. Radio programs from the Voice of America ·and from such large continental transmitters outside of Germany which come under United States control. * • *

"4. To make available world news for :the newspapers which are published in Germany by us. Some time later, when German,papers are licensed, a course of world news will be needed until -a German news agency is or· ganized. • • •

"5. Photographic exhibits and such other services as may be needed. The information control &ection. United States group control council and PWD SHAEF are depending on OWI for these United States services and hopes that OW! will be able to continue to supply them.''

This message has not heretofore been made public, though there is obviously no reason why it should not. In fact, it must be admitted that Director Davis seems to have leaned over backward to avoid making his own case and that of his agency in the court of public opinion. This is, I think, a mis• take.

At all events, General McClure's message speaks for itself. It states the job which OW! is expected to do. A job which must be

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6417 done. The State Department feels the same way about it.

Until other agencies are ready to take up this burden, it is the owrs· job to carry on. The voice of America must not be silenced.

CALL OF THE ROLL

Mr. BARKLEY. -Mr. President, the Senate is about to proceed to consider measures on the calendar, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk called the roll, and the following Senators answered to their names: Aiken Austin Bailey Ball Bark~ey Bilbo Brewster Bridges Br:ggs Brooks Burton Bushfield Butler Byrd C:1pehart Capper Chandler Chavez Donnell Downey Eastland Ellender Ferguson Fulbright George Gerry

Green Myers Guffey O'Daniel _ Gurney O'Mahoney Hatch Overton Hawkes Pepper Hayden Reed Hill Revercomb Hoey ·Robertson Johnson, Calif. Saltonstall · Johnson, Colo. Shipstead • Johnston, S.C. Smith Kilgore Stewart La Follette Taft Langer Taylor Lucas Thomas, Okla. McCarran Thomas, Utah McClellan Tobey McFarland Tunnell Y....cKellar Wagner McMahon Walsh Mead Wherry Millikin White Mitchell W.iley Moore Wilson Morse Young Murdock

Mr. HILL. I announce that the Senator from Virginia [Mr. GLASs], the Senator from Nevada [Mr. ScRUGHAM], and the Senator from Montana [Mr. WHEELER] are absent because of illness.

The Senator from Florida [Mr. ANDREWS] is necessarily absent.

The Senator from Alabama [Mr. BANKHEAD], the Senator from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON), -the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. MYERS], and the Senator from Maryland [Mr. RADCLIFFE] are absent on public business.

The Senator from Texas [Mr. CoNNALLY] is absent on official business as a delegate to the International Conference in SaQ Francisco.

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. MAYBANK] and the Senator from

· Georgia [Mr. RussELL] ::>.re absent in Europe visiting battlefields.

The Senator from Montana [Mr. MuRRAY] and the Senator from Maryland [Mr. TYDINGS] are absent on official business.

Mr. WHERRY. The Senator from Oregon [Mr. CORDON] is absent on official business of the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

The Senator from Iowa [Mr. HICKENLooPEn J and the Senator from Indiana [Mr. WI:.usl are necessarily absent by leave of the S~nate.

The Senator from Idaho [Mr. THOMAS] is absent because of illness.

The S~nator from Michigan [Mr. VANDENBERG] is absent or~ official business as a delegate to the International Conference at San Francisco.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. HART] is absent because of the death of his son.

The Senator from Delaware [Mr. BucK] is necessarily absent.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Seventy-seven Senators having answered to their names, a quorum fs present. The clerk will call the first measure on the calendar.

Mr. TAFT subsequently said: Mr. President,' I wish to have the RECORD show that the Senator from New York [Mr. WAGNER], the Senator from Colorado [Mr. MILLIKIN], the Senator from Utah [Mr. MuRDOCK], the Senator from Idaho [Mr. TAYLOR], the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. FuLBRIGHT], and I have been attending a meeting of the Committee on Banking and Currency, and some of us were unable to respond to the quorum call.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Mr. FERGUSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be absent from the Senate during the remainder of the day.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With.out objection, the request is granted.

NATIONAL CEMETERIES

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The cleric wUI proceed to call the calendar.

The S~nate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 524) to provide for one national cemetery in every State and Territory and such other national cemeteries in the States, Territories, and possessions as may be needed for the burial of war veterans, which had been reported with an amendment, on page 2, line 21, to strike out sections 5, 6, and 7, as follows:

SEc. 5. The establishment, care, maintenance, administratoin, and operation of the national cemeteries herein and hereafter provided for and all existing national cemeteries shall be a function of the Quartermaster General directly under the Secretary of War.

SEc. 6. The provisions of United States Code, page 24, section 275 .(sec. 4874, Revised Statute:s), are amended 'to read as follows: "The su}3erintendents and assistant superintendents of the national cemeteries shall be selected from meritorious and trustworthy soldiers, sailors, and marines, either commissioned officers or enlisted men who have been honorabfy mustered out or discharged from the service of the United St ates, and who may have been disabled for active field service in the line of duty."

SEc. 7. The act entitled "An act to provide for a national cemetery in every s:ate," approved June · 29, 1938 (U. S. C., 194.0 ed., title 24, sec. 271a), is hereby repealed.

· And to insert in lieu thereof the following:

SEc. 5. The Secretary of War is authorized to prescribe such regulations, not in conflict with the provisions hereof, for the administration of this act as he may deem necessary.

Szc. 6. Section 4874 of the Revised Statutes (24 U. S. C. 275) is amended to read as follows:

"The superintendents of national cemeteries shall hereafter be selected from meritorious and trustwor-thy officers, warrant officers, or enlisted men of the Army, Navy', Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, who have been honorably discharged, relieved from active duty, or transferred to a reserve component, and who may have been disabled for active service in line of duty. Personnel engaged in the administration and operation of national cemeteries (other than superintendents) shall hereafter be selected, when available, from ·meritorious and trustworthy officers, warrant officers, or enlisted men of the

Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Oi"· Coast Guard, who have been honorably discharged, relieved from active duty, or transferred to a ·reserve component."

SEc. 7. The act entitled "An act to provide ·for a national cemetery in every State," approved June 19, 1938 (52 Stat. 1233; 24 U.S. C. 27la), and the act entitled "An act to authorize an appropriation for the purpose of establishing a national cemetery at Honolulu, T. H," approved November 21, 1941 (55 Stat. 772), are hereby repealed.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, I offer an amendment to the committee amendment on page 3, line 16, after the word "Act", to insert the words "by the Quartermaster General", so to make it clear that the administration of the act would be in the Secretary of War though the work would be performed by the Quartermaster General, who has charge of this work and who has prepared the program.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Alabama to the committee amendment.

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.

The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a "third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of War is authorized and directed to acquire, by donation, purchase, condemnation, or otherwise, in each State and Territory of the

. United States in which there is not situated on the date of enactment of this act a national cemetery, a suitable site wherever practicable within such State or Territory for the establishment thereon of a national cemetery. ·

SEc. 2. The Secretary of War is authorized - to acquire, by donation, purchase, condemna

tion, or otherwise, in States (includinG the District of Columbia) ·having ·a population of 500,000 or more, and in the Territories and posse~sions of the United States, (1) suitable sites for the establishment thereon of such additional ·national cemeteries, and (2) land adjoining existing national cemeteries for the extension of such national cemeteries, as the Secretary of War may determine to be needed for the burial of war veterans.

SEc. 3. Upon the 'acquisition of such land by the United States, the Secretary of war is authorized and directed to establish thereon national cem~teries, and to provide for . the care and maintenance of such national cemeteries.

SEc. 4. Before any design and building ma-. terial is accep~ed for use in an.y national

cemetery, the Secretary of War shall obtain with respect· thereto the advice of the Commission of Fine Arts.

EEc. 5. The Secretary of War is authorized to prescribe such regulations, not in conflict with the provisions hereof, for the administration of this act by the Quartermaster General as he may deem necessary.

SE.:: . 6. Section 4874 of the Revised Statutes (24 U. S. C. 275) is amended to read as follows:

"The superintendents of national cemeteries shall hereafter be selected from meritorious and trustworthy officers, warrant of-

. fleers, or enlisted men of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, who have been honorably discharged, relieved from active duty, or transferred to a reserve component, and who may have been disabled for active service in line of duty. Personnel engaged in the administration and operation of national cemeteries (other than superintendents) shall hereafter be selected, when

6418 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN.ATE JUNE 21 available, from meritorious and trustworthy officers, warrant officers, or enlisted men of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, who have been honorably discharged, relieved from active duty, or transferred to a reserve component."

SEc. 7. The act entitled "An act to provide for a national cemetery in every State," approved June 29, 1938 (52 Stat. 1233; 24 U. S. C. 27la), and the act entitled-"An act to authorize an appropriation for the purpose of establishing a national cemetery at Honolulu, Territory of Hawaii," approved November 21, 1941 (55 Stat. 772), are hereby repealed.

INCREASE OF SALARY OF EXECUTIVE BECRETARY OF NURSES' EXAMINING BOARD, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The bill (H. R. 2839) to increase the salary of the executive secretary of the Nurses' Examining Board of the District of Columbia, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. SALARIES OF METROPOLITAN POLICE

FORCE AND FIRE DEPARTMENTS, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill <H. R. 2875) to amend an act en· titled "An act to fix the salaries of of· ficers and members of the Metropolitan Police Force and the Fire Department of the District of Columbia," which had been reported from the Committee on the District of Columbia with amendments, on page 2, line 7, after the word "pilots", to strike out "$3,000" and insert ''$3,400", and in line 8, after the word "engineers", to strike out ''$3,000" and insert "$3,400."

The amendments were agreed to. The amendments were ordered to be

engrossed and the bill to be read a third time. -

The bill was read the third time and passed.

BILL PASSED OVER

The bill <S. 101) to prohibit discrimi· nation in employment because of race, creed, color, national origin or ancestry, was announced as next in order.

Mr. HILL and Mr. McCLELLAN. Over. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

bill will be passed over. . WAIVING OF BONDS OF NAVY MAIL

CLERKS AND OTHERS

The bill <S. 984) to permit waiving of the bonds of Navy mail clerks and assistant Navy mail Clerks, and for other purposes, was announced as next in order.

Mr. WALSH. The House ha,s passed an identical bill, which is on the calendar, order No. 375, House bill 3193. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to consider the House bill.

There being no ·objection, the bill <H. R. 3193) to permit waiving of the bonds of Navy mail clerks and assistant Navy mail clerks, and for other purposes, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third tirne, and passed.

Mr. WALSH. I ask that the. Senate bill be indefinitely postponed. . ·

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the Senate bill will be indefipitely postponed.

BILL PASSED OVER

The bill <S. 130) to increase the number of midshipmen allowed at the United

States Academy from the District of Columbia, was announc.ed as next in order.

Mr. LANGER. Over. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

bill will be passed over. Mr. WALSH subsequently said: Mr.

·President, I should like to inquii·e what became of Calendar ·No. 288, Senate bill 130, to increase the number of midshipmen allowed at the United States Naval Ace.demy from the District of Columbia?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill was passed over on objection by the Senator from North Dakota - [Mr. LANGER].

Mr. V</ ALSH. Will the Senator from North Dakota permit me briefly to explain the bill?

Mr. LANGER. Mr. President, I objected to consideration of the bill, 'because I want to find out why a boy from North Dakota nominated for West Point-and the rule is the same there as at Annapolis-was dismissed, because they said he was one-half inch too short. He was captain of his football team, the head of his class, and they would not let him take an examination because he was one-half inch too short, and no one knew that he was not going to grow some more. That is the reason I objected.

Mr. WALSH. That has nothing· to do with the pending bill. The pending bill seeks to equalize the number of midshipmen from the District of Columbia, because of the increase in population in the District of Columbia. The bill would change no law. The Senator, of course, is within his rights in objecting.

· OCCUPATION OF CERTAIN PUBLIC HOUSING BY MEN IN VARIOUS SERVICES AND THRIR DEPENDENTS

The bill <S. 1003) to permit members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Coast and Geodetic Survey, Public Health Service, and their dependents, to occupy certain Government housing facilities on a rental basis without loss of rental allowance, was announced as next in order.·

Mr. WALSH. Mr. President, the House has passed a similar bill, which is on the Senate Calendar, Order No. 377, House bill 3233. I asl{ unanimous consent that the House bill be substituted for the Senate bill, and that the House bill be now considered.

The PRESIDENT pro . tempore. Is there obection?

There being no objection, the bill (H. R. 3233) to permit members of the Army; Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, Coast and Geodetic Survey, Public Health Service, and their dependents, to occupy certain Government housing facilities on a rental basis without loss of rental allowances was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

Mr. WALSH~ I ask that the Senate bill be indefinitely postponed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the Senate bill will be indefinitely postponed. REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN NAVY PER

SONNEL FOR LOSS FROM FIRE AT PORTSMOUTH, VA. The· bill <S. 716) to provide for reim

bursement of certain Navy personnel and

former Navy personnel for personal property lost or damaged as the result of a fire · at the outlying degaussing branch of the Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Va., on December 4, 1942, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reacting, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sum or sums, amounting in the aggregate not to exceed $1,884.69, as may be required by the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse, under such regulations as he may prescribe, certain Navy personnel and former avy personnel for the value of personal property lost or damaged in a fire a·t the outlying degaussing branch of the Norfolk Navy Yard, Portsmouth, Va., on December 4, 1942: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 percent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. · Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

ENSIGN ELMER H. BECKM:ANN; UNITED STATES NAVAL RESERVE

The bill (S.1732) for the relief of Ensign Elmer H. Beckmann, United States Naval Reserve. was announced as next in order.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, may we have an explanation of the bill?

Mr. WALSH. The purpose of the bill is to authorize and direct the Secretary of the Treasury to pay to the claimant named in the bill the sum of $409.05 for the value of personal property lost in a fire in the junior bachelor officers' quarters at the United States naval air station, Brunswick, Maine, on August 4, 1944.

Similar claims have been paLd in the past. This was one claim which was not filed until lately because of the absence of the ensign. It is a claim which has been examined by a board of thL Navy Department and approved by the board, and also approved by the Committee on Naval Affairs.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts. I think his explanation is completely satisfactory.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the bill was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $409.05 to reimburse Ensign Elmer H. Beck· mann, United States Naval Reserve, for the value of personal property lost in the first in the junior bachelor officers' quarters at the

· United States naval air station, Brunswick, · Maine, ·on August 4, 1944: Provided, That no

part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess 'of 10 percent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the · contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be· deemed

,·

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~SENATE 6419 guilty of a misdemea:J;lor an~ upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN NAVY PER. SONNEL FOR LOSS BY FIRE AT CAMP

ROSSEAU, CALIF.

The bill '(S. 761) to reimburse certain Navy personnel and former Navy personnel for personal property lost or damaged as a result of a fire in Quonset-Hut occupied by Eighty-third United States Naval Construction Battalion at Camp Rosseau, Port Hue-neme, Calif., on December 22, 1944, was announced as next in order.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. President, Senate bill 761 and several bills <i>n the calendar immediately following, are of the same type. The bills provide for reimbursement of certain naval personnel for losses of their personal property caused by fire for which they were not in any way responsible. ~he PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is

there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the bill was · considered, o:r;dered to be engrossed for a

third reading, read the third time, and · passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to· pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sum or sums, amounting in the aggregate not to exceed $365, as may be required by the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse, under such regulations as he may prescribe, certain Navy personnel and former Navy personnel for the value of personal property lost or damaged as the result of a fire in Quonset Hut occupied by the Eighty-third United States Naval Construction Battalion at Camp Rosseau, Port Hueneme, Calif., on December 22, 1944: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 percent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereat shall be fined in any sum not- exceeding $1,000.

REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN NAVY PERSONNEL FOR LOSS BY . FIRE AT ROSNEATH, SCOTLAND . - . The bill (S. 822) to reimburse certain

Navy personnel for personal property lost or damaged in a fire at Naval Base Two, Rosneath, Scotland, on October 12, 1944, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed. as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and pe is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sum or sums, amounting i:Q. the aggregate not to ·exceed $426.65, as may be required by the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse, under such regulations as he may prescribe, · certain Navy personnel for the value of per- ' sonal property lost or damaged as the result of a fire at Naval Base Two, Rosneath, Scotland, on October 12, 1944: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in ~xcess of 10 percent ·thereof shall be -paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in eonnection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the con-

trary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof Ehall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000 .

REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN NAVY PERSONNEL FOR LOSS BY FIRE AT SEATTLE, WASH.

The bill <S. ·823) to reimburse certain Navy personnel and former Navy personnel for personal property lost or damaged as the result of a fire in the United States naval hospital, Seattle, Wash., on May 10, 1944, was considered, ordered to be engrcssed for a third reading, .read the third time, ·and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sum or sums, amounting in the aggregate not to exceed $1,381.45, as may be required by the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse, under such regulations as he may prescribe, certain Navy personnel and former Navy personnel for the value of personal property lost or damaged as the result of a fire in the United States naval hospital, Seattle, Wash., on May 10, 1944: Provided, That no part of

· the amount appropriated in this a-ct -in excess of 10 percent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and tpe same· shall be unlawful, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the · provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN NAVY PERSONNEL FOR LOSS BY FIRE AT NOR· FOLK, VA.

The bill (S. 824) to reimburse certain Navy personnel and former Navy personnel for personal property lost or damaged as a result of a fire in Quonset hut E-172 at the amphibious training base, Camp Bradford, naval operating base, Norfolk, Va., on Janu~ry 20, 1945, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, ~s follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, such sum or sums amounting to, in the aggregate, not to exceed $981.30, as may be required by the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse, under such regulations as he may prescribe, certain Navy personnel and former Navy personnel for the value of personal property lost or _damaged as the result of a fire in Quonset hut E-172 at the amphibious training base, Camp Bradford, naval operating base, Norfolk, Va., on January 20, 1945: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this a~t in excess of 10 percent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney <w account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be. deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exc,eeding $1,900 . .

WILLIAM D. WARREN The bill <S. 626) for the relief of -Wil

liam D. Warren, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows: B~ it ena~ted, etc., That in the administra

tion of the pension ia:ws ·or any laws ccin-

. ferring rights, privileges, or benefits upon persons honorably discharged from the United States Army, William D. Warren (C-2428987), of Boulder, Colo., shall be held and cor;tsidered to have served 90 days in the First Territorial Regiment, United States VolJmteer Infantry, during the War with Spain and to have been honorably discharged from such service; but no pension, increase of pension, pay, or bounty shall be , held to

. have accrued by reason of this act, prior to its enactment.

REQUISITION OF PROPERTY FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE

The bill (S. 1009) to amend the act entitled "An act to authorize the President

. of the United States to requisition property required for the defense of the United .States," ~pproved October 16, 1941, as amended, for the purpose of continuing it .in effect, was announced as next in order.

Mr. WHITE. Mr. President, may I ask · the Senator from Utah [Mr. THOMAS] if

this bill would do any more than extend the present authority of law for a

. year? Mr. THOMAS of Utah. It wouid do no

more . than- extend the authority for a - year.

-Mr. WHITE. And the same is true with resiJect to Calendar No. 298, Senate bil1 1010? . .

Mr. THOMAS of Utah. That is true. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

Chair will state that Senate bill 1009 is . identical to a House bill on the calendar,

order No. 378, .House bill 3234. Without objection; the House bill will be substituted for the Senate bill. Is there objection to the presen ·~ consideration of

· the House bill? There being no objection, the bill (H. R.

3234) to amend the act entitled "An act to authorize the President of the United States to requisition property required for the defense of tl:)e United States," appr<;>ved October 16, 1941, as amended, for the purpose of continuing it in effect, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the Senate bill 1009 will be indefinitely postponed.

REQUISITION OF CERTAIN ARTICLES ' AND MATERIALS

The bill (S. 1010) to amend section 3 of the act entitled "An act to authorize the President to requisition certain articles and materials for the use of the United States, and for other purposes,'~ approved October 10, 1940, ·as amended, for the purpose of continuing it in effect, was announced as next in order. ·

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will state that the House has passed an identical bill, which is on the calendar, Order No._ 376. Is there objection to the substitution of the House bill for the Senate bill, and present con-. sideration of the House bill?

There being no objection, the bill <H. R. 3232) to amend section 3 of the act entitled "An act to authorize the President to requisition certain articles and materials for the use of the United States, a:hd for other purposes," approved October 10, 1940, as amended, for the purpose of continuing it in effect, was considered, ordered to _a third reading. read the third time, and passed.

6420 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With·

out objection, Senate bill 1010 is indefi· nitely postponed. ' AWARD OF MERIT FOR CERTAIN SELEC

TIVE SERVICE SYSTEM PERSONNEL The bill <H. R. 1S12) to authorize an

award of merit for uncompensated pe:r:· sonnel of the Selective Service System was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

MEXICAN BORDER SERVICE MEDAL The bill CH. R. 2322) to provide for the

issuance of the Mexican Border Service Medal to certain members of the Reserve forces of the Army on active duty in 1916 and 1917 was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time; and passed.

KERMIT. ROOSEVELT FUND The joint resolution <H. J. Res. 136)

to provide for the establishment, man~gement, and perpetuation of the Kermit Roosevelt fund was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. ·

MARLIN-ROCKWELL CORP. The bill (H. R. 1044) for the relief of

Marlin-Rockwell Corp. with respect to the jurisdictien of The Tax Court of the United States to redetermine its exces· swe profits for its fiscal year ending December 31, 1942, sub3ect to renegotiation under the Renegotiation Act, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

AMENDMENT OF CANAL . ZONE CODERETIREMENT PROVISIONS

The bill (H. R. 2125) to amend the Canal Zone Code, was announced as next in ordel'.


Mr. STEW ART. Mr. President, ·may the bill be passed Dver for the present and called up after I have obtained certain data?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be passed ove1· temporarily:

. Mr. STEWART subsequently said: Mr. President, a few minutes ago Calendar No. 303, House bill 2125, to amend the Canal Zone Code, was passed over at my request.

The PRESIDENT pro tempol'e. An explanation of the bill was requested and, on request of the Senator from Tennessee, the bill was passed over.

Mr. s ·TEWART. · When the bill was reached on the calendar the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. REVERCOMB] asked for an ex~lanation of it. I had just entered. the Chamber. A similar bill had been introduced by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. LA FOLLETTE]. I believe the House bill was later substituted for the Senate bill.

At any rate, Mr. President, the purposes of the two bills are similar, and are set forth very clearly, much better tban I could set them forth, in the re· port of the Committee on Interoceanic Canals, from which I read a paragraph:.

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of the bill is to bring the Canal Zone retirement provisions in line with the civil-service retirement provisions. •

Mr. WALSH. Mr. President, this bill provides ·that in the administration of the pension laws or any laws conferring rights, privileges, or benefits upon persons honorably discharged from the United States naval .or military forces, the commissioned officers of the St. Louis shall be held and considered to have

Section_1 (d) of the Civil Serv,ice Retirement Act provides for voluntary retirement upon attaining the age of 55 years with 30 years of service, on an annuity having a value equal to the present worth of a deferred annuity at the age of 60 years. The present bill adds a provision to the Canal Zone Retirement Act to permit voluntary retirement on an immediate annuity having a value equal to the present worth of a deferred annuity beginning at the age of 60 years, providing the employee retiring has attained the age of 55 years and has at least 30 years of service, 15 years of which shall have been spent on the Isthmus of Panama.

. served in the naval forces of the United States between May 18 and September 2, 1898.

Under the eKisting provisions of paragraph (a), section 93 of title 2 of the Canal Zone Code, an employee serving thereunder who shall have attained . the age of 55 and rendered at least 25 years of service, of which not less than 15 years shall ha:ve been rendered on the Isthmus of Panama, may voluntarily retire on an immediate annuity having a value equal to the present worth of a deferred annuity beginning at the age of 62. The proposed legislation would amend this provision by stipulating that the annuity of an employee retir.ing thereunder with at least 30 years of service shall have a value equal to ~

the present worth of a deferred annuity beginning at the age of 60 years.

Mr. President, as I understand, the bill would not increase the amount of pension or annuity which the employee would receive, but would entitle him to receive it 5 years -earlier, and the entire value of the annuity would be spread over a longer period of years than would be the case under existing law. During the hearing which was held on the matter we became involved in a great deal of arithmetic, and I was advised that no additional cost or expens-e to the Government would be involved by reasQn of the provisions of the bill.

Mr. REVERCOMB. As I understand, the bill applies only to civilian employees in the Canal Zone.

Mr. STEWART. It applies to civilian -' employees in the Panama Canal Zone.

Mr. REVERCOMB. And brings the retirement provisions in line with the retirement provisions under civil service.

Mr. STEW ART. It places such em· ployees under existing civil-service law . I believe no further purpose than that is intended by the bill.

The author of the Senate bill is the senior Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. LA FoLLETTEJ. However, when the matter was considered by the Committee on Interoceanic Canals, the House bill was substituted for the-Senate bill.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I thank the Sen· a tor.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration or the bill?

There being .no obj.ection, the bill (H. R~125) to amend the Canal Zone Code was consider-ed, ordered to a third :reading, read the third time, _and passed. RELIEF OF COMMISSIONED OFFICERS OF

U. S. S. ST. LOUIS DURING THE SPAN· ISH WAR

The bill (~. 727) for the relief of the commissioned officers of the U. S. S. St. Louis during the Spanish-American War, May 18 to September 2, 1898, · was announced as next in order.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, may we have an explanation of the bill?.

The bill also authorizes and directs the Secretary of the Navy to correct the records of the Navy Department to coincide with the dates of the appointments of such officers as shown on their respect ive commissions and discharges, in order that the commissioned officers of the St. Louis will be on a lawful parity wlth their brothers officers of the U. S. S. Harvard and U. S. S .. Yale, who served during the same period.

At the outbreak of the Spanish-Ameri-can War three merchant vessels of .the United States, the Harvard, the Yale, and the St. Louis were incorporated directly into the naval service, placed under the command of naval officers, and assigned to duty in the scouting forces of the Atlantic Fleet. They operated continuously therein until the close of hostilities when they were immediately returned to owners in order to resume their regular mercantile voyages. The dates these vessels were placed in commission as vessels of the Navy were, respectively, Harvard, April 26, 18.98; Yale, May 2, 1898; and St. Louis, April 24, 1898. All three vessels were placed out of commission on September 2, 1898, and thus were operating with the Navy for a period of 4 months or more.

The personnel of the Harvard, Yale, and St. Louis were not, however, enrolled in the Navy at the time of the commissioning of the vessels. The · officers and crew of the Harvard were enrolled on June 22, 1898, and were discharged on / September 2 of that year; .those of the Yale were enrolled during the period June 10 to 15, 1898, and were discharged on September 2, 1898. Members of the crew of the St. Louis were never actually enrolled in the Navy but were paid and subsisted by the American Steainship Co. under a s_pecfal form of contract; the of:ficers of that vessel were enrolled in the service Dn July 23, 1898, and were dis· charged on September 2 following.

By virtue of section 3 of the act ·of June 2, 1930 (46 Stat. 492), the officers and crews of the Harvard and Yale are now entitled to pensions. The officers of the St. Louis, not having actually served under an enrollment in the Navy for a period of 70 days · or more, are not now entitled to pensions. Further, the members of the crew of that vessel are not entitled to pensions since, as stated above, they were never enrolled in the naval service.

All three vessels did, however, serve during practically their entire time of. commission and the St. Louis was in the engagement off Santiago wherein the cable landing at that point was cut. ·

Mr. Michael J. McGinn, formerly an assistant engineer on the steamship St •. Louis, _was inducted into the naval service of the United States as an assistant

1915 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6421 engineer officer with the rank of ensign, He appeared before the committee, when hearings were held on a similar bill (S. 714 of the 78th Cong.) and presented evidence showing that he was actually on board the vessel during the period in question and that he and the other officers were not free to leave their employment on the St. Louis. Excerpts from his evidence are as follows:

The record of the U. S. S. St. J.,ouis during that period will indicate that it was impossible to leave my employment, even if I had so desired. On April 30, 1898, the St. Louis sailed from New Yorlt for the West Indies to join Admiral Sampson's fleet, then in those waters. On May 20, 1898, while cutting the telegraph cables at Guantanamo, Cuba, it was necessary to withdraw because of the heavier armament of a Spanish gunboat. On May 22, 1898, the admiral ordered the St. Louis to New York to mount heavier guns and to recoal. It arrived in New York May 25, 1898. Engineers were not allowed shore leave, remaining on board supervising the recoaling of the ship and assisting in installing heavier guns. On June 1, 1898, the U. S. S. St. Louis sailed from New York for Guantanamo, Cuba. On July 5, 1898, the St. Louis left Cuban waters with the Spanish admiral, Cervera, his officers, and some 500 Spanish sailors as prisoners of war, arriving· at Portsmouth, N. H., on July 10, 1898. On July 17, 1898, the St. Louis arrived in New York.

It is apparent, therefore, that it was impossible to leave my employment between April 30 and July 17, 1898, inasmuch as the ship was at sea during that entire period, with the exception of the pei'iod of May 25 to May 30, 1898, when the ship was docked at New York for the reasons stated above, and shore leave could not be grahted.

From the evidence available it appears that the personnel on the St. Louis actually served for a longer period of time than the personnel of the Harvard and Yale, and that they were also in actual combat with the enemy, although the crew of the vessel was never actually enrolled in the naval service and the officers were not commissioned until several months after they began actual naval service.

The committee are of the opinion that the pe_rsonnel of this vessel should be in the same status as the personnel of the Harvard and Yale as regard pensions and recommended therefore that the bill be enacted.

A similar bill passed the Senate of the Seventy-eighth Congress on October 12, 1943.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. WALSH. I yield. Mr. REVERCOMB. Let me ask the

able Senator from Massachusetts whether any ships, other than the Harvard, Yale, and St. Louis, are in the same category? ·

Mr. WALSH. There are no others. Mr. REVERCOMB. Is it the view of

the chairman of the Naval Affairs Com-mittee that there will be no other ships

, in the same category? Mr. WALSH. None whatever. It is

only an accident that the date of the commissioning of this crew was- postponed, because we were at war.


There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill <S. 727) for the relief of the commissioned officers of the U.S. S. St. Louis during the SpanishAmerican War, May 18, 1898, to feptember 2, 1898, which had been reported from the Committee on Naval Affairs with an amendment. on page 2, at the beginning

. of line 8, to insert "U.S. S. Harvard and'', so as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc., That in . the administration of the pension laws or any laws conferring rights, privileges, or benefits upon persons honorably discharged from the United States naval or military forces, the commissioned officers of the U.S. S. St. Louis shall be held and considered to have served in the naval forces of the United States between May 18, 1898, and September 2, 1898.

SEc. 2. The Secretary of the Navy is ai.lthorized and directed to correct the records of the Navy Department to coincide with the dates of their appointments as shown on their respective commissions and discharges.

SEc. 3. This correction is authorized so that the commissioned officers of the U. S. S. St. Louis will be on a lawful parity with their brother officers of the U. S. S. Harvard and U. S. S. Yale, who served during the same period.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed

for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

CLAIM OF NORFOLK-PORTSMOUTH BRIDGE, INC.

The bill (H. R.- 1599) to confer jurisdiction upon the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to hear, determine, and render judgment upon the claim of NorfolkPortsmouth Bridge, Inc., was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, Senate bill 57, Calendar No. 209, which is identical with the bill just passed, will be indefinitely postponed.

PARTITION OF CERTAIN LANDS IN CLEVELAND COUNTY, OKLA.

The bill (S. 438) authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to partition certain lands in Cleveland County, Okla., and for other purposes was considered, · ordered -to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That B. H. Goodin, his heirs or assigns, may maintain a suit to partition the northeast quarter of section 33, township 9 north, range 1 east, Indian meridian, in Cleveland County, Okla., against any restricted Indian who is a part owner of said lands in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma in accord~ ance with the law governing partitions in the State of Oklahoma. The United States shall be made a party to such action, and jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon such court to hear and determine such cause, and service may be had on the United States by serving one copy of the petition or bill in equity on the United States attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma not less than 41 days before said cause is set for trial, and any conveyance ordered made by said court, in such proceedings, shall operate to remove all restrictions on the lands conveyed to the grantee therein, except where such grantee is a restricted Indian. ·

PAYMENT OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE CHARGES ON CERTAIN PUEBLO INDIAN LANDS

The bill (S. 718) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to contract with the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District of New Mexico for the payment -of · operation and maintenance charges on certain Pueblo Indian lands was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the provisions of the act of August 27, 1935 (49 Stat. 837), as amended by section 5 of the act of June :;o, 19S8 (52 Stat. 779) , authorizing the Secretary of the Interior to provide by agreement with the Middle Rio Grande Conservaney District, a subdivision of the State of New Mexico, for the payment of operation and maintenance charges on newly reclaimed Pueblo Indian lands and lands purchased by the United States by virtue of the act of June 7, 1924 (43 Stat. 636), as amended, for cer:tain Pueblo Indians, are hereby extendBd for an additional period of 10 years to 1955.

EXPORTATION OF CERTAIN COMMODITIES

The bill <S. 935) to continue in effect section 6 of the act of July 2, 1940 <54 Stat. 714), as amended, relating to the e:,portation of certain commodities was announced as next in order.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. House bill2944, Calendar 374, as an identical bill, Is there objection to the present consideration of the House bill?

There being no objection, the bill <H. R. 2944) to continue in effect section 6 of the act of July 2. 1940. as amended. · relating to the exportation of certain commodities, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, Senate bill 935 will be indefinitely postponed.

CLAIMS OF CERTAIN ENROLLED SIOUX INDIANS

The bill (H; R. 378) authorizing an appropriation to carry out the provisions of the act of May 3, 1928 (45 Stat. 484), and for other purposes, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and' passed. · LAND ~ATENT TO PETER A. CONDELARIO

The bill <S. 709) authorizing and directing the Secretary of the Interior to issue to Peter A. Candelario a patent in fee to certain land, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to issue to Peter A. Candelario, a Sioux Indian of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, S.Dak., a patent in fee to the northeast quarter of section 31, in town'ship 40 north, range 35 west, of the sixth principal meridian, South Dakota.

PAY AND ALLOWANCES, ETC.,· FOR CERTAIN UNDER-AGE NAVAL PERSONNEL DISCHARGED

The bill <S. 1045) to provide for pay and allowances and transportation and subsistence of personnel discharged or released from the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard because of under age

•

6422 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE .21

at the time of enlistment, and for other purposes, was announced as next in order.

. nlshed transportation in kind and subsistence from the place of discharge to their home.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. President, i anticipated an inquiry with respect to this bill. It is a rather interesting bill, because it shows the extreme patriotism of some very young boys in this country.

A number of young men have falsified their age, stating that they were 17 years of age when they were not. In fact, as many as 6,000 have enlisted in the Navy under age. Some of them had been in the Navy 4 months, and even a year, before they were detected as having entered the Navy under age. . Under the regulations of the Navy they must be discharged if they are under 17. The result has been that some of these boys far away from home have

· been stranded after being discharged with no funds and no means of getting

· home. This bill authorizes the Secretary of the Navy to reimburse them, to pay their traveling expenses, and in certain cases to give them the allotment to which they would be entitled if they had entered the Navy duly and properly, and within the legal age.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. WALSH. I yield. Mr. REVERCOMB. I approve the pur- '

pose of the bill. The thought I have in mind is that it extends these benefits only to naval personnel. What provision has been made for tbe boys who, prior to the discontinuance of enlistments in the Army, entered the Army under age and were discharged? There have been quite a number of them. We occasionally hear of such cases. This bill pertains only to those in the Navy.

Mr. WALSH. This bill deals only with naval personnel. I am under the impression that there is a similar law with reference to Army personnel. Perhaps the chairman of the Committee on Military Affairs can inform us.

Mr. REVERCOMB. There certainly should be.

Mr. WALSH. I agree with the Senator. In any event, it is my job to take care of the Navy.


There being no objection, the bill <S. 1045-) . to provide for pay and allowances and transportation and subsistence of personnel discharged or released from the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard because of under age at the time of enlistment, and for other purposes was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a . third reading, read the third time; and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted etc., That the Secretary of the Navy, under such regulations as he may prescribe, may discharge or release from the Navy, Marine Corps, and the reserve components thereof, with pay and allowances and discharge certificate found appropriate for their service after enlistment, enlisted persons who heretofore have secured or hereafter may secure enlistment by reason of false statement of age on their applications for enlistment and have therefore been enlisted while under the minimum statutory or administrative age limit. When so discharged or released such enlisted persons shall be fur•

SEc. 2. Whenever the Coast Guard is operating as a part of the Navy the provisions

· of this act shall be applicable to personnel of the Coast Guard, exclusive of temporary · members of the Coast Guard Reserve on active duty without full military pay and allowances. When the Coast Guard is operating · under the Treasury Department, the powers conferred upon the Secretary of the Navy in section 1 of this act shall be vested in the Secretary of the Treasury.

SEc. 3. Appropriations available for pay and allowances, subsistence. and transportation of enlisted personnel of the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard shall be available for the payment of pay and allowances, subsistence, and transportation authorized by this act.

SEc. 4. All payments heretofore made of a character authorized under the provisions of this act, if otherwise correct, are hereby validated.

SEc. 5. The act approved July 1, 1944 (Public Law 398, 78th Cong.), entitled "An act to provide for the transportation to their homes of persons discharged from the naval service because of under age at the time of enlistment," is hereby repealed.

MEMORIAL TO GUSTAV BECKER AT SPRINGERVILLE, ARIZ.

The Senate proceeded to consider the joint resolution <S. J. Res. 4) authorizing the erection on public grounds in Springerville, Ariz., of a memorial to Gustav Becker, which had been reported from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds with amendments, on page 1, line 7, after the word "site", to insert "at any time within 2 years after the date of approval of this joint resolution;" on page 2, line 1, after the word "That", to strike out "the site chosen and"; and in line 2, after the words "approved by the", to strike out "National Commission of Flne Arts" and insert "Commissioner of Public Buildings", so as to make the joint

· resolution read: Resolved, etc., That the Commissioner of

Public Buildings is authorized and directed to select ' a suitable site on the grounds of the Federal Building in Springerville, -Ariz., and to grant permission to any association or committee organized for that purpose to erect upon such site at any time within 2 years after the date of approval of this joint resolution, as a gift to the people of the United States, a memorial to the late Gustav Becker: Provided, That the design of such memo~;ial shall be approved by the Commissioner of Public Buildings, and that the United States shall be put to no expense in or by the erection of such memorial.

The amendments were agreed to. The joint resolution was ordered to be

engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

JOINT RESOLUTION PASSED OVER

The joint resolution (8. J. Res. 31) re· lating to the appropriation for the roofs and skylights over the Senate and House wings of the Capitol, and for other purposes, was announced as next in order.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, may we have an explanation of the joint resolution?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The joint resolution was reported by the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. GREEN].

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, I ask that the joint resolution be passed over temporarily.

The . PRESIDENT pro tempore. The joirit resolution will be passed over temporarily.

BETTY ELLEN EDWARDS

The bill <H. R. 2001) for the relief of Betty Ellen Edwards was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

HEIRS OF HENRY B. TUCKER

The bill (H. R. 3074) for the relief of the heirs of Henry B. Tucker, deceased, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. CONSTRUCTION CHARGES ON NON-

INDIAN LANDS IN SAN CARLOS FEDERAL IRRIGATION PROJECT

The bill <S. a:;.2), to amend section 3 of the San Carlos Act (43 Stat. 475-476), as supplemented and amended, and for other purposes, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That section 3 of the San Carlos Act, approved June 7, 1924 (43 Stat. 475-476), as amended and supplemented, be, and it is hereby, amended so as to provide that the construction charges on account of non-Indian lands in the San Carlos Federal irrigation project shall be re-

. paid in variable ann1.1al payments, to be determined by the number of acre-feet of water stored in the San Carlos Reservoir on March 1 each year beginnir. g on the 1st day of March 1945; the amount of each such annual payment shall be fixed and determined in accordance with the following schedule: When stored water The annual construe-

( other than dead tion charge pay-storage) in the ment due Dec. 1 San Carlos Reser- of the following voir on Mar. 1 year shall be-of each year is-

0 to 100,000 acre-feet ___________ $12, 500 Over 100,000 but not over 200,000

acre-feet-------------------- 25, 000 Over 200,000 but not over 250,000

acre-feet ____________________ 37,500 Over 250,000 but not over 300,000



acre-feet-------------------- 100, 000 Over 400,000 acre-feet __________ 125, 000

SEc. 2. The variable repayment schedule provided for in section 1 hereof shall go into effect for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1945, and ending June 30, 1946, and the first such annual payment shall become due and payable December 1, 1946.

SEC. 3. The term "construction charges'' shall mean the unpaid balance of the principal obligations due _the United States under the terms of the repayment contract dated June 8, 1931, between the United States and the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District, as amended, including all annual installments deferred in whole or in part: Provided, That the sum o! $25,000 shall be paid December 1, 1945, on the deferred installment due December 1, 1945, under the amended repayment contract: Provided further, That none of the deferred 'installments shall bear interest during the periods deferred.

SEC. 4. The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to enter irito a supplemental agreement with the San Carlos Irrigation and Drainage District modifying the repayment provisions of the existing repayment contract, as amended, in accordance herewith.

FELIX FREDERICKSON

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 543) for the relief of Felix Fred41

1945 CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD-SENATE '. 6423 erickson, which had been reported from the Committee on Claims, with an amendment, on page 1, in ·line 6, after the words "sum of", to strike out "$9,500" and insert "$5,000", so as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Felix Frederickson, of Seattle, wash., the sum of $5,000, in full satisfaction of his claims against the United States (1) for compensation for personal injuries sustained by him when he was struclt by a United States mail truck at the intersection of Westlake Avenue and Virginia Street in Seattle, wash., on January 4, 1944, and (2) for reimbursement of medical, hospital, and other expenses incurred by him as a result of such ·injuries: Erovided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 percent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract t.o the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act sh:Ul be. desmed guilty of a misdemeanor and ,upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1 ,000.

The amendment was agreed . to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed ·


OSBORNE E. McKAY

The Senate proceeded to ·consider the bill (H. R. 2336) for the relief of Osborne E. McKay, which had been reported from the Committee on Claims, with amendments, on p2.ge l, in line 6, after the word "reserve", to insert "retired''; in line 9, after the word "Me- ·

- Kay", to insert "and his wife"; and in line 10, after the word "sustained", to strike out "on November' 10, 1942, when certain personal effects owned by him were destroyed by fire and water in the hold of the United States Army · transport James Parker at pier 60, Cristobal, C. Z.", and insert "by them as the result of a fire which occurred in the hold of the United States Army transport James Parker at pier 6, Cristobal, C. Z. , on November 10, 1942."

The amendments were agreed to. The amendments were ordered to be

engrossed and the bill to be read a third time.


DANIEL B. JOHNSON

The· bill <H. R. 1038) for the relief of Daniel B. Johnson was considered, orderEd to a third reading, read the third t ime, and passed.

CAMP NO. 1, ALASKA NATIVE BROTHERHOOD

The bill <H. R. 802) for the relief of camp No. 1, Alaska Native Brotherhood, Sitka, Alaska, was announced as next in order.


Mr. O'DANIEL. It is for the relief of camp No. 1, Alaska Native Brotherhood. In this case a camp owned by the Alaska Native Brotherhood at Sitka, Alaska, was taken over by the Government. After the Government took it over there was, because of negligence on the part of the

Government, a fire which destroyed the greater part of the camp. Tlle bill is for the purpose of reimbursing the association which owned the building and the camp.

Mr. REVERCOMB. In what amount is reimbursement proposed?

Mr. O'DANIEL. In the amount of $6,000. The bill has been approved by the Government officials, who recognized the liability.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Let me ask the Senator if the camp was occupied by the armed forces?

Mr. o:DANIEL. · Yes; it was occupied by the Army.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I take it that the bill has come to us because the amount of $5,000 is in excess of the authority had by the Army, under the $5,000 propertydamage allowancelimit; is that correct?

·- MT. · O'DANIEL. That is correct. There is an itemized statement showing the amount of loss. It amounts to $·S,500; and it has been approved ·by the Army, reduced to $6,000.

· Mr. REVERCOMB. Very well. Ti.1e PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is

there objection 'to the present consideration of the bill?

There bein~ no objection, the bill was cons·:dered, ordered to a third reading, read the· third time, and passed.

WILLIAM H. SHULTZ

The bill <H. R. 912) for the relief of Vlilliam .H. · Shultz v. as considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. · LEONARD D. JACKSON AND ELSIE FOWKES

JACKSON

The bill (H. R. 1059) for the relief of Leonard D. Jackson and Elsie Fowkes Jackson was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

ESTATE OF DEMETRIO CAQUIAS

The bill <H. R. 1756) for the relief of the estate of the late Demetrio Caquias was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed . .

MRS. ELLEN C. BURNETT

The bill <H. R. 993) for the relief of Mrs. Ellen C. Burnett was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

AUSTIN BRUCE BOWEN

The bill <H. R. 1488) for the relief of Austin Bruce Bowen was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

HUGH M. GREGORY

The bill <H. R. 1617) for the relief of Hugh M. Gregory was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

LEGAL GUARDIAN OF SAM WADFORD

The bill <H. R. 1482) for the relief of the legal guardian of Sam Wadford was· considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

ERNEST L. FUHRMANN

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 711) for the relief of Ernest L. Fuhrmann, which had been reported from the Committee on Claims, with an

amendment, on page 1, in line 6, after the words "sum of", to strike out "$15,-000" and insert "$5,000", so as to make the bill read :

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury . is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Ernest L. Fuhrmann, of Bogalusa, La., the sum of $5,000, in full satisfaction of his .claims against the United States ( 1) for compensation for personal injuries sustained by him when he was struck by a block of ice thrown from a moving troop train, at Elton, Miss., on May 24, 1943; and (2) for reimbursement of mEdical, hospital, and other expenses incurred by him as a result of such injuries: Provi ded, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 percent thereof· shall be

· paid or cfelivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection· with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be finEd in any sum not exceeding $1,000.


for a third reading, read the thir~ time, and passed.

EDITH M. POWELL

The bill <H. R. 1453) for the relief of Edith M. Powell was considered, ordered to a third reading; read the third time, and passed.

. NELSON R. PARK

The bill (H. R. 2925) for the relief of Nelson R. Park was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

ETHEL FARKAS

The bill (H. R. 1606) for the relief of Ethel Farkas, Julius Farkas, and legal guardian of Terez Farkas was considered, ordered to a third re_ading, read the third time, and passed.

The title was amended so as to read: "An act for the relief of Mrs. Ethel Farkas."

MRS. SADIE L. DANCE AND OTHERS

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill <H. R. 842) for the relief of Mrs. Sadie L. Dance, Michigan Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co., and State Farm Fire Insurance Co., which had been reported from the Committee on Claims, with an amendment, on page 1, in line 6, after tht: figure "$982", to strike out "to Michigan Millers Mutual Fire Insurance Co., of Lansing, Mich., the sum of $1 ,363.81; and to State Farm Fire Insurance Co., of Bloomington, Ill., the sum of $200. The payment of such sums shall be in full settlement of all claims against the United States for real and personal property damages sustained by the said Mrs. Sadie L. Dance on June 18, 1944, when a; United States Navy airplane crashed on her property in South Boston, Va. The payment herein authorized to the said Mrs. Sadie L. Dance shall be in full settlement of damages resulting from such crash to her fence, driveway, rose garden, shrubbery, and lawn, and the payments herein authorized to such insurance companies shall be in full settlement of all claims of such companies by reason of their being required by t he

6424 CONGRESSIONAL-RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 terms of policies issued to the said Mrs. Sadie L. Dance, to pay such sums to her upon damage by fire resulting from such airplane crash to real and personal property belonging to her" and insert "for compensation for damages (not covered by insurance) to her fence, driveway, rose garden, shrubbery, and lawn, as the result of a United States Navy airplane crashing on her property in South Boston, Va., on June 18, 1944."

The amendment was agreed to. The amendment was ordered to be en

grossed and the bill to be read a third time.


The title was amended so as to read: "An act for the relief of Mrs. Sadie L. Dance."

CAFFEY ROBERTSON -SMITH, INC.

The bill (S. 489) for the relief of Caffey Robertson-Smith, Inc., was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of Agriculture be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any funds available for carrying out the provisions of · section 32 of the act entitled "An act to amend the Agricultural Adjustment Act, and for other purposes," approved August 24, 1935, as amended, the sum of $9,448.86, to Caffey Robertson-Smith, Inc., of Memphis, Tenn., in full satisfaction of its clai:tns against the United States for payments for the exportation of certain quantities of cotton at the rates in effect at the time of the sales thereof for export, notices of such sales having been given prior to December 6, 1939, but the payments therefor having been withheld for the reason that the said Caffey Robertson-Smith, Inc., did not promptly file a bond supporting the agreement o~ compliance, dated Aug1:1st 1, 1939, which it entered into in connection with the cotton and cotton products export program of the Department of Agriculture for the fiscal year 1940: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 percent thereof shall be p\).id or delivered to or received by any agent .or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the ·contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

ALICE WALKER

The bill <H. R. 2700) for the relief of Alice Walker was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

MRS. JANE STRANG

The bill, <H. R. 2730) for the· relief of Mrs. Jane Scrang was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed ..

CHARLES E. SURMONT

The bill <H. R. 1611) for the relief of c:1arles E. Surmont was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. LEGAL GUARDIAN OF STEWART MARTIN,

JR., A MINOR

The bill (H. R. 2003) for the relief of the legal guardian of· Stewart Martin, Jr., a m;nor, was considered. ordered to a

third reading, read the third time, and passed. . ·

HAROLD J. GRIM

The bill (H. R. 1091) for the relief of Harold J. Grim was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

MRS. CECILIA M. TONNE;R

The bill <H. R. 1328) for the relief of Mrs. Cecilia M. Tonner was· considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

MRS. C. J. RHEA, SR.

The bill <H. R. 1243) for the relief of Mrs. C. J. Rhea, Sr., was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

TOBEY HOSPITAL

The bill <H. R. 2721) for the relief of Tobey Hospital was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. INTERCHANGEABLE USE OF POST-OFFICE

CLERKS AND CITY LETI'ER CARRIERS

The bill (H. R. 3059) authorizing the Postmaster General to continue to use post-office clerks and city letter carriers interchangeably was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

JOINT RESOLUTION PASSED OVER

The joint resolution <H. J. Res. 145) providing for membership of the United States in the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations was announced as next in order. ·

Mr. REVERCOMB. Let the joint · resolution be passed over.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, it is very important that the joint resolution

· be considered as soon as possible. I do not know what the Senator's objection is.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I do not think a measure of this kind should be passed on the call of the calendar.

Mr. BARKLEY. · I will not argue that matter with the Senator.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Objection being heard, the joint resolution will be passed over. ·

MADELINE J. MAC DONALD

The bill <H. R. 892) for the relief of Madeline J. MacDonald was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. · '

AUTHORIZATION TO ACCEPT MEDALS FROM CANADA

The joint resolution <S. J. Res. 51) granting permission to Charles Rex Marchant, Lorne E. Sasseen, and Jack Veniss Bassett to accept certain medals tendered them by the Government of Canada -in the name of His Britannic Majesty, King George VI, was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third read-ing,- read the third time, and passed, as follows: · Resolved, etc., That Charles Rex March~nt,

Lorne E. Sasseen, and Jack Veniss Bassett, employees of the Civil Aeronautics Administration, Department of Comme1·ce, be authorized to accept and wear British Empire . medals, Civilian Division, tendered by the Government of Canada in the name of His

Britannic Majesty, King George ·VI, in recognition of their gallant services in rescuing four crew members from a crashed and burning Canadian bomber in September 1942, and that the Department of State is hereby authorized and permitted to deliver the above medals to Charles Rex Marchant, Lorne E. Sasseen, and Jack Veniss Bassett. POWER PLANT AT SAN CARLOS IRRIGA

TION PROJECT

The Senate proceeded. to consider the bill <H. R. 1656) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to modify the provisions of a contract for the purchase of a power plant for use in connection with the San Carlos irrigation project, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs with an amendment, on page 1, after line 4, to strike out "modify the provisions of the contract entered into on June 19, 1942, whereby the United States agreed to purchase the Diesel electric generating plant of the said corporation for use in

· connection with the San Carlos irrigation project for the sum of $27,000 in cash and electric power of the value of $33,000 to be delivered to and accepted by the said corporation prior to Decembe,. 31, 1944, so as to provide for either <1} the payment to the said corporation, in addition to amounts heretofore paid and electric power heretofore delivered of the sum of $18,700 (the appropriation of which is hereby authorized), or (2) the delivery to the said company, during the 3-year period beginning on January 1, 1945, of the equivalent thereof in electric power at the rates established by the general rate schedule for tbe San Carlos project power system, the said company having been unable, because of circumstances beyond its control, to utilize the amount of electric power which it agreed to accept under the provisions of such contract within the period therein prescribed" and insert "extend to December 31, 1946, the provisions of the contract entered into on June 19, 1942, whereby the United States agreed to .purchase the Diesel electric-generating plant of said corporation for use in connection with the San Carlos Indian irrigation project, and whereby said corporation agreed to accept delive;.·y of electric energy from the United States prior to D~cember 31, 1944, in partial payment for· such plant; to modify the contract thus extended so as to require that electric energy delivered to said corporation during the period beginning January 1, ,1945, be paid for by credit under the contract at the rates estal:Jlished by the general rates schedule for the San Carlos Indian irrigation project system in etiect at the time of delivery; and to delete from the contract the provision reserving a first right to said corporation to use 750 kilowatts of power. The terms of the contract thus extended shall be subject to the right of the United States to remove th~ Diesel plant frbm its present location or to sell or otherwise dispose of it, wpic}:l action may be taken in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior. In the event of such removal or disposition of the Diesel plant, any remaining balance of the purchase price shall be liquidated and discharged prior to December 31, 1946, in the same man-

·1945 :·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6425

. ner as though such plant had not been

. disposed of or removed." . Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President,

may we have an explanation? . Mr. McFARLAND. Mr. President, the bill provides for the modification of the provisions of a contract made by the Indian Service with the Christmas Copper Corp. in connection with the purchase of a power plant located at Christmas, Ariz. Payment was to be made to the

. Christmas Corp. in electrical energy.

. On account of the fact that the Christmas Copper Corp. was unable to ob-

. tain certain materials because of rulings of the War Production Board, it was not able to use the electricity as fast as it had anticipated. So the bill merely would extend the time within which the corporation can receive payment by means of the use of electricity, as provided for in· the original contract.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I thank the. Senator.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the committee.

The amendment was agreed to. . The amendment was ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time.

The bill was read the third time and passed. ·

TITLES TO LANDS CONVEYED BY THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRffiES

The bill <H. R. 2'754> to validate titles to certain lands conveyed 'by Indians of the Five Civilized . Tribes and to amend the act entitled "An act relative to restrictions applicable to Indians of the Five ,Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma," approved January 27, 1933, and to validate State court judgments in Oklahoma and judgments of the United States District Courts of the State of Oklahoma, was considered, ordered to a third reading, ·read the third tim'e, and passed. -EXPEDITION OF FEDERAL FARM LOANS

The bill <H. R. 2113) to amend the Federal Farm Loan Act was announced as ~ext in order.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, this measure is very important. I should like to be informed in what respect the bill would am~nd the Federal Farm Loan Act.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Utah £Mr. MuRDOCK], who is in charge of the bill, is not now in the ·Chamber.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. I ask that the bill 'be passed over.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be passed over.

Mr. MURDOCK subsequently said: Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to recur to Calendar No. 359, House bill 2113, to amend the Federal Farm Loan Act.

I understand, Mr. President, the bill was passed over because no Senator was here to explain it at the time.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from South Dakota [Mr. BusHFIELD] objected, and the bill was passed over under the rule.

Mr. MURDOCK. I hope the Senator from South Dakota will withdraw his ob

XCI-405

· jection. The bill was unanimously re: ported by the Senate Banking and Cur. rency Committee, and it was passed by the House without any opposition whatsoever.

The purpose of the bill is to improve procedure so as to expedite loans for the convenience of -borrowers. There are one or two substantive changes in the -Federal Farm Loan Act, which I shalJ be very glad to explain.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from South . Dakota withdraw his objection?

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Mr. President, I probably will have no objection to the bill, but I have not seen it, and it is a

·very important bill to my section of the country. I should like to have an. opportunity to confer with the Senator from Utah, and for that reason.! ask that it go over.

Mr. MURDOCK. If that is the Sen-ator's attitude, very well; but it is quite

-essential that the bill be passed before June 30, and I do not know if we will have another opportunity to consider the .calendar. Could the Senator confer with me at this time about it?

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Not until we finish the ,calendar.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be passed over.

Mr. BUSHFIELD subsequently said: Mr. President, during the call of the ·calendar, when Calendar No. 359, House bill 2113, a bill sponsored by the Senator from Utah [Mr. MuRDOCK] was reached, I asked that the bill he passed ·over. I have since satisfied my objection to the bill, and I now withdraw my objection to present consideration of the 'bill.

The PRESIDENT pro fempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the bill (H. R. 2113) to amend the Federal Farm

·Loan Act, the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933, the Federal Farm Mortgage Cor:poration Act, the Service Men's Re• adjustment Act of 1944, and for other purposes, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. EXTENSION OF 5-YEAR-LEVEL-PREMIUM

TERM POLICIES

The bill (H. R. 2949) to extend 5-year.Ievel-premium-term policies for an additional 3 years was annoJ.tnced as next in order. · Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, may we have an explanation of the bill

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Colorado [Mr. JO!JNSON] is in charge of the bill.

Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. President, enactment of the proposed legislation is necessary in view of the fact that it would extend the time during which insurance might be converted. The bill would extend the application of ·a provision in the National Service Life Insurance Act of 1940 which makes it possible for veterans to convert their insurance. The bill would merely extend the time during which veterans could ptake the conversion.

Mr. WALSH. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me?

Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. I yield. Mr. WALSH. -Is it not a fact that

there are a large number of persons in the armed services who are veterans of

·the First World War and are away from the United States and are not in a position to convert their insurance at this time, so that unless the provisions of the act are continued in effect for 3 years, they may be deprived of the opportunity to convert their insurance?

Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. That is true. It is difficult to get in touch with

· them. It may be possible to do so, but they are on the various battle fronts. It is not possible for the War Department or the Veterans' Administration to discuss the matter with them and ascertain

·what they wish to do about it. The bill merely extends the period in which they may exercise the right which was afforded them by the act of 1940.

Mr. REVERCOMB. I thank the Sen. ator frolll> Colorado.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to ·the present considera- 1.

tion of the bill? There being no objection, the bill was

considered, ordered to a third reading, read the thirc}. time, and passed. REDUCTION OF INTEREST RATE ON LOANS

SECURED BY GOVERNMENT LIFE INSURANCE

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill <S. 447) to reduce the rate of interest on loans secured by United States Government life insurance to 3 percent per annum, which had been reported from the Committee on Finance with an amendment to strike· out all after the enacting clause and insert:

That section 7 of Public Law 198, Seventy. sixth Congress, approved July 19, 1939, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"SEc. 7. On and after July 1, 1945, the rate . of interest charged on any loan secured by a lien on United States Government life (converted) insurance shall not exceed 4 percent."



The title was· amended so as to read: ''A bill to reduce the rate of interest on loans secured by United States Government life insurance to 4 percent per -annum." PRIORITY OF VETERANS' ADMINISTRA

TION IN EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONNEL, ETC.

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill <H. R. 3118) to amend section 100 of Public Law No. 346, Seventy-eighth Congress, June 22, 1944, to grant certain

· priorities to the Veterans' Administration, to facilitate the employment of personnel .by the Veterans' Administration, :and for other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Finance with amendments.

The first amendment was on page 2, line 8, after the word "necessary'' to strike out: "to procure and employ additional personnel on a full- or part-time .basis without regard to section 3709 of

'6426 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD~SENATE JUNE 21 the Revised Statutes (41 U. S.C. 5), and the civil-service laws and the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, but with full regard to veterans' preference,. and to fix and pay the compensation of such per.sonnel not to exceed the maximum provided for comparable classified positions under such laws, and."

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, as a member of the subcommittee of the Finance Committee which reported favorably House bill 3118, I should like to invite attention bri.efty to the language which was stricken out by the subcommittee on page 2 of the bill.

The provision which the committee struck out deals with the Civil Service Act. Originally, as the bill was passed by the House, it permitted the Veterans' Administration to employ additional personnel on a part-time basis without regard to section 3709 of the Revised Statutes, but with full regard to veterans' preference.

I merely call this to the attention o:f the Senate because it is my understanding that the House may insist upon the language as it came from the House to the Senate.

The testimony before our committee was that -the Veterans' Administration has been severely criticized and con4 demned in certain sections of the coun4 try. ·one of the reasons for the criticism and condemnation, according to witnesses appearing before the committee, is that the Veterans' Administration is un4

· able to employ the personnel which is necessary in order to carry on its admin4 istrative work. Mr. President, I am a be4 liever in civil service. However, on sev4 eral separate occasions during the pres4 ent great emergency, the Congress has passed measures of this character and ignored civil service. The present volume of administrative work will increase by leaps and bounds as our veterans return. The officials of the Veterans' Administration assert definitely that they can employ men every day if they do not have to clear them through the Civil Service Commission. They state that they can employ this or that person who is looking for work, but the moment he is told that he has to be cleared through the Civil Service Commission, in 9 times out of 10 he never returns. The question involved is not one of violating the civil4 service laws; it is a question of obtaining sufficient help to administer the law.

While I went along with this amendment, I merely call attention to the facts. I did not hear the recent testimony . of the representative of the Veterans' Ad4 ministration before the subcommittee, but did hear him before the full com4 mittee.

Then there was involved the question whether this was not a matter to be considered by the Civil Service Committee and whether the Finance Committee had jurisdiction to include in the bill lan4 guage of this kind. I do again call at4 tention, however, to the fact that if in the immediate days to come, we are to have a really efficient administration, which will be subject to the least possible amount of criticism, we will have to make it possible for · those in charge of the Veterans' Administration to get the type and kind of personnel they

require. They need doctors; they need surgeons; they need all types and kinds of assistants to help administer that great agency of the Government. I saY to you, Mr. President, they are desperate for the type and kind of help they absolutely require.

· It takes some time to process employees through the Civil Service Commission. I 8Jll only speaking now from the standpoint of the emergency. The same situ4 ation has arisen from time to time during the war in regard to ·other agencies. For instance, we have absolutely eliminated the~ civil-service requirements in order to give the Army and the Navy and the Marine Corps and a number of other agencies of the Government the kind of employees they need in order that they may function efficiently and properly.

Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado. Mr. President, the Senator from Illinois has stated one viewpoint concerning the elimination of the House provision. The other viewpoint is that all agencies of the Government would like to get out from under

·the restrictions of the civil-service law. The argument is that, instead of being handicapped by the civil-service provisions now in force, the Veterans' Bureau would be definitely assisted if they used the processes of the Civil Service Commission to augment their necessary per4 -sonnel. -

Mr. President, as I have said, the:J;"e is violent opposition to the House provision eliminating the personnel from the requirements of the civil-service law. But the Veterans' Bureau is very anxious to have the other provisions of the pro-

. posed legislation enacted and put into effect, because they need it badly and they are perfectly willing to forego this one provision with respect to civil-service personnel. That is the reason our committee eliminated it. lt was a highly controversial matter. The bill, with that provision eliminated, was not controversial in any respect, and I hope it may be passed with the amendments reported by the committee.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the amendment reported by the committee beginning in line 8, page 2.

The amendment was agreed to. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

Clerk will state the next amendment. The next amendment was, on page 2,

line 18, after the word "existing", to strike out "statutes: Provided, That any personnel so employed shall have the right to qualify by prescribed competitive examination for civil-service status ahd the employment of any person not receiving a civil-service appointment shall be terminated not later than 1 year after the end of the war", and insert "statutes."

The amendment was agreed to. The amendments were ordered to be



The title was amended so as to read: ''An .act to amend section 100 of Pt:.blic Law Numbered 346, Seventy-eighth Con4 gress, June 22, 1944, to grant certain priorities to the Veterans' Administration; and for other purposes."

Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado subsequently said: Mr. President, today in legislative session the Senate passed, during the call of the Calendar. House bill 3118, relating to employment in the Veterans' Administration, . with an amendment. There was a brief discussion of the measure, and I ask unanimous consent to insert in the RECORD at that point a letter which I have received from Mr. Harry B. Mitchell, President of the United States Civil Service Commission, with respect to the amendment which the Senate adopted.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,

Washington, D. C., June 15, 1945. Hon. EDWIN C. JoHNSON,

· United States Senate. DEAR SENATOR JoHNSON: The Commission's

attention has been directed to the provisions in vour bill S. 971, to amend section 100 of Public Law No. 346, Seventy-eighth Congress, June 22, 1944, to grant certain priorities to the Veterans' Administration, to facilitate the employment of personnel by the Veterans' Administration.

This Commission is fully aware of the serious situation which confronts....the Veterans' Administration insofar as personnel matters are concerned. It has done everything it possibly can to place all of its resources at the disposal of the Veterans' Administration and to see to it that those resources are pooled with the resources which the Veterans' Administration has available for recruiting purposes.

If the bill as proposed should . become law, it would have the effect of removing the positions in the Veterans' Administration from the classified service for the duration of the war. Consequently, the Civil Service Commission would be unable to · utilize its resources in an effort to assist the Veterans' Administration in meeting its personnel needs. It is clear that tlfis would have the effect of retarding r~her than facilitating the filling of vacancies in the Veterans' Administration.

Unless it is desired to circumvent the provisions of the Veterans' Preference Act of 1944 by this bill, it will not introduce any more flexibility into the recruiting program of the Veterans' Administration than exists now under the war service regulations. All war agencies have been ·staffed without recourse to legislation of this kind.

The provision of the bill which would authorize the Veterans' Administration to hire persons at the maximum rather than the minimum of the schedule for a particular grade under the Classification Act is an example of the kind of a piecemeal approach to pay matters which gives to one agency of the Federal Government a:Q unfair advantage over the other agencies of Government. If such legislation should pass, it would be difficult for Government, as an employer, to explain to an employee in one agency why that employee, although placed in the same grade as. an employee in the Veterans' Administration, is, nevertheless, receiving less pay. Important as the duties and responsibilities of the Veterans' Administration are, there are other agencies of Government which are likewise discharging important responsibilities.

The Senate has just passed, and there is now pending before the House of Representatives, a pay bill which, if passed by the Congress and approved by the President, will improve tne pay structure Qf the entire Government. It is clear . that any other approach to a problem of this nature is unsound and unfair.

· Measures such as those proposed in this bill never provide 'l. re~l solution for per-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6427 - sonnel problems. The Commission believes

that more can be done than has been done in the direction of delegating authority to act in connection with personnel problems to field officers of the Veterans' Administration, in the direction of giving the field administrative officers of the Veterans' Administration staff help in the personnel field, in the direction of providing better housing conditions for persons required to live at veterans' facilities, and in the direction of providng more adequate transportation facilities for persons who are required to travel a considerable distance in order to work at the veterans' facilities.

Two bills have been introduced, S. 971, your bill, and H. R. 3118, the bill which passed the House Monday. As explained in the above, it is the Commission's view that this proposed legislation is unnecessary and undesirable, and it urges that the bill be not given favorable consideration.

The Bureau of the Budget advises there is no objection to the presentation of this report as the enactment of the legislation as introduced in S. 971 and the companion bill, H. R. 3118, would not be in accord with the program of the President.

By direction of the Commission. Very sincerely,

HARRY B. MITCHELL, President.

INTER-AMERICAN STATISTICAL INSTITUTE

The Senate proceeded to· consider the bill (H. R. 688) to amend the joint resolution of January 27, 1942, entitled "Joint resolution to enable the United States to become an adhering member of the Inter-American Statistical Institute, which had been reported from the Committee on Foreign Relations with amend:rrents.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Mr. President, may we have an ex~lanation of the bill Fnd a statement of what it means?

Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, this bill is simply to correct certain errors in the original joint resolution which has already passed and is the law. Certain ditnculties developed in the administration of the law. The pending bill is intended simply to clarify the original measure.

Mr.' REVERCOMB. What is the Inter-American Statistical Institute?

Mr. GEORGE. It is an institute to which the various nations of this hemisphere have subscribed for the purpose of gathering and disseminating information. There is a small cost involved of course. In the original joint resolution the cost was based on approximately 20 cents per thousand population, but there were some other provisions which had the effect of cutting down the contribution of the United States to about 15 cents per thousand population. The pending bill in the nature of an amendment to the original law is to correct the -language of the jo~nt resolution passed on January 27, 1942, by which we subscribed to this institute and became a participating member in it.

Mr. REVERCOMB. Is the United ..States required to pay a greater expense per capita than the other countries by participating?

Mr. GEORGE. No; actually, as the joint resolution was worded,· it placed upon other countries in the Western Hemisphere a little larger cost than it did on the United States.

Mr. REVERCOMB. -But the pending bill does not · place a greater expense on this Government per capita?

Mr. GEORGE. No; it is limited in any event to not to exceed $35,000.

. Mr. REVERCOMB. May I ask the able Senator just what is the purpose and the work of this statistical institute? Is it to gather information and {urnish information to the several governments and to the public?

Mr. GEORGE. It has been some time, of course, since the resolution was passed. II.l its administration the difficulty was encountered to which I have just called · attention. My recollection is that it is designed to gather information and pertinent facts with respect to the resources of the several countries in the Western Hemisphere, including Canada, and to distribute the information to the agencies of government which wish to obtain it; but I do not recall the terms of the original joint resolution which, as I have said, was passed some time ago.

Mr. REVERCOMB. What does it cost a year?

Mr. GEORGE. I may say there is a unanimous report from the committee. Further amend!l1-ents to the joint resolution relate only to the language of the measure. An amendment was offered by th~· Senator from Vermont [Mr. AusTIN].

Mr. REVERCOMB. Is-the cost $35,000 a year?

Mr. GEORGE. ~t cannot exceed $35,-000 a year . .

Mr. REVERCOMB. I .thank the Senator.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will state the amendment of the committee.

The CHIEF CLERK. On page 2, line 3, after the word "unless", it is proposed to strike out "the dues paid by" and to insert "at least eight of."

The amendment was agreed to. The CHIEF CLERK. On page 2, line 6,

after the words "shall have", it is proposed to in~ert "paid dues which."

The amendment was agreed to. Th'e amendments were ordered to be



EXCHANGE OF LANDS IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN NATIONAL PARK, COLO.

The bill (S. 100) to authorize an exchange of certain lands with William W. Kiskadden in connection with the Rocky Mountain National Park, Colo., was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That upon submission of satisfactory evidence of title the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to accept title. on behalf of the United States to the following-described land conveyed to William W. Kiskadden by warranty deed No. 174403 from Mrs. Arab Chapman, recorded August 24, 1916, in book 339, page 231, records of Larimer County, Colo.: Beginning at the northeast corner of the southwest quarter of section 31, township 5 north, range 73 west, sixth principal meridian, Colorado; thence south four hundred and eighty feet; thence west two hundred feet; tl'i.ence north 27 degrees 30 minutes west five hundred and forty-one feet; thence east four hundred and fifty feet to the place

of beginning, containing approximately three and fifty-eight one-hundredths acres, and in exchange· therefor to issue a patent for that portion of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter and that portion of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of section 31, township 5 north, ran ge 73 ' west, sixth principal meridian , Colorado, more particularly described as follows: Beginning at a point from whence the center quarter-section corner of section 31 bears south 79 degrees no minutes east, three hundred and sixt y and nine-tenths feet; thence • south four hundred and eighty feet to a point from whence the east quarter corner of section 31 bears north 79 degrees 22 minutes east, two thousand six hundred and seventy-three and six-tenths feet; thence west two hundred feet; thence north 27 degrees 30 minutes west, five hun dred and forty-one feet; thence east four hundred and fifty feet to the point of beginning, con taining approximately thr.ee and five-tenths acres: Provided, That the · land conveyed to the United .States, other than the land to be patented, shall, upon acceptance of · title thereto, become a part of the Rocky Mountain National . Park, Colo., and become subject to all laws and regulations applicable to said park.

EXCHANGE OF LAND IN MINNESOTA FOR PARK AND OTHER PURPOSES

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 199) to authorize the conveyance of certain public lands in the State of Minnesota to such State for use for park, territorial, or wildlife refuge purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys with an amendment, on page 2, line 20, after the word "such", to strike out "occupation or use" and to insert "occupation, use, or flooding", so as to make the bill read:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed, upon payment of a reasonable price set by him, through appraisal or otherwise, to convey to the State of Minnesota the following-described lands located in Morrison County, Minn.: Lot 6, section 10; lots 1, 14, 15, and 16, section 14; lots 9, 10, 11, and 12, section 15; lot 1, section 22; lot 9, section 23; and lots 1 and 5, section 25, township 42 north, range 32 west, fourth principal meridian; lot 4, section 4; and lot 3, section 9, township 130 north, range 29 west; fifth principal meri~ian; lot 5, section 18; and lots 4, 5, 6, and 7, section 32, township 131 north, range 29 west, fifth principal meridian.

SEc. 2. The lands authorized to be conveyed by the first section of this act shall be conveyed to the grantee for use for park, recreational, or wildlife-refuge purposes. The patent conveying such lands shall provide (1) that such lands or any part thereof may, with the approval of the Commissioner of Conservation of the State of Minnesota, be used by the United States for such military purposes as do not conflict with or are not incompatible with the use thereof for park, recreational, or wildlife-refuge purposes; (2) that the United States and its permittees or licensees shall have the right to occupy, use, or flood · any or all of the lands for power development, transmission-line purposes, navigation, flood control or other allied purposes, under any law applicable to the use of the public lands for such purposes and that no claim or right to compensation shall accrue from such occupation, use, or flooding; (3) that all minerals, including oil and gas, shall be reserved to the Unit ed St ates together with the right to prospect for, mine, and remove the same, under regulations to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior; (4) that the title to the lands shall revert to the United States 1f the State shall cease to use the lands for parks, recreational,

6428 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 or wildli.fe-refuge purposes, or if the State shall alienate or attempt to alienate the lands : Provided, That not h ing herein contained shall interfere wit h existing grazing privileges en joyed by persons prior to the passage .of the act, but such pr ivileges shall not extend beyond the lifetime of persons now exercising the same and no such grazing privilege shall be exercised by any person during any period of t ime when such islands are being actually used for military training or maneuvers.

T h e a mendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed

for a third reading, read the third time, and p assed.

SALE OF SALT SPRINGS LAND, ALABAMA

The bill <S. 708) authorizing the State of Alaba ma to lease or sell and convey all or any part of the Salt Springs land granted to said State by the act of March 2, 1819, was announced as next in order.

Mr. HILL. Mr. President, an identical House bill having passed the Senate day before yesterday, I ask that · the Senate bill be indefinitely postponed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the Senate bill will be indefinitely postponed.

SALE OF ALLOTMENT OF HENRY KEISER ON CROW INDIAN RESERVATION, MONT.

The bill (S. 480) to authorize the sale of the allotment of Henry Keiser on the Crow Indian Reservation, Mont., was considere<l, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third tfrne, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary' of the Interior is hereby authorized, upon the applica~ion of Henry Keiser in writing, to offer for sale to the highest bidder, under such terms and conditions as the Secretary may prescribe, the allotment of Henry Keiser, Crow Indian allottee No. 3313, described as lots 11 and 12 of section 3, west half of section 10, township 2 south, range 30 east, and southwest quarter northwest quarter, northwest quarter souhwest quarter, south half southwest quarter, and southeast quarter of section 1, township 8 south, range 37 east, principal meridian, Big Horn County, Mont., containing seven hundred and eighteen and seventy-five one hundredths acres: Provided, That such part of the proceeds ·recei.ved from the sale of said land as the Secretary of the Interior may deem advisable shall be reinvested in other lands selected by said Henry Keiser, and such land so selected and purchase shall not be alienated or encumbered without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior and shall be nontaxable and such restrictions shall appear in the conveyance. The balance of such proceeds, if any, shall be deposited to the credit of Henry Keiser and shall be expended under individual Indian money regulations of the Department of the In~erior.

FORT PECK PROJECT, MONTANA

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 486) for the acquisition of Indian lands required in connection with the construction, operation, and maintenance of electric transmission lines and other works, Fort Peck project, Montana, which had been reported from the Committee on Indian Affairs with an amendment, on page 3, to add a new section at the end of the bill, so as to make the bill read: ·

Be it enacted, etc., That in aid of the construction of the Fort Peck project, there is hereby granted to the United States, subject to the provisions of this· act, such right,

title, and interest of the Indiaps as may be required in and to such tribal and allotted lands as may be design ated by the Secretary of the Interior from time to time for the construction, operation, and maintenance of electric transmission lines and ot h er works of t h e project or for t h e relocation or reconstruction of properties made necessary by t h e construction of the project.

SEc. 2. As lands or interest s in lands are designated from time to time under t his act,

_ t h e Secretary of the Interior shall determine t h e amount of mon ey to be paid to t he Ind ians as just and equit able compensation t h erefor. The amounts due the tribe and t h e individual allottees or t heir heirs or devisees shall be paid from funds now or hereafter made available to t he Department of the Interior for the Fort Peck project to the superint endent of the appropriate Indian agency, or such other officer as may be designated by the Secretary of . the Interior, for credit on the books of such agency to the accounts of the tribe and the individUals concerned.

SEC. 3. Funds deposited to the credit of allottees, their heirs, or devisees may be \15ed, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, for the acquisition of other lands and improvements, or the relocation of existing improvements or construction of new improvements op. the lands so acquired for the allottees or heirs whose lands and improvements are acquired under the provisions of this act. Lands so acquired shall be held in the same status as those from which the funds were derived, and shall be nontaxable until otherwise provided by Congress.

SEC. 4. The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized ~o perform any and all acts and to prescribe such regufations as he may deem appropriate to carry out the provisions ·of this act.

SEc. 5. All designations of Indian lands pursuant to this act shall be made subject to the condition that in the event any such lands shall no longer be required for the purposes for which they were designated, then the right, title, or interest so acquired in lands so designated shall revert to the United States in trust for the Fort Peck Indian Trlbes.


for a third reading, read the third time, and passed. ·

CONVEYANCE OF· LANDS TO THE CITY OF CHEYENNE, WYO.

The bill <S. 911) authorizing the conveyance of certain lands to the city of Cheyenne, Wyo., was considered, ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to convey to the city of Cheyenne, Wyo., subject to any and all valid existing rights or claims, for use in connection with the water supply system of the city, and for the protection of its reservoirs, the following-described lands: The north half of section 2, township 13 north, range 70 west, containing three hundred and twenty-six and eightysix one-hundredths acres, more or less; the northwest quarter of section 4, township 13 north, range 70 west, containing one hundred and sixty-one and twenty-nine onehundredths acres, more or less; the south half of the north half, the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter, the south half of the southeast quarter, ·and the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section 22, township 14 north, range 70 west, aggregating three hundred and twenty acres, more or less; the west half of the northwest quarter, the southeast quarter of the northeast quarter, and the north half of the south half of section 26, township 14 north, range 70 west, aggregating two hundred and eighty acres, more or

less; the southeast quart er of the southwest quarter of section 30, t ownship 15 north, range 70 west, containing forty acres4 m ore or less; and the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of section 30, townsh ip 15 north, range 70 west , containing forty acres, more or less, sixth principal mer idian , Wyom ing, upon condit ion that the city shall make payment for the said lands at their appraised price as fixed by t he Secretary of t h e Inter ior, but at n ot less than $1.25 per acre, with in six mont hs after t he approval of this act: Provided , That there shall be reserved to the United States all oil , gas, coal, or other mineral deposits in t he lands, toget her with the r ight to prospect for, mine, and remove tbe same under regu lat ions to be issued by the Secretary of t he Interior.

SEc. 2. The lands granted pursuant to this act shall be used by the city of Cheyenne, Wyo., for the purposes of it s water supply system and the protection of it s reservoirs, and for no other purpose, and if said lands or any part thereof shall be abandoned for ·such use, said lands or such parts shall revert to the United St ates. The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and empowered to declare a forfeiture of the grant if at any time he shall determine that the city has for more than 1 year abandoned the lands for the use herein indicated, and such order of the Secret ary shall be final and conclusive, and thereupon and thereby the lands shall 'be restored to the public domain free from the operation of this act.

DENTAL CARE FOR NAVAL PERSONNEL

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 715) to provide more efficient dental care for the personnel of the United States Navy, which had been reported from the Committee on Naval Affairs with an amendment, to strike out -an after the enacting clause and insert: ·

That within 6 months after the date of enactment of this act the Bur{laU of Medicine and Surge-ry shall be reorganized so as to provide for greater integrity of the Dental Servic·e in accordance with the provisions hereof.

· SEC. 2. The dental functions of such Bureau shall be defined and prescribed by ap.propriate directives of such Bureau, and by any necessary regulations of the Secretary of the Navy, to the end that the Dental Division of such Bureau shall study, plan, and direct all matters coming within the cognizance of such Division, as hereinafter prescribed, and all ' matters relating to dentistry shall be referred to the Dental Division.

SEc. 3. The Dental Division shall (1) establish professional standards and policies for dental practice; {2) conduct inspections and surveys for maintenance of such standards; (3) initiate and recommend action pertaining to complements, appointments, advancement, · training assignment, and transfer of dental personnel; and (4) serve as the advisory agency for the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery on all matters relating directly to dentistry. An officer of the Dental Corps of ~he Navy shall be detailed as the Chief of the Dental Division. Such oflfcer, while so serving, shall have the rank, pay, and allowances of a rear admiral.

· SEc. 4. The Secretary of the Navy shall provide by regulations for establishing on ships and on shore stations dental services to be under the senior dental officer who shall be responsible to the commanding officer of such ship or shore station for all professional, technical, and administrative matters in connection therewith: Provided, That this section shall not be construed to impose any administrative requirements which would interfere with the proper functio.ning of battle organizations.

All laws and parts of laws in confict herewith are hereby repealed, and nothing con-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6429 tained herein shall act to reduce ·the grade or rank of any person.



Mr. WALSH. Mr. President, I ask that the report accompanying Senate bill 715, Calendar No. 371, be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the report (No. 378) was ordered to be printed in the REcORD, as follows:

The .Committee on Naval Affairs, to whom . was referred the blll (S. 715) to provide more efficient dental care for the personnel of the Unit ed St at es Navy, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill, as amended, do pass.

The purpose of the bill is to reorganize the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery so as to provide for greater integrity of the dental service of the United States Navy.

Section 1 of the bill directs that this reorganization shall be made within 6 months after the date of the enactment of the act.

Section 2 provides that the dental functions of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery shall be defined and prescribed by appropriate directives of such Bureau and by any necessary regulations of the Secretary of the Navy. It provides also that the Dental Division of such Bureau shall study, plan, and direct all matters coming within the cognizance of the Dental Division and that all matters relating to dentistry shall be referred to the newly created Division.

Section 3 sets up a Dental Division in the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery and directs that this Division shall (1) establish professional standards and policies for dental practice; (2) conduct inspections and surveys for maintenance of such standards; (3) initiate and recommend action pertaining to

· ·complements, appointments, advancement, training, assignment, and transfer of dental personnel; and (4) serve as the advisory agency for the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery on all matters relating directly to dentistry. This section also provides that an officer of the Dental Corps of the Navy shall be detailed as the Chief of the Dental Division and that' such. officer, while so serving, shall have the rank, pay, and allowances of a rear admiral.

Section 4 directs that the Secretary of the Navy shall provide by regulations that on shore stations and on ships all dental services shall be under the senior dental officer. The proviso to this section directs that this section shall not be construed to impose any administrative requirements which would interfere with the proper functioning of battle organizatiqns.

The bill as originally introduced was sponsored by the American Dental Association. Officials of this organization appeared before the committee and stated that, in . their opinion, enactment of the blll would increase the morale of naval dental officers and make the dental service rendered to naval personnel more efficient and effective.

Vice Admiral Mcintire, Chief of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery of the Navy Department, appeared before the committee and stated· that, in his opinion, the original bill, if enacted, would not improve the efficiency of the Dental Department of 'the Navy but, on the contrary, the efficiency of the Medical Department as a whole would be lowered.

Vice Admiral Jacobs, Chief of Naval Personnel, informed the committee that the enac~ .nent of the bill as introduced would interfere with the efficient operation of the naval service.

The committee amendment is a compro• m1se between the views as expressed by the

Chief of the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery and the officials of the American Dental Association.

The committee are of the opinion that the proposed substitute wm give the Navy Dental Corps considerably more autonomy and that this will increase the morale of dental officers. The committee believe the proviso in section 4, which states that this section shall not be construed to impose any administrative requirements which would interfere with the proper functioning of battle organizations, will insure that the reorganization directed by the bill will not interfere with the war effort.

BILLS PASSED OVER

The bill (S. 1125) to increase the compensation of the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Vice President of the United States, Senators, Representatives in Congress, Delegates from Territories, the Resident Commissioner from Puerto Rico, and members of the Cabinet was announced as next in order.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, I doubt whether that bill should be ,.Passed on this call of the calendar, and I ask that it go over.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be pa~sed over.

The bill <H. R. 3368) making appropriations for war agencies for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1946, and for other purposes, was announced as next in order.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Obviously, that bill cannot be taken up under the 5-I:ninute rule, and, without objection, it will be passed over. •

WHITE VAN LINE, INC.

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill <H. R. 1792) for the relief of the White Van Line, Inc., of South Bend, Ind. . Mr. -REVERCOMB. Mr. President, is this the next bill in order on the calendar?

Mr. BARKLEY. Several House bills preceding the one just stated were substituted for Senate bills and passed a while ago.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the third reading of House bi111792.

The bill was ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

ESTATE OF HERSCHEL ADAMS AND PLEAS BAKER

The bill (H. R. 2727) for the relief of the estate of Herschel Adams, deceased, and Pleas Baker was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

COWDEN MANUFACTURING CO.

The bill (H. R. 2158) for the relief of the Cowden Manufacturing Co. was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed. REALTY BOND & MORTGAGE GO. AND

ROBERT W. KEITH

The bill (H. R. 1055) for the relief of the Realty Bond & Mortgage Co. and Robert W. Keith was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

JANE THAYER

The bill <H. R. 2286) for the relief of Jane Thayer, was considered, ordered to a third rea,ding, read the third, time, and

. passed, ·

MRS. MARY ELLEN KEEGAN HERZOG AND OTHERS

The Senate proceeded to consider the bill <H. R. 1668) for the relief of Mrs. Mary Ellen Keegan Herzog and others, which has been reported from the Committee on Claims with an amendment, on page 1, line 12, to strike out "supervision of the Forest Service" and insert "the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, Department of the Interior" and a comma.

The amendment was agreed to. The amendment was ordered to be en

grossed and the bill to be read a third time.

The bill was read the third time and passed. ·

HIRES-TURNER GLASS CO.

The bill (H. R. 1677) for the relief of Hires-Turner Glass Co., was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

W .. A. SMOOT, INC.

The bill (H. R. 1058) for the relief of W. A. Smoot, Inc., was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

MRS. ADA WERT ILLINICO

The bill (H. R. 1678) for the relief of Mrs. Ada Wert' Illinico, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

GRANDVIEW HOSPITAL

The bill (H. R. 1891) for the relief of the Grandview Hospital, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

M. ELIZABETH QUAY

The bill (H. R. 1320) for the relief of . M. Elizabeth Quay, was considered, or

dered· to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

JOSEPH WYZYNSKI

The bill <H. R. 2002) for the relief of Joseph Wyzynski, was considered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and ·passed.

BILL PASSED OVER

The bill <H. R. 3035) to reclassify the salaries of postmasters, officers, and employees of the postal service to establish uniform procedures for computing compensation, and for other purposes, was announced as next in order.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. This bill ·cannot be considered under the 5-minute rule, and the Chair asks that it go over, and, without objection, it will go over.

That completes the call of the calendar.

PREVENTION OF DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION

Mr. THOMAS of Utah: Mr. President, on a previous call of the calendar, 11way back in April, the Senate passed Senate bill 805, to insure further the military security of the United States by preventing disclosures of information secured through official sources.

On the 11th of Apri11945, the Senator from Michigan [Mr. FERGUSON] entered a motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed .

6430 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is the

bill on the calendar? Mr. THOMAS of Utah. It appears on

page 14 of the calendar, under the heading "Motions for reconsideration." The Senator from Michigan [Mr. FERGUSON] has gone over the matter with the State and Navy Departments, and has suggested two or three amendments, and with th~ amendments he now has no objection to the passage of the bill. I ask that the clerk report the amendments, to see if we cannot pass the bill at this t ime.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, will it not be necessary to reconsider the vote by whici.1 the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and passed?

Mr. THOMAS of Utah. That probably would be the proper motion. ·

Mr. BARKLEY. I ask unanimous consent that the votes by which the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passeq, be reconsidered.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the votes ·are reconsidered. The clerk will state the amendments suggested by the Senator from Michigan.

The amendments were on page 2, line 15, after the word "shall", to insert "willfully"; on page 3, line 17, after the word "shall", to insert "willfully''; on page 4, after line 5, to strike out:

SEc . . 4. (a) T):le term "cryptographic" as used herein includes any code, cipher, secret writing, deception, mechanical or electrical device, or other method used to disguise or conceal the meaning of any communication.

(b) The term "cryptanalytic" as used herein includes all methods of interception and all methods of obtaining information of the contents of cryptographic communication.

And insert: SEc. 4. (a) The terms "code," "cipher,"

and "cryptographic" as used herein include any secret writing, deception, mechanical or electrical device or other method used for the purpose of disguising or concealing the meaning of any communication. ·


And after the amendment just above stated to insert:

SEc. 5. Nothing in this act shall prohibit the furnishing, upon lawful demand, of information to any regularly constituted committee of the Senate or House of Representatives of the United States of America.•

So as to make the bill read: Be it enacted, etc., That whoever, by virtue

of his employment by or performance of services tor the United States or by virtue of his employment by any person, firm, or corporation performing services for the United States or by virtue of his service in the armed forces of the United States, having obtained, or having had custody of, access to, or knowledge of (1) any information concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic or cryptanalytical system of the United States or any foreign government, or (2) any information concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or cryptanalytic purposes, or (3) any material which has been, or purpOits to have been, prepared or trans ..

mitted in or by the use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or an y foreign government, or (4) any information concerning the cryptographic or cryptanalytic activities of the United States or any foreign government, or ( 5) any informat ion which has been or purports to have been derived from crypt analysis of messages transmitt ed by the United States or any foreign government, shall willfully, without authorization by the head of the department or agency by which such person was employed or in which he performed services at the time when he had custody of or access to or obtained knowledge of the above-described information or material, communicate, furn ish, or transmit to another or publish any · such information or material, shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. Authorizations, as herein provided, shall be granted only in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Presiden t .

SEc. 2. Whoever, by virtue of his employmen t by or performance of services for any foreign government or by virtue of his service in the armed forces of any foreign government , having obtained, or having had custody of, access to, or knowledge of (1) any information concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic or cryptanalytical system of the United St ates, or (2) any information concerning the design, const ruction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, appara.tus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by ' the United States for cryptographic or cryptanalytic purpose, or (3) any material which has been, or purports to have been, prepared or transmitted in or by the use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States, or (4) any information concerning the cryptographic or cryptanalytic activities of the United States, or (5) any information which has been or purports to have been derived from cryptanalysis of messg,ges transmitted by the United States, shall willfully, without joint authorization by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of War, and the Secretary of the Navy communicate, furnish, or transmit to another or publish any such information or material, shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.

SEc. 3. The term "foreign government'' as u sed herein includes any person or persons acting or purporting to . act for or on behalf of any military or naval force , faction, party, department, agency, or bureau of or within a foreign count ry, or for or on behalf of any government or any person or persons purporting to act as a government within a foreign country, whether or not such government is recognized by the United States.

SEc. 4. (a) The terms "code," "cipher," and "cryptographic" as used herein include any secret writing, deception, mechanical or electrical device or other method used for the purpose of disguising or concealing the meaning of any communication.


SEc. 5. Nothing in this act shall prohibit the furnishing; upon lawful demand, of information to any regularly constituted committee of the Senate or House of Representatives of the United States of America.

The amendments were agreed to. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed.

Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, l now ask unanimous consent that there.

be inserted in the RECORD as part of my remarks a statement which I have prepared in regard to the bill.

There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

This bill (S. 805) has been the subject of vicious attacks in the press. It has been u sed as a· vehicle for attacks upon the Army and Navy, for criticism of the Committee on Military Affairs, and for attacks upon the Senate itself.

Perhaps the most charitable view we can t ake of these wild alarms is that their authors do not understand the provisions ot the bill or it s purposes, and do not realize the n ecessity for its enactment. Surely they would not knowingly contend that employees of the Government have an unrestricted license to disclose secret military information, and that this licenses must be protected at the expense of the military security ot the United States. But their opposition to

. this bill amounts to just such a contention. Everyone knows that an army and a navy

have .highly secret information, which should not . be publicly disclosed. I~ transmitting this information from place to place, highly secret methods of communication must be used. It is inevitable that in carrying on operations all over the world, many different individuals must participate in the transmission of this information and learn something of its contents antl the method of its transmission.

Now, the question involved in the present bill is this: Is each of these individuals to be permitted to determine for himself how much of this information is to be kept secret, and when and where to whom it should be disclosed? It seems perfectly plain that persons who have obtained secret information in a confidential capacity should not violate their trust by making improper use of that information or disclosing it to others without proper authority. The very idea that they should do so is reprehensible. Yet that is what this bill seeks to prevent. This bill, which has been so viciously attacked, merely seeks to enforce a rule of conduct which all honorable meri would agree should be observed. And it seeks to enforce this rule, because it is extremely vital to the military security of the United States that it should be observed.

The bill is intended to provide needed protection for a particular class of information. Specific legislation of this nature is nothing unique in our law. The act of June 10, 1933, which protects diplomatic codes, is a direct precedent for the present bill. I shall refer to that act at some length in a moment: There are also numerous...other statutes preventing Government employees from disclosing specific types of information acquired in the course of their work. The present bill is no more objectionable than these laws, which affect such Federal agencies as the Census Office, the Bureau of Internal Revenue, the Department of Agriculture, and the Office of Price Administration.

S. 805 is a very simple bill, straightforward in its intent. It has no sinister implications. It was originated in the working ranks of the Army and Navy by officers familiar with the inherent dangers of the present situation. Some of these officers are in the Regular Army and Navy, but most of them are temporary officers in service for the duration of the war only. They are the persons who v,:ould be most directly affected by the bill after they have returned to civilian life.

The sole purpose of the measure is to fill a serious gap in our existing laws to protect not only the military security of the United States, but the lives of countless thousands of American boys overseas. It is not too much to say that our very national existence might well some day be dep~ndent. on the protection afforded by the passage o! this ~ct.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6431 The private citizen of this Nation and the

Government alike are afforded protection from interference with their simplest communications through the United States mail and their communications both by telephone and telegraph. The purpose of this bill is to provide similar protection for the highly secret communications of the armed forces which are transmitted. in code or cipher and upon the security of which may depend our destiny as a Nation.

The act of June 10, 1933 (48 Stat . .122), makes it a crime punishable by $10,000 fine or 10 years in jail, or both, to disclose any diplomatic codes or any matters transmitted in such codes. That law affords a high degree of protection to the secret communications of the United States in the field of

- diplomacy, that is, communications of the State Department, but there is no comparable protection provided for the highly secret messages transmitted by the armed forces in their worid-wide operations or for the codes and ciphers used in transmitting such messages.

The bill provides the essential degree of protection for military messages by making unlawful the unauthorized willful disclosure of the processes by wJ:+ich the messages are encoded as well as the contents of the messages. In order to come within the pro-

. hibition of the b111, the information must have been obtained by virtue of employment by the Government, or by virtue of service in the armed forces of the United States, or by virtue of employment by a person, · firm, or corporation rendering services to the Government in connectio:q with the processes involved. The prohibitions mentioned above apply also to persons who acquire information about such processes of the United States by virtue of their employment by or service in the armed forces of a foreign government. No other classes of persons are affected by the bill. Under no circumstances could any prosecution be brought under this act against any member of the press for any disclosure except as to information received by him while employed or in service as stated above.

The Lill seeks to protect the secret processes used by the Government in encoding and decoding messages. Provision is included to prevent willful disclosure, without proper authority, of "any material which has been, or purports to have been, prepared or transmitted in or by the use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government." This portion of the bill is identical for all practical purposes with the 1933 act protecting diplomatic codes. That act reads as follows:

"Whoever, by virtue of his employment by the United States, shnll obtain from another or shall have custody of or access to, or sliall have had custody of or access to, any official diplomatic code or any matter prepared in any such code, or which purports to have been prepared in any such code, and shall willfully, without authorization or competent authority, publish or furnish to another any such code or matter, or any matter which was obtained while in the process of transmission between any foreign government and its diplomatic mission in the United States, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both."

The 1933 act was passed after thorough consideration in both the House and the Senate of the free speech issue, which was fully appreciated by the Members of Congress and thoroughly discussed by the press. The 1933 bill was carefully limited so as- not to restrict 1n any way the freedom of members of the public or of the press. The present bill was carefully drafted to contain the same provisions. The only difference 1n substance 1s that the present bill provides for United States military coded communications the essential protection now provided for the "d!,Plomatic" codes. It does not seem pos-

sible that any responsible person, fully cognizant of the facts, could contend that the encoded communications of our Army and Navy, involving · the lives of our soldiers, sailors, and marines overseas, the plans for our future military operations, our troop movements and our military dispositions, are not entitled to the same protection afforded the encoded communications of the State Department.

During the 12 years that the 1933 act has been on the books, there has been no suggestion that it has had any tendency to restrict in any way freedom of speech or freedom of the press. It has only served its intended purpose of preventing disloyal acts on the part of Government employees or former Government employees entrusted With the secret coded communications of our Government. There is no reason except that the present b1ll will have any other or different effect.

The bill applies to any matter which has been or "purports to have been prepared" in any code or cryptographic system. The similar provision in the 1933 act was clearly explained by the then chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, Senator Pittman, in the Senate on May 10, 1933. Senator Pittman said:

"There has been some objection to the words 'or which purports to have been prepared in any such code on line 9, page 3. The reason for that is this: If a message purports to be a code message between some foreign government and our Government, or between two foreign governments, and it is obtained by one through virtue of his office, or through his ability to crack a code which he has been taught by our Government, it might be found almost jmpossible to prove that it was a code of the foreign government without placing the representatives of that foreign government on the witness stand. But if a man is in a position of trust and confidence, and the message purports to be a code message, whether it is a code message or not a code message, he stlll would be violating his trust if he deliberately and willfully published it or deliberately and willfully gave it to another to be published without competent authority, as provided in the bill."

Certainly, if in 1933 the secrecy of our diplomatic encoded communications required protection by specific legislation, world history in the past 12 years should make it evi· dent that such secrecy is essential and that

. 1t must include also the communications of our armed forces. It will always remain within the power of Congress to prevent the use of this secrecy for improper purposes in the unlikely event such action should be attempted.

Freedom of speech does not mean license for every Government employee to steal or give away the contents of our Government's secret encoded communications. This was brought out by the following remarks of Senator Robinson, of Arkansas, on the 1933 act:

"It is not intended to interfere with the legitimate freedom of the press. It is only intended to penalize a practice which has become too common in many countries; that is, of selling alleged Government secrets. When one publishes what he claims to be a code he puts upon the Government the burden of making a denial and of proving what the actual co~e is. This legislation is for the protection of the code, and it is a fair propo-sition." .

The Senator from Texas [Mr. CoNNALLY] participated actively in the consideration of the 1933 act. The remarks he made in the Senate at that time are so appropriate in their application to the present bill that I wish to quote from them at some length. On May 10, 1933, the Senator said:

"My contention is that any citizen, whether white or black, male or female, big or little, lean or fat, who is in the employ

of the Government and having access to con· fidential papers and records, disloyally and improperly uses knowledge so obtained for private gai~ or private profit ought to be punished.

"Suppose an employee does not get such knowledge from his own Government, but by reason of the knowledge that he gains in the Government's service gets information from the codes of other governments and then publishes that material, when he knows that it is apt to involve his own Government in war or in diplomaic difficulties, he- is as much a traitor to his country as one who deserts his general on the field of · battle.

"Mr. President, what is there so wrong about this measure? What is there so terrible about it? Where is the Senator who approved pilfering private records? If there be such, let him rise. Senators who became outraged because of a man's stealing a spotted calf and want to put him in the penitentiary would seem to entertain the idea that a man could steal a public record or a public document and sell 1t for money to the newspapers and that that would be an act of patriotism and public service. I do not so regard it. •

"The newspapermen have a code of their oym; they respect confidences. When they are told something in confidence they will not publish it; it is a violation of their highest ethics for them to violate a confidence· and yet because the Government asks thos~ who are in its employ and who are receiving its compensation that they be loyal and not divulge information obtained in their confidential capacity Senato1·s rise and say that we are interfering with a free press.

"We are interfering with free thieving and . free betrayal of trust; that is what we are interfering with. We are interfering with free treachery to their employer and to their Government; that is all."

Mr. President, I believe in free speech and in freedom of the press. But I also .believe in responsibility in government. There is no effort here to cover up info'rmation which should be made public. There is nothing in .this bill which will prevent information from being given out by competent officials in any proper case. There is nothing in this bill Which Wlll prevent information from being obtained from responsible sources. The issue is whether responsible officers of the Government shall determine, in a proper manner, the time and circumstances under which information is to be disclosed, or whether every officer, enlisted man, clerk, or other individual Who has obtained military Jnformation in the course of his work is to be free to disclose it whenever and wherever he wishes.

I think the bill has a proper purpose. I do not believe we should be frightened by the broadside charges of people who read into the bill evil things which aren't there. I think the legislation is necessary and should be passed.

Here are examples of types of information Which Federal employees obtain by virtue of their employment and which provisions of existing law make it a criminal offense for them to disclose without proper authorization. References are given to the places where these provisions may be found in the United States Code. The list does not purport to be exhaustive:

1. Information relating to the census (U.S. Code, title 13, sec. 208). -

2. Information relating to cotton statistics (U. S. Code, title 13, sec. 73}.

3. Information relating to cottonseed statistics (U. S. Code, title 13, sec. 82).

4. Information relating to crop reports (U. S. Code, title 18, sec. 214).

5. Information relating to operations of manufacturers or income-tax returns (U. S. Code, title 18, sec. 216).

6. Information obtained under the Emergency Price Control Act (U. S. Code, title 50, Appendix, sec. 904),

6432 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~SENATE JUNE 21 7. Information obtained under title III of

the Second War Powers Act (U. S. Code, title 50, Appendix, sec. 633 ( 5) ) .

LAND EXCHANGE NEAR PENTAGON BUILDING

Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, on a former call of the calender when Calendar No. 277, Senate bill 888 was reached, the Senator from Ohio asked that the bill be passed over. The Senator no longer has objection to consideration of the bill. Therefore I ask for the present consideration of Senate bill 888.


There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill (S. 888) to authorize the Secretary of War to exchange with the Rosslyn Connecting Railroad Co. certain lands in the vicinity of the War Department Pentagon Building, in Arlington, '\!a., which had been reported from the Committee on Military Affairs with an amendment to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the fo~lowing:

That the Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, authorized, under such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, to convey to the Rosslyn Connecting Railroad Co., its successors and/or assigns, all right, title, and interest of the United States of America in and to a parcel of land located within the boundaries of the War Department Pentagon grounds in Arlington, Va., aggregating four and three hundred and twenty-five onethousandths acres, more or less; that the Federal Works Administrator be, and he is hereby, authorized, under such terms and conditions as he may prescribe, to convey to the Rosslyn Connecting Railroad Co., its successors and/ or assigns, all r ight, title, and interest of the United States of America in and to a parcel of land, aggregating one hundred and fifty-nine one-thousandths acre, more or less, immediat ely adjacent to the above-described parcel of land, and that the Commissioners of the District of Columbia be, and they are hereby, authorized, under such terms and conditions as they may prescribe, to convey to the Rosslyn Connecting Railroad Co., its successors and/ or assigns, all right, t itle, and interest of the United St ates of America in and to a parcel of land, aggregating seven hundred and ninety-four ten-thousandths acre, more or less, being a portion of the abandoned approach to the Highway Bridge, otherwise known as the Fourteenth St reet Bridge (U. S. Highway No. 1), immediately adjacent to the next above described parcel of land, and that in exchange therefor, the United St ates of America accept all right, title, and interest of the Rosslyn Connecting Railroad Co. in twelve and two hundred and twenty-five one-thousandths acres of land, more or less, situate in the same vicinit y.



The title was amended so as to read: "A bill to authorize the exchange of certain lands in tl;le vicinity of the War Department Pentagon Building in Arlington, Va."

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE

A message from the House of Representatives, by Mr. Chaffee, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House had agreed to the report of the

committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 3306) making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1946, and for other purposes, and that the House had receded from its disagreement to the amendments of the Senate numbered 17, 27, 29, and 32 to the bill, and concurred therein. TEMPORARY APPOINTMENT OR ADVANCE

MENT OF CERTAIN PERSONNEL OF THE NAVY AND MARINE CORPS

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid befor the Senate the amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 58) to amend an act entitled "An act authorizing the temporary appointment or advancement of certain personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps, and for other purposes," approved July 24, 1941, as amended, and for other purposes, which was to strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

That the act entitled "An act authorizing the temporary appointment or advancement of certain personnel of the Navy and Marine Corps, and for other purposes,' ' approved July 24, 1941 (55 Stat. 603), as amended (U. S. C., 1940 ed., Supp. IV, title 34, sec. 350, and the following), is hereby amended by adding the following new subsection (c) to section 2 of said act: ·

" (c) Officers on the retired list of the Regular Navy may, while on active duty, be temporarily appointed to ranks or grades in a different branch or corps of the Regular Navy without loss of or prejudice to any rights, benefits, privileges, and gratuities enjoyed by them by virt ue of their former status."

SEC. 2. Said act of July 24, 1941, as amended, is further amended by striking out the period at the end of section 11 (a) of said act and inserting in lieu thereof a colon and the following: "Provided, That officers on the retired list of the Naval Reserve with pay pursuant to provisions of the act entitled 'An act making appropriations for the naval service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1919, and for other purposes,' approved July 1, 1918, may, while on active duty, be temporarily appointed to ranks or grades in a different branch or corps of the Naval Reserve under the authority of this act without loss of or prejudice to any rights, benefits, privileges, and gratuities enjoyed by them by virtue of their former status."

Mr. WALSH. I move that the Senate concur in the amendment of the House.

The motion was agreed to. VETERANS HOSPITAL AT SIOUX FALLS,

S.DAK.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the amendments of the House of Representatives to the bill <S. 880) to provide for d~signation of the United States Veterans' Administration hospital at Sioux Falls, S .. Dak., as the Royal C. Johnson Veterans Hospital," which were, in line 5, to strike out "Veterans Hospital" and insert "Veterans Memorial Hospital", and to amend the title so as to read: "An act to provide for designation of the United States Veterans'. Administration Hospital at Sioux Falls, S. Dak., as the Royal C. Johnson Veterans Memorial Hospital."

Mr. BUSHFIELD. I move that the Senate concur in the amendments of the House.

l'he motion was agreed to. LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may be permitted to be absent from the Senate on next Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. . The PRESIDEN_T pro tempore. With-out objection, leave of absence granted the Senator from Indiana.. ·

ORDER FOR CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTIVE BUSINESS

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from Oregon [Mr . . MoRSE] desires to address the Senate at this time. I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of his address the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. I wish to say in that connection that it is desired that we take up the nomination of Mr. Wickard to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration.

The PRESIQENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Kentucky? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered.

THE OFFICE OF WAR INFORMATION

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I am sure that many Members of the Senate were deeply disturbed by the recent criticism leveled against OWl in certain sections of the press and during the debate in the House on the war agencies appropriation bill.

Certainly the OWl is not above criticism. In fact, not so long ago, I criticized the publicly announced policy of the OWl

' to keep American newspapers and periodicals from free circulation in Europe.

In my statement of criticism at that time I said:

The circulation of American newspapers and periodicals would ,be a great demonstration to the German people of the vigor and strength of democracy in action. I am opposed to the adoption of fascist devices in governing conquered fascist countries. I favor very firm controls over Germany, but not the adoption of dictatorial methods which violate the principles in defense cf which we are fighting this war.

The widest possible circulation of American newspapers and periodicals provides one of the best ways of demonstrating to the German people how deeply we resent their ruthless disregard of the laws of · morality and human decency. At the same time the circulation of an American free press in Germany would be one of the most effective ways of informing the German people of and educating them to a better understanding of the determination of the American people to maintain permanent world peace in keeping with the democratic ideals of the Atlantic Charter.

I was very happy to read in the neW-spapers a few days thereafter that President Truman had reversed the policy of OWI in regard to the free circulation of American newspapers and periodicals in Germany. So I say that OWl certainly is not above criticism.

Wherever OWI has fallen short, it should be subjected to public censure, and, if necessary, to congressional investigation, and made to correct its failings.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6433' But what disturbs me-and what, I am

sure, disturbs every Member of the Senate who knows how OWl has told the American story abroad-is that the criticisms of OWl's appropriation requests do not appear to be spund or justified. What further disturbs me, I must confess, is that some of this criticism seems to be inspired by partisanship. To anyone who cares deeply about the future of American foreign relations-and what Member of the Senate does not?-this is· disturbing and disheartening.

The Overseas Branch of the OWl has had two principal responsibilities. Under · the direction of the Chiefs of Staff, it was largely responsible for psychological warfare operations against theenemy. Under the supervision of the Department of State, it was responsible for an information program in Allied and neutral countries which would present official American policy on problems relating to the war and peace. As part of its information work, the OWl also had the task of creating a wider understanding of the American people, their contribution to the Allied war effort, the genius and working of their Government, their achievements in science, industry, art, and education.

I suppose only the most biased critic of the OWl would now dispute the testimony of our highest military authorities that psychological warfare bas under-·

' mined the will of the enemy and has saved American lives. Very few have been so unthinking or callous as to propose that psychological warfare against the Japanese should be abandoned or curtailed.

Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President---The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.

JOHNSTON of South Carolina in the chair). Does the Senator from Oregon yield to the Senator from New Hamp-shire? ·

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. BRIDGES. I agree with the state

ment the Senator has made relative to the value of psychological warfare, but I ask the Senator, in fairness to the subject he is discussing, if the fanatical opposition of the Germans to the end and the present fanatical opposition of the Japanese indicates that psychologicalwarfare has had much effect.

Mr. MORSE. I can only rely, of course, upon high military and Government authorities, and it is their testi..; mony that it has been very helpful. .

Mr. BRIDGES. Of course, I realize that the Senator is relying on them, but other author,ities would indicate the reverse. I agree with the Senator in his statement that psychological warfare should help. The only question in my mind is whether it has helped.

Mr. MORSE. It is my judgment, Mr. President, on the basis of the testimony I have read and the reports that have been issued by our Chiefs of Staff, that it has been very helpful in the prosecution of the war in Europe. I understand that the same view is held by our leaders who are operating in the Pacific. · Mr. AIKEN. If the Senator will per~ mit a question?

Mr. MORSE. I yield.

Mr. AIKEN. Is it not a fact that the psychological warfare had a very valuable effect on the civilian populations of the occupied and enemy natiOI\S, as well as friendly nations?

Mr. MORSE. That is what the authorities report.

Mr. AIKEN. Even though it might not have affected the armies. - I suppose we cannot tell to what extent it affected the armies.

Mr. MORSE. That is what the testimony, letters, and reports from our officials state. I understand tnat is one of the reasons why General Eisenhower wishes to have OWl's work in Europe continued.

Mr. AIKEN. I understand that the effect on the civilian population has been

· considerable. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, as I stated

before I was interrupted, very few have been so unthinking or callous as to propose that psychological warfare against the Japanese should be ,· abandoned or curtailed, though, to be sure, the drastic cut in appropriations voted by the House would hamper Pacific operations of this agency.

Because the testimony of the military leaders in the field cannot be successfully disputed and cannot be ignored, these critics have concentrated their attack against the continued operation of the OWI information program abroad. Here their argument is that the information program is one part fact, one part boondoggle, and one part do-goodism.· If there ever was any justification for this progt~m. they maintain, it ceased with the end of the European war. The one part fact, in their opinion, can be left in the able hands of the American press agencies. The boondoggle can be elimi-· nated. And the do-goodism, considerably reduced. in scale, can be shifted to

·the cultural attaches of State Department missions.

This would be admirable-except that it reveals a complete misunderstanding of OWl's information program, the reason behind it, the material it deals in, the way it works, and the results it bas achieved.

The idea behind the OWI information program is not do-goodism. It is not even the promotion of good will as such. Quite simply and realistically it is this: In their relations with one another, nations are motivated by self-interest. Enlightened self-interest requires that they compose and adjust their differences. Such adjustment proceeds more easily where there is mutual understanding of the history and institutions which determine national character and aims. Understanding depends on· information-complete and factual.

If foreign peoples are not fully aware of the extent of the American contribution in this war, they should be told. If there are misunderstandings about lendlease, they should be cleared up. If there . is resentment because food shipments are not larger, then the real story of the demands upon our shipping and food re-sources, of American rationing, of the limit of the American ·larder should be told.

If there is any doubt about the American attitude toward war criminals, the full text of Justice Jackson's report should be available to foreign officials and editors. When Mr. Vinson reports on The War: Phase Two, Allied and liberated countries should know the magnitude of the job still ahead for American arms. When the American Secretary of State makes a full-dress statement of this country's aims-as Secretary Hull did on several occasions in 1943 and 1944-the complete text of that statement should be at hand in the world's capitals. When this Chamber passes a Connally resolution or hears a report from the President on the Crimea Conference, the official texts should quickly be placed in the bands of foreign news editors and editorial writers. It can make a good deal of difference in the formation of foreign opinion and the course of foreign relations, whether an editorial writer of a great paper bas 100 words, or the full text, of a statement or document before him when he writes his piece. This is especially true in Europe where much more attention is paid to editorial opinion than here in the United States.

This is the kind of material which forms a substantial part of the information output of OWI abroad. It is quite useless to argue that this job could be left to the news agencies, or could be undertaken by the State Department. The fact is that the private American wire services have as their first interest the bringing of foreign news into this country, not to send American news overseas. As yet the State Department is not equipped to take over the job.

Mr. President, I invite the attention of the Senate to a report on the free press tour. A summary of that report has been prepared by the board of directors of the American Society of Newspaper Editors. It is a report of the trip of its World News Freedom Committee. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD at the conclusion of my remarks this summary·report of the committee because I think it contains information which every Senator should have. It is ·good supporting evidence of the need of keeping OWl active in Europe for some time in the future.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the report will be printed as requested.

(See exhibit A.) Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I should

like to read briefly from the report of . the editors, dealing with the type of news being sent from this country abroad by news agencies, and which is circulated abroad by foreign newspapers which bring the news in:

Tass brings in about 13,000 words a day from America, but it is screened politically and does not give any real picture of America. • • • In fact, one of the chief complaints we found from our diplomats and information officers was that our own news services, such as AP, UP, and INS, were doing the same thing, sending out items they thought would be used and displayed in an effort to build up their services without regard to whether people of foreign countries were getting a picture of America and its news Too often

·· it is race riots, murders, Hollywood loves,

..

6434 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 divorces, and so on which contribute to a distorted picture of America.

Senators may reasonably ask whether any of OWl's material ever sees the light of day; and, if so, whether it makes any impact on representative officials in other countries or the people at large. I speak of the type of factual material which OWI sends over to Europe. If Senators would refer to the testimony of our ambassadors and ministers contained in hearings on OW!, or if they would examine the files of foreign newspapers, or ask to see the huge books of clippings from newspapers all over the world in the OW! office, they would be satisfied on this score. ·

Let us take Britain as an example. Members may question the need or value of an information program in an Allied country which enjoys a great and free press and which has its own correspondents in the United States. But sections of the British press can be a breeding ground for false rumors and mi&information about America, just as sections of our own press can be a breeding ground for anti-British · sentiment. Furthermore, the coverage of American news' in many British papers before the war was notorious for its fullness on the folkways of high life in Hollywood and low life in American crime, and for its almost total neglect of the United States.

The principal metropolitan dailies in Britain today, despite the fact that they are limited to four pages, carry generous excerpts of major American policy statements, and often full texts of speeches by the President and the Secretary of State. These are supplied by OW!. Currently the British newspapers are running lengthy background pieces on the Pacific war. The material for most of these pieces is supplied either in London by the British division of the OWI, or through the help of the OW! to British correspondents in this country. · In addition the OW! sends by cablewireless factual reports on the Pacific fighting by United States admirals and generals.

After much effort and long negotiation, OWI officials in London persuaded the government printing office in Britain-His Majesty's Stationery Office.....-to reprint at its own expense and sell at a nominal fee in its bookstalls all over England the te~ts of official American reports and documents which would be of interest to the British public. As a result-and without a single penny of expense to the American taxpayerHMSO has published the reports of General Marshall and Admiral King, Target Germany, the story of the American Eighth Air Force, the Baruch-Hancock report, the first report . to the President and the Congress of Justice Byrnes as Director of War Mobilization and Reconversion, and other official American papers.

Recently HMSO has published, at a shilling, an illustrated history of the Pacific war from 1941 to 1944. It is entitled "Ocean Front." For it the OWI supplied much of the material. Incidentally, in my judgment, it is a much better job than any which has appeared in this country, for the price.

l repeat, Mr. President, that through the efforts of OWl the British Government is printing American documents and histories without any cost to the American taxpayers. -

This story can be multiplied again and again, not only in Britain but in other countries. In Turkey, for example, 58 percent of all foreign news in the Turkish press comes from American sources via OWI. In the Middle East and Near East-a critical area for world peace, I think we will all agree-OW! is the principal supplier of foreign news.· Even if any private news agencies dealt largely in the kind of material the OW! furnishes the press-but they do notthe foreign newspapers could not afford to subscribe to the service.

I have touched on only a part of the information program. I have said nothing of the news reels by which OW! reaches untold thousands with the American story, or the small, portable exhibits which have been seen by hundreds of thousands of persons, or of the magazines which have been prepared and sold by the OWI, many of them at a profit to the United States Treasury.

Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. BRIDGES. How long does the dis

tinguished Senator from Oregon believe the ·owr should be carried on? Let me say by way of background that Elmer Davis testified that when the war was over, OWI would stop. Gf course, my understanding is . that the war in Europe is over. The greater part of the funds carried in the current appropriation for OW! are for European activities. I am not telling the Senate that everything about the OWI is bad. It has done many fine things. ·

But the question in my mind is, How much longer should it be continued; and · cannot some other agency, such as the War Department or the State Department, take over its activities, and should not the ·OW! be gradually liquidated in that way?

Mr. MORSE. I think that is an exceedingly fair question, and I shall be glad to discuss it at some length. I think the OW! and the services it is now rendering should be continued, certainly until the Allied Nations reach a settlement as to the peace and rehabilitation policies which should prevail in Europe. I think the OW! is doing a fine job of informing the populations of the European countries in which it is now operating about the problems which confront America, the principles of our Government, and, for example, the reasons why we cannot give them all the relief they think they need now by way of food and other supplies. I think OWl is a very important arm of this Government for the dissemination of information to the civilian populations of the liberated and conquered countries of Europe. I cannot say to the Senator how long I think it should continue, in terms of the calendar; but my best judgment is that certainly it should continue until we have reached· a settlement of European affairs growing out of this war insofar as the peace settlement is con-

cerned. I fear that is going to be a _ period of at least a year, and possibly longer. It will be for at least as long as we maintain troops in Europe.

Mr. BRIDGES. The Senator will be interested to know, if he will yield further, that the Assistant Director of OWI made a statement that certajn functions of the OWI would have to be continued as a · perpetual matter. I intend to speak on that point later. I was rather amazed to have that statement made by the Assistant Director of the OWI.

Mr. MORSE. I would agree with him that certain functions of the OW! should be continued as long as we maintain an army of occupation in Europe.

Mr. BRIDGES. I would agree with that, ·too. My only question is whether some other agency which will be a permanent agency of Government should not be gradually taking over the activities of OW!, and whether the OW!, which was purely a war activity, should not be gradually retiring from the field.

Mr. MORSE. I should be very glad to have that suggestion pass in review before me and the other Members of the Senate at a later date, but I do not think it is germaine to the problem which I now wish to emphasize, namely, that in this period of emergency, in this period in which we are trying to make the necessary settlements in Europe which we think will make possible a permanent peace we should not cripple OWl's program in Europe by taking away any considerable amount of the OWl's budget at this time. It is doing a vital job which no other agency of the Government is as well equipped to do.

Let me comment on another point the Senator made in his remarks, namely, whether in my judgment the activities of OW! should be taken over by some permanent agency of the Government suet. as the State Department or by the military. I think it would be most unfortunate to have OW! taken over by the military-for psychological reasons, if none other. I say that because I think that, after all, the OW! should serve as America's civilian voice to the civilian of Europe. In other words, it should be a conduit of people's opinion. It should be 'the instrumentality of the people of this country for spreading information and the factual data which we wish the people of Europe to have concerning the people of America and the governmental processes of America.

I think that psychologically it would be very unwise to have that information given to them through the military. Europeans are accustomed to the military-in fact, too much accustomed to it. I wish to have them see democracy in action; I wish to have them see that here is a government in which the civilians are supreme and in which the military, after all, is but subject to the will of the civilians. I think it would be most unfortunate to have the information service now carried on by OWI handled by the military.. I wish to leave military affairs to the military, but I shall always raise my . voice in protest whenever the military seeks to carry on what I think is a proper civilian function, I think this happens to be a proper

'• .

1945 CONGRESSJONAL· RECORD-SENATE 6435

civilian function and should be carried on 'Qy a civilian agency working in full cooperation with the military and the State Department. Such has been its record to date and I am sure such will be its record in the future.

Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, will the Senator yield further.

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. BRIDGES. I spent more time on

the OWl and in examining and exploring its activities than perhaps any other member of our· committee did.

Mr. MORSE. I am sure that is so; probably the Senator has given more consideration to OWl budget matters than any other Member of the Senate.

Mr. BRIDGES. I try to look at this thing in a fair way. To start with, the Senator will understand that I am not questioning in any way the activities of the OWl on the Pacific front. I think that is necessary; I wish the OWl to have all the funds it · needs for that purpose. _ The only two reasons about which I

am raising a question are, first, the a~tivities of the OWI in Europe, now that the war there is over, and, second, some of the OWl's activities here at home. Those are the only two points about . which I raise questions.

The Senator spoke of the efforts of the OWl in some of the other countries of Europe. I wish to ask the Senator if he has made an examination of any of the individuals who are directing the OWl's activities--for instance, in certain countries. Does the Senator kpow about the type M material which has been put out relative to Pol2.nd by the OWl's Polish desk, or does the Senator know the background or character of the persons doing it?

Mr. MORSE. The answer is "No.'' Let me say for the RECORD that I have checked into the type of material which is sent out by the OW'!. I have read, for example, reports such as the one I now hold in my hand, which is entitled "OWl in the ETO-A Report on the Activities of the Office of War Information in the European Theater of Operations, January 1944-January 1945."

The reading of such material convinces me that it is essential, not only from the standpoint of our national security but from the standpoint of maintaining and developing sound foreign relations with Europe, that we do not cripple the OWl at this stage of our international program.

Mr. BRIDGES. The Senator is indefinite as to how long he thinks that situation should continue.

Mr. MORSE. I do not mean to be indefinite. I said that it should continue until the peace settlement and the policies of occupation have been· determined. It should continue as long as we maintain in Europe an army of occupation. I am not saying that it should continue after the next fiscal year at the same level of expenditure as is being proposed in the pending appropriation request 'of OWI. I should want the agency representatives to come each year to us and demonstrate that the amount of money which they are requesting . is necessary in order to carry on the projected year's work and to demonstrate· further, as I think they are

doing this year, that the program- is an essential one. I am convinced, and I hope to be able to persuade the Senator from New Hampshire before I shall have finished with my remarks, that in order to do its very vitally important work the_ agency needs the money which it is asking for in the present year's budget.

Mr. BRIDGES. I should like to point out to the Senator that he is an even more ardent exponent of the OWl than its Director, Mr. Elmer Davis, who stated flatly before the committee that when the war is over he favors the discontinuance of OWI. I gather that the Senator is much more enthusiastic about the perpetuation of the OWI than is its Director.

Mr. MORSE. I am not only enthusi·astic about it, but I think it is of great importance to this country that we continue to tell the American story abroad after the peace settlement has been accomplished, -and so long as we maintain an army of occupation in Europe. I respectfully suggest, however, that the Senator from New Hampshire is placing · a very limited and strict, interpretation upon Mr. Elmer Davis' testimony. I am_ satisfied that when he spoke of discontinuing O'WI when the war is over Mr. Davis did not mean that OWl should be withdrawn from Europe during the very critical period of American negotiations for a just and lasting peace and during the period that our boys have to remain there in an army of occupation.

Mr. BRIDGES. I agree with the Senator that we must do something about the matter, but I do not agree with him that the OWl is the arm of Government service which should do the work. I hope to see the State Department strengthened and acting as our permanent agency in dealing with international affairs. It should have a greater voice than it has had in the past in spreading the American policy.

Mr. MORSE. I do not believe the Senator and I will find ourselves in disagreement at all on the question of what vehicle should be employed in doing the work, unless the Senator proposes that it shall be done by the Army. I oppose that selection for reasons which J.. have already expressed. so· far as next year is concerned, the State Department will be in no position to do the work. We certainly should continue the OWl for the next year, and give it the necessary funds to do the type of work which it is doing. If, after next year, the Senator can suggest some other agency to do the same work, and do it as well as the OWI can do it, I will not quarrel with him over his selection. However, the State Department is in favor of OWl continuing with its important work, and it has not asked to be given OWl's job. I am not convinced, but that is a matter for future debate, that our State Department should ever be assigned this particular type of public-relations work.

Mr. BRIDGE&. How much ·money does the Senator believe it will require for the OWl . to do the minimum work which the Senator thinks should be done?

Mr. MORSE. I think the amount of money which the OWl has asked for is the minimum amount which they should be granted. The Appropriations Com-

mittee reduced the $42,000,000 which the OWl requested to approximately $39,-000,000. I think the OWI has made out a case for $42,000,000.

Mr. BRIDGES. - I may point out to the Senator that he is probl3,bly aware that the OWl requested C42,000,000, that the House committee reported $35,000,-000, 9,nd then the ' House reduced it to $18,000,000. Representatives of the OWl came before our committee and asked for a restoration to $42,000,000 which they said they needed. They stated that they might get along on $35,000,000. The Committee first recommended $40,000,-000, and on a secondary vote the :figure was reduced to $39,750,000. On some minor issue the appropriation was then sliced a few more thousand. I make that statement to show that there exists a difference of opinion with regard to the matter.

Mr. MORSE. I shall _ certainly vote for the full $39,000,000, but I think a case was made out for $42,000,000.

Mr. WILEY. M~ President, will the Senator yield.

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. WILEY. I am very much inter

ested in the discussion which has been taking place: I wish to compliment the Senator from Oregon for the position which he has taken.

The other night General Eisenhower _ said that there was no antagonism be

tween idealism and practicality. · I thought the_ statement to be a very remarkable one -to be made, as it was, during the period in which we are now living. We-need to understand what he was shooting at.

With respect to the OWl, I agree fully with the statement of the distinguished Senator that the idealistic function of selling to the world what is America is a tremendous task for us to undertake. The question which I have in my mind is how to translate that purpose into the practicality of getting results on the European front. I do not need to tell the Senator that in most European count1ies the press is not free. Even in so-called Republican countries the press is controlled. The problem is to get our bill of goods before the consumers of the European countries.

Another problem with which we are confronted is that of making sure that the bill of goods, as suggested by the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. BRIDGEs], is an American-type bill _of goods and not an American-com- ' munistic or an American:..Fascist type. Of course, in that connection it is our· responsibility to see that the administrators of the agency to which we give money are comPOsed of the American type of men who can sell the bill of goods to which I refer, and achieve results, and not merely fritter away money.

I thank the Senatdi- for what he has said, but I hope he will go into the subject further. He is always thorough and illuminating in his remarks. What is the practical aspect with regard to getting the American bill of goods into those countries?

Mr. MORSE. I will discuss the subject at some length in my prepared statement. · I agree with the premise of the

6436 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 Senator from Wisconsin; but I thinlc the fact that we do not find freedorr.. of the press in Europe today is all the greater reason why we should do everything possible to see to it that we keep open our channels of information to Europe.

Mr. WILEY. Will the Senator discuss how we are to keep those channels open? Only the other day I read a comment in the press relating to country A. I will not name it. The statement was made

. definitely that in country A a certain great news agency-! will not call it by its name-was not giving to country A the facts with regard to America's part in winning the war, but was maximizing the effort of other nations in winning the European war. That is the practical thing about which I am thinking.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator from Wisconsin is correct." Let me give an instance of a situation about which I have learned from OWI officials and from reading their reports and from hearing about the lcind of information they have sent over to Europ~.

The situation involves southern France. I think it is pretty clear from the record that there are thousands of people in southern France who are not aware of the great part which America has played in liberating France. Certain groups in southern France are, of course, putting out information to the effect that France was liberated not by the Allied troops but by tbe French underground and by the Russian Army pressure upon Germany. After all, the people in southern France are isolated. Keep in mind the fact that they do not even know--

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. Let me finish my statement, anq then I shall be glad to yield to the Senator from South Dakota.

I was about to say that the people of southern France do not know what is taking place· even in the northern part of their country. They have not been well informed concerning the great job whic America has done in liberating France. I think it is important that the OWl channels of information be kept

. open so that info·rmation may be taken into southern France-using that territory as an example-concerning the American story. I use "American story" as a general term to cover the various types of news, information, and exhibits which OWl uses in Europe to inform the people there about America.

Let us consider other parts of Europe as, for example, the Balkans. I think as of the present moment the best channel we have, in fact the only effective channel we have bringing American news to those people is the OWI service, I think it is very important to see to it that OWT continues to have the funds which are necessary to make American new~ and official information as available as it can on a continent which the Senator from Wisconsin says-and I agree with him-does not understand the great virtues and value of a truly free press such as we ha_ve in America.

Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, the Senator led up to a concrete instance in southern France. He reached the point of suggesting that he thought it was a virtue to sell the American story to

southern France, but the Senator did not tell me how to get it to the people of southern France.

Mr. MORSE. The OWI officers in southern France are disseminating information there daily and in quantity.

Mr. WILEY. What do they use to disseminate it? They have no newspaper there, have they, and they are certainly not in a position to go among the French and issue a paper of their own, are they? What are they doing? That is what I wish to know. I am seeking information. I am not speaking in a critical sense.

Mr. MORSE. I know the Senator is not. I appreciate his questions which are very fair and helpful to this discussion.

The OW! informs me that they are making available the type of services I have enumerated. News-reel services, various types of exhibits and demonstrations, leaflets, the text of American statements and Ame.fican daily news all are made available to the people and to such French newspapers as are published. Of course, not all of the material in the form of news items is used by French editors, but the records show that those· editors who have supplied to them OWI information use a good deal of it and appreciate getting our point of view of many occupation problems. The responsibility of the,OWI is to see to it that a good public relations program is developed between OWl and French newspaper editors and other foreign editors. Only through such a vehicle is it possible to have this information disseminated in Europe and that is why it is necessary to keep OWl there on the job. The OWl is doing it and doing it well. I am sure the Senator and I would be in complete agreement that much of the information which we would like to have accepted by foreign editors is not accepted; but none of it will b'e accepted if we cut OWl off so that there is no source of supply for American news made available to the citizens of European countries and to their editors.

¥r. WILEY. Can the Senator tell me whether we are buying space in 'the French newspapers? ·

Mr. MORSE. No; I cannot tell the Senator whether we are buying space, but that information certainly can be obtained, and I shall be glad to obtain it for the Senator and make it available to him.

Mr. WILEY. The Senator knows, does he not, that other governments have been buying space? M~. MORSE. That is one of my major

points. I know that :eritish information and Russian information and French information are going to be disseminated through their news souxces in great quantities, and I think it would be most unfortunate if America should cut off one of her important channels for sending information to Europe.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Mr. PresidentMr. MORSE. I yield to the Senator

from South Dakota. Mr. BUSHFIELD. I thank the Sena

tor. Mr. President, I spent an evening very

recently with a returned war correspondent who had been for a year and a half in Russia. What I am about to say is right along the line of the question the

distinguished Senator from Wisconsin was asking. As I recall, he said that there were about 150 war correspondents in Moscow but they had not been permitted to leave Moscow except to take a little train trip to a rural area, a very quiet rural area, which the Senator from Arizona [Mr. McFARLAND] suggests to me was only 40 miles from Moscow. Except for what the Russian Government issued to them that was all the opportunity they had to obtain information. Will the Senator from Oregon tell me, if he can, how the OWI is going to disseminate the word he wants to have reach Russia?

Mr. MORSE. In view of the Russian press policies, I do not think that OWI is going to be able to broadcast any great amount of information in Russia, but nevertheless I think it very important that we keep the OWl in Moscow. My information, again to use a specific example, is that the OWl does rele.ase each day in Moscow mimeographed sheets of American news, and those sheets go to all foreigners in Moscow, to all members of the diplomatic corps, and to all embassies, and to the Russian high officials.

Mr. BUSHFIE~D. Are they published in any.Russian newspapers?

Mr. MORSE. The sheets go to Russian officials.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. But they are not published in the Russian newspapers, are .they? ..

Mr. MORSE. Excerpts occasionally are published, I am informed.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Did the Senator ever read any of those excerpts?

Mr. MORSE. No; I do not read Russian.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Nobody in Russia knows anything about the United States being in this war, except government officials and military o:flicers and perhaps a few others.

Mr. MORSE. I think the Senator is to a large degree correct about it; anci so it is all the more important, I say, that we keep in Moscow at least some source for American news, because 'r am one w:Oo

. hopes and prays that better understandings will develop between this country and Russia. I fear that unless we reach agreement on some of the things about

· which the Senator complains, cooperative international relations will be difficult to accomplish.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield further?

Mr. MORSE. I am very glad to yield. Mr. BUSHFIELD. I agree with the

Senator in his objectives, but, from the · standpoint of the practicality of the situ

ation in Russia, I am wondering whether OWl or any other agency will get any of this needed information into Russia. I think the Senator will agree with me that there is some doubt about it.

Mr. MORSE. I have no doubt, however, about the fact that the money we spend in an attempt to keep Russia supplied with at least one reliable source of America·n news is..money well spent.

Mr. BUSHFIELD. Will the Senator yield for one more question?

Mr. MORSE. I am glad to yield. Mr. BUSHFIELD. For more than a

year I have been noticing as I have attended the moving-picture theaters

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6437 around Washington that whenever I go to a show, before the program is finished, some form of propaganda is presented on the screen. Is the OWI money spent for that sort of thing?

Mr. MORSE. I do not know whether the Senator and I would agree on the definition of propaganda when applied to the specific news releases he may have in mind. I would say that, of course, propaganda based upon a distortion of facts should not be issued by any Government agency; but I have no evidence before me that OWI disseminates propaganda in that sense.

Mr. BUSHFlELD. I thank the Senator. Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, will the

Senator from Oregon yield? Mr. MORSE. I am very glad to yield

to the Senator from New Hampshire. Mr. BRIDGES. If the Senator's theory

is correct and if proper information could be disseminated abroad, as I think it should be-l only question the vehiclehe will admit, will he not, that it is important to know the individuals who carry on the work?

Before the Senator votes on this question finally may I ask if he will not make a study of the records and background of some of the personnel who are formu- . lating the American policy, who are the interpreters-perhaps I should use that word-and who disseminate the information according to their interpretation, to ascertain whether he is satisfied with those individuals and with their background and whether they are the type of people he wants to put out such information for America?

Mr. MORSE. I can assure the Senator--

Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, will the- Senator yield? _ Mr. MORSE. If the Senator from Connecticut will permit me to answer the Senator from New Hampshire, I shall be glad to yield to him. I can assure the Senator from New Hampshlre that I will follow in this instance, as I do in every instance, the procedure of hearing any evidence and obtaining any material available to me on the point under discussion; but I may say to the Senator from New Hampshire that if there is a problem of personnel in OWl, the solution is not to cut off OWl funds, so as to make impossible the rendering of the service which I think the Senator and I are in agreement should be rendered. If the Senator's real objection to giving OWl adequate funds is an objection to the qualifications of some of the OWl personnel then I think the Senate should proceed to investigate the qualifications of Mr. Davis' staff to which the Senator alludes, and if he has personnel which is incompetent, because of some ideology,

· to do the job or for any other reason, we ought to see that the personnel is changed. ·

However, I think the Senator will agree with me that we can bring about changes in personnel without destroying OWl and cutting it off from needed appropriations. It is for the objectives of OWl and for the continuation of its much needed in· formation channels to Europe and the Pacific that I am pleading today. I imagine that Mr. Davis himself would admit that some of his help could be

more competent. That is true of every Government agency. However, I know of no evidence which supports any contention that OWl is doing an incompetent job. To the contrary I think that Davis is doing a very competent job on the whole. Granted that he and his staff make mistakes now and then, their over-all record is excellent and they deserve our continued confidence and sup-port. f#

Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, will the Senator from Oregon yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. MclVIAHON. The suggestion made

by the Senator from New Hampshire to the effect that the Senator from Oregon study the personnel records of the personnel putting out this material would undoubtedly entail a good deal of workby the Senator. Does not the Senator believe that he can better judge the situation by looking at the material they do put out? It would seem to. me that a man should be known by his works. I presume that material is available to any Senator who desires to look at it, and .I should like to ask the Senator from New Hampshire whether he has reference to any particular material which would seem to indicate that these people are misusing their office.

Mr. BRIDGES. W'ill the Senator from . Oregon yield?

Mr. MORSE. I ·am glad to yield so that the Senator may answer the ques· tion.

Mr. BRIDGES. I did not ask that they bring before the Committee on Appropriations for a check all foreign broadcasts the OWl had put out, realizing what they have issued has been in such vast numbers that it would be unfair to ask for what they have issued over any period of time, but I did ask for the broadcasts from the first week in November 1944 to the last week in November. Those were in 28 different languages. I do not boast of having mastered more than one language, English, and probably am somewhat imperfect in that at times, but I have asked various persons representing me to study some of these things, and I am in the process of studying them now.

I might say that to date some of the broadcasts I think are fine, others are questionable. But I am not in a position yet either to approve or condemn. Therefore I would have some question about some of the focal points of dissemination, while as to others I have nothing but praise.

Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, will the Senator from Oregon yield? - Mr. MORSE. I yield further.

Mr. McMAHON. I shall be very much interested in seeing what the Senator from New Hampshires comes up with after he has completed his analysis. Frankly, I have never seen one of these foreign broadcasts by the OWl, but I wish to state that this is no time for the voice of America to be muted throughout the world. It strikes me that what we have to be concerned with is the exportation of democracy. There may be some defects in this instrumentality, I do not know, but I say to the Senator from Oregon that in my opinion never before was there s~ch a necessitY: to put

before the people of the world the truth about this country, what we stand for, and what we have done.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator; he expresses exactly my point of view.

I wish to say to the Senator from New Hampshire that I should be very much surprised if we took a quantity of OWI releases and found that we were in agreement witfi OWl, that all the releases were perhaps the most wise that could have been issued at the time. Nevertheless, I am sure the Senator from· New Hampshire and I would find ourselves in disagreement as we examined a large quantity of releases as to whether or not, qualitatively speaking, a certain release should or should not have been released. We would probably agree for the most part, but the point I make is that OWI is better able to judge such matters on the facts it has at the time than we are nov!. It is my understanding that at least while hostilities were on, and I believe the procedure still prevails, the so-called OWI releases-and I judge this from the report of General McClure, which I inserted in the RECORD a few days ago, ani from statements made to me by OWldo first receive approval from a board, or .a committee, or a commission, of offi-

. cials representing this Government, and performing coordinated functions in the European area. These boards in the various areas are made up of representatives of the General Staff, the State Department, and the OWI. Thus, OWI works in cooperation with and coordination with the other American sources for the dissemination of news in Europe. Whereas the Army and State Department issue their official communiques, the OWl releases so-called civilian news, but the other arms of the Government have full knowledge of OWl's program and give it their approval and support.


Mr. MORSE. I yield. -Mr. BRIDGES. The Senator from

Oregon and I agree sometimes and dis· agree at other times, but whether it is the Senator from Kentucky £Mr. CHAN· DLER], or the Senator from Vermont [Mr. AIKEN], or the four of us who happen to be in this small group here at the moment, we disagree and we agree, but does the Senator think it would be proper for OWl or any other official agency, in disseminating American news, to censer or black-out speeches· of any Senator, no matter who he was? _

Mr. MORSE. Not censor in the sense in which I am sure the Senator uses the term. But I think the Senator will agree with me--

Mr. BRIDGES. If they used excerpts they approved and left out excerpts they disapproved, would the Senator approve of that?

Mr. MORSE. I shall discuss in a very short time the policy OWI followed,~for example, in the last political campaign, and I shall insert in the RECORD the instructions OWI sent to their officers all around the world at the time . of that campaign. I have reached the conclusion-and I think the Senator from New Hampshire will reach the same conclusion-that those instructions were impartial, that they were fair, and that they

I

'6438 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 2l made possible the dissemination of a fair account of that great campaign of last fall. They very carefully avoided censoring the speeches of tlie candidates. Obviously OWI carinot carry in its releases verbatim accounts of all speeches made by candidates for office or by Senators elected to office. However, I am satisfied that OWI did not censor speeches in that campaign nor were its releases subject to the criticism of playing politics through favoritism ill. selecting certain excerpts from any particular speech in order to help or injure a particular candidate.

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, will the Senator from Oregon yield a inoment?

Mr. MORSE. I am delighted to yield· to my good friend the Senator from Kentucky.

Mr. CHANDLER. I am tremenc;iously interested in the statement made by the Senator from Connecticut. Is it proposed that we shall spend money to export democracy to these other countries? That intrigues me, because if it is so, then we should have no objection if they spend money to export communism to the United States.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator from Connecticut can speak for himself, but ·because I agree with him, I should like to make this statement. I judge that what he meant was that we should maintain OWl as a source of information with regard to American news, American problems, and American democracy in action.

Mr. CHANDLER. We in this country believe in democracy, and have a right to. I want to keep democracy for America. I have no objection to communism in Russia if that is what Russians want. They have no right to object to our having democracy here.

Mr. MORSE. f think I know what the Senator has in mind.

Mr. CHANDLER. There are millions of people all over the world who will not understand anything we say, and a lot of news releases will not mean anything to them. If they get the idea that we are sending propaganda, that is paid for, to induce them to set aside the form of Government they have or are living under, even if they like another, we are going to try to substitute our form, such procedure will probably be very objectionable to them. I would not vote a cent to try to export democracy to unwilling people, or to Russia, and then at the same time complain, as we hear bitter complsJnts, about what they are trying to do with the international comintern and other things to communize this country.

Mr. MORSE. Let me make myself clear, and then I shall be glad to yield to the Senator from Connecticut to make whatever comment he cares to make on the point raised by the Senator froin Kentucky.

I think the Senator should keep this in mind. I do not think it falls within our province or our right to seek to democratize Russia by way of American propaganda, and I do not think it falls within Russia's right or prerogative to seek to communize America. But speaking of realities and practicalities, as referred to by the Senator from Wisconsin a few.

minutes ago, if we are to be cool-headed realists, we have to realize that on the Continent of Europe at this very hour there are millions of people in liberated and conquered countries who are being bombarded by information, much of which, I think, is distorted and misleading as to governmental ideologies.

I believe in the principle of self-determination when it comes to selecting a

4agovernment which any people will have over them. I do not believe that a principle of self-determination can ilve in an atmosphere in which the people are being bombarded with information from only one source. I think it is highly desirable, in the interest of the future peace of the world, that we make available to the peo-· pies of the earth what I have referred to in this speech as the American story.

It is_ not our job to say to them "You should set up a democratic form of government "or'' you must set up a democratic form of government." But I think we would be amiss if we do not take advantage of the great opportunity we have to give them an education through unbiased, factual news information as to what we -mean by democracy in action. I am willing to spend more money than OWI asks for to make the American story known to the peoples of Europe.

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, let me proceed for a moment on that theory. Assuming the peoples referred to are going to be bombarded by the Russians or some others-and I assume they arethen the plan is to have every one bombard them. In visiting some of the countries in question I was impressed with the fact that the people who have heretofore been considered generally to be subject people, want to be educated, and if we educate them they will have some opportunity, after becoming educated, to make their choice and to make that self-determination which my friend the Senator from Oregon said he would like to have them make. Of course I would like to have them make that selfdetermination also.

In visiting with the Arabs I saw thousands and thousands of them diseased and in distress. We asked El Glali in what way we could help Arab hospitals. His reply was direct: "Unless you educate us let us die."

I believe the money could be better spent if the American people would take schools to those people and educate them, and in that way give them our ideas of government, rather than to spend millions of dollars in '\"/hat sometimes seems to be foolish propaganda and certainly selected propaganda. If someone selects the propaganda, certain matter will be selected and other matter left out. I am certain that I have seen releases which have gone across the seas which seem to be rather foolish and stupid and which would not really accomplish any good purpose. I think it would be just as well for us and for those for whom it was intended, if it remained at home.

Of course, mistakes will be made. I had no idea other than that much of what has been sent over has been very good and helpful. But I do not believe we should continue te spend millions of dol-

. lars simply to send broadcasts and re_leases across the ocean to bomb~rd and

perhaps confuse people because others are going to confuse them and bombard them. Those to whom it is sent do not understand much of it. Someone will try to explain it to them. Would we not be engaging in much better business if we considered doing what this rather simple man suggested-! do not mean that he is simple in the sense that he is not smart because he is well educated and devoted to his people-when he said "Senator, if you are not going to educate our people, let us die.''

Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. McMAHON. The Senator from

Oregon has so well stated in his explanation what I meant when I said we must export democracy, that I hesitate to gild the lily, because I think his explanation a fine one.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator. Mr. McMAHON. But I say to the Sen

ator from Kentucky that if the continent of Europe adopts the ideology of communism, and if it is adopted in South America, and if it surrounds the borders of this country, then I would fear that our system would be endangered. I say, to adopt the Senator's expression, that we should give every legitimate aid to the self -determination of these peoples; if we can aid them to wish for and to determine to adopt our system, instead of the other system, then we are not only helping them, in my opinion, but we are aiding the system which we love and with which . we abide.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the Senator from Connecticut for his contribution.

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, will the Senator again yield?

Mr. MORSE. I shall yield in a moment if the Senator will permit me first to make a statement respecting his remarks. I think I find myself in complete agreement with the point of the Senator from Kentucky when he speaks about the need for education. I have great confidence and faith in the force and power of education, and I hope we are

· going to perform in Europe a great many educational services over and above the OWl services. But I want to point out to the S~nator that OWl is a great educational force iii Europe today. It is one of the best educational avenues we have for . telling the American story to the peoples of Europe. I agree that we must do many other things over and above supporting OWl in Europe. I think the humanitarian relief program that our country will carry out in Europe will greatly impress the peoples of Europe with the strength of democracy.

Will the Senator permit me to add to that point this other point, bec.ause· I should like to have the Senator know my views as to what I think, after all, is a very fundamental foundation rock of democracy. I know of no governmental form in the world in which the individual has the rights that he has in a democracy. I should like to put it this way, that after all under our form of government the 'dignity of the individual is supreme. Under our form of government there is a sacred recognition of the spiritual .value of human life. Under o·_:r form of government those individual

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6439 liberties and civil liberties that we refer to under the Bill of Rights are protected. I know of no form of government existing in the world that protects those sacred human rights to the extent that our form of government does. I believe that if we can tell that story to the people of Europe, they are going to see the strength of democracy in protecting the human rights of the individual.

There is no such protection in communism. There is no such protection in fascism. Both forms are the same so far as suppression Qf individual human rights is concerned. They substitute for individual human rights a master state. It is a foreign concept to their ideology that after all the state is the servant of the people. Their view is that the people are servants of the state. And so I say to the Senator from Kentucky that I think it is very important that at least we make available to those nations, the peoples of which are going to have to make a great decision in the critical period ahead, the American story, that we make available to them news and information which tells them of the strength of democracy based on this foundation rock of individual rights.

Mr. CHANDLER. Of course, Mr. President, there is no disagreement between the Senator from Oregon and me with respect to the importance of democracy here and the importance and substantial so-undness of the American position. What I fear is that what is sent will be labeled as being propaganda; that it will be accepted by those who receive it as propaganda. It will be paid for by the American people, and as my friend the S~nator from Connecticut said, exported across the seas, and they will take it as an export, as an exporting of propaganda. I question the wisdom of spending so many millions of dollars for that purpose. It may be that some money ought to be spent for the purpose, but I question the wisdom of spending so many millions of dollars which perhaps could be best spent by way of education, and in ·the long run putting those people in a position where they can understand what is involved. •

William L. White in his story about Russia told of the apparent poverty of the Russian people. Our people should understand that a Russian compares his present situation with something which happened in the past. He compares it with h is lir'e under the czars. The old timers of course realize that their present situation is so much better than their former situation tha.t there is nothing in their experience which does not tell them, "I am getting along so much better now than I ever did before. Why should I look for something else?"

We must give such ·people something more than propaganda which is paid for and exported and labeled as such, which the leaders and heads of governments can speak of and do speak of as "propaganda from the United States. This propaganda is calculated to have you become dissatisfied with what you have and embrace something they have which you know nothing of. Then they show some terrible event which has taken place in America, portrayed in a picture, which can undo all that was done before!

I am anxious to accomplish the same objective that my friend from Oregon has in mind. However, we must not get into the position 6f trying to inflict democracy on other countries if they do not want it. I object to their trying to inflict communism or any other ideology or form of government on us if we do not want it. The thing we must remember is that in the long run, if we are to accomplish anything we must place the peoples of other countries in a position to choose for themselves, if they are able, the kind of government under which they are to live. In the long run, that is the only way in which we can avoid unrest and trouble.

Mr. MORSE. The Senator's last statement coincides with the principle of self -determination which I express. However, I do not think there can be intelligent self-determination without the educational facts about America made a vail able to the masses in Europe which today are highly ignorant of the American story, and are misinformed as to our form of government.

Mr. CHANDLER. The question is, are we informing them with OWI messages? Is it worth what we are paying for it? To what extent is it accomplishing the over-all purpose which the Senator and I have in mind?

Mr. MORSE. I say that it is one educational channel which should be kept open. I do not think it is costing too much. I believe that the money is well spent. As I stated a while ago, I would be willing to spend more money through that channel, because I think the job which needs to be done is so very critical to our future foreign relations program.

Mr: CHANDLER. Does the Senator believe that the job is being done well enough unde:;.· the circumstances? That is the question which I am anxious to have answered.

Mr. MORSE. I believe that an excellent job is being done when we consider the various handicaps under which the agency has had to work, and the problems with which it has been confronted.

After all, there comes a time when we must give some weight, at least, to expert testimony. When our military officials, our chiefs of staff, and our State Department officials approve the job which is being done by OWI and express the view that the work should be ·continued, I give some weight to those expressions. They are not conclusive. As I stated to the Senator from New Hampshire a while ago, I shall be glad to go with him into what I know must be some weaknesses and defects in OWI. There are weaknesses and defects in any other organization operated by human beings. But I do not intend to vote to destroy the objectives and program of OW! merely because there may be some defects and weaknesses which need correcting.


Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. BRIDGES. Of course, the Sena

tor does not believe for a moment that all the testimonals and endorsements with respect to OWI have come without solici· tation on the part of OWI, does he?

Mr. MORSE. I should not be a bit surprised if many of them were in re-

sponse to requests for an evaluation of the work of OWI. But I am satisfied that the fact that perhaps a particular communication received from the Chief of Staff was in response to a request for an evaluation of ·OWl's work does not make that an unsound, distorted·, or untrue evaluation from the Chief of Staff. I accept the reports and statements about OWI made by the authorities at their face value. When the reports tell us that the work has be.en well done and that it should be continued, I intend to accept them as true unless the Senator can demonstrate that they are false.

Mr. BRIDGES. I am obliged to leave the Chamber to attend a committee meeting. Before I go I extend a very cordial invitation to the Senator from Oregon to join me in examining some of the foreign broadcasts. I have a great many thousand of them. Whenever the Senator has the time and the opportunity, I shall be glad to have him examine them.

Mr. MORSE. I assure the Senator from New Hampshire that it will be a pleasure; and if he will call me when he is ready, I shall be glad to sit down with him and examine them.

To return to my formal statement, Mr. President, I do not consider the OWl service to which I have been referring as boondoggling. I do not call it dogoodism. I call it an honest, straightforward telling of the American story. I think it is a story eminently worth telling, and one-without jingoism-that we should be proud to tell. I think most Americans who have contributed their. share to the fighting, working, and pay~ ing for this war do not want the next generation to do it all over again. They want the story told.

That is why I find it difficult to un .. derstand the ·opposition to OWl's information program. I cannot believe that this is opposition for opposition's sake. I cannot believe that it is economy for economy's sake-not in a matter which so closely affects our relations with other countries. I cannot believe that these critics are willing to have America's story go untold while Britain and Russia tell theirs-and ours too, but from their viewpoint. Yet this is just what would happen if OWl pulls out of Europe: And it will have to pull out if the cut in appropriations voted by the House is not restored.

I have tried to find a plausible reason for this opposition, and I believe-if these critics ever put it into words-it would go something like this: "We agree," they might say, "that psychological warfare has proved effective and must be continued. We are even prepared to ad~ mit that while we were fighting in Europe, there was good reason for an information program which would constantly reassure our allies of our singleness of purpose by telling them of the American war effort."

"But," they might say, "the voice of America, which is truly a united voice in war, is not necessarily a singl_e voice on domestic issues, nor even on many details of foreign policy. It is a composite voice, made of many parts and divisions, but principally of two, because the United States politically is divided into two great

.,

644~ CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 parties. How can we be sure that the OWI, under a democratic administration, will not over-simplify the Voice of America, or even, on issues where there are wide divergencies of opinion, identify it with the voice of the Democratic administration?"

This seems to ·me a reasonable suspicion-especially in men who of necessity live and have their being in an atmos-phere charged with politics. ·

Let us take a prime example of political division in this country-a national campaign with all the partisan feeling it engenders-and see how it was handled by the OWI. If there was any disposition to distort, suppress, misrepresent, or edit with partisan eye,- here certainly was the time to do it.

How did the OWI go about presenting the men and measures of last November's campaign?

This is what Elmer Davis and Robert Sherwood, then director of the Overseas Branch, told Congress: -

Every attempt should be made to create the best possible impression of both (Presidential) candidates, with absolute impartiality, because one or the other of them will become President of the United States; and it will then be our duty to convince the world of his good faith, his statesmanship, and his wisdom in handling of all the manifold problems of the war and beyond the war.

I believe that the first instruction strikes pretty much the spirit of the entire document. This is what OWI said by way of instructions to its branches all around the world on April 1, 1944, in a directive on the handling of campaign speeches:

1. It must never be forgotten that our function is not to further the candidacy: of any person either for nomination or for election. Our continuing task in this connection is to show constantly that the United States is wholeheartedly in this war, that our people, regardless of party, are determined to see it through to complete victory, and that however much they may disagree on domestic and even on certain phases of foreign issues, they are resolved . to accept their responsibilities in the postwar world. Our authority for this is the voice of Congress representing the American people, as expressed in the FUlbright and Connally resolutions. Campaign speeches from whatever source should be drawn upon just as we draw upon other material to hammer these points home.

2. Although some Europeans may be puzzled by the fact of our holding an election in wartime, we take pride in it. Our democratic Constitution prescribes it, and our ability to hold such an election in the midst of our greatest w~r demonstrates the vitality and strength of our democratic institutions. Millions in Germany, Japan, and the occupied countries wish that they, too, could hold a free election now. Other Allied countriesAustralia, New Zealand, and South Africahave held elections in wartime and have felt their war efforts strengthened thereby. We, too, shall be in better position to cope with the giant problems of the next few years if our people have had a chance to speak their minds and choose their leaders in free, American fashion.

3. We do not use our facilities to give publicity to anyone. We broadcast or cable speeches, or excerpts of speeches, solely because their content is useful in the war job which has · been assigned to us. Since we are not in the business of publicity we cannot lay down a 50-50 mathematical ratio in the use of Democratic or Republican speeches;_

instead, we should continue to use the widest possible selection in the personalities whom we quote, and to quote whatever there is in their statements that serves our assigned purposes.

4. Straight domestic controversies, such as attacks upon one party by the candidates or spokesmen of another are usually unsuitable for our use. The same generally applies to intraparty attacks, such as those of Mr. Willkie against other Republicans, or of Democratic Senator EDWIN JoHNSON against the administration.

5. In excerpting any campaign speech we must be careful to place the excerpt accurately in its context. For example, if we quote a useful passag-e from a campaign speech by Governor Bricker, we must always state, preferably in the lead, that the speech was otherwise critical of the administration on domestic issues or in other pertinent respects, if such was the case. Similarly, if we excerpt a portion of a speech by Vice President Wallace, its general domestic :flavor must be stated if it is not apparent in the excerpt. Outposts are to be instructed to follow this rule in any release that they may make of excerpts from speeches.

6. The fact that a given candidate is not par'ticularly well known in Europe should not deter us from making use of his speeches. The office he holds, such as Governor of a State, is ample warrant for us to use his statements if they are helpful to us overseas.

In other words, Mr. President, the instructions were to make clear that it was the intention of OWI to see to it that impartiality, fairness, and an equal break in the news were accorded to the two great political parties during that campaign, So far I have not found any evidence or data demonstrating that OWI did not live up to the spirit or purpose of

• those instructions. That is how OWI viewed its job abroad

as a reporter of an American election. If some Members of the Senate have any doubt about how thoroughly or exactingly the operating bureaus of OWI carried out these directives, I invite them to look at OWl's cable-wireless files during this period, to leaf through OWl's magazines, and to view OWl news reels. They will then understand how their party's leading candidates become familiar to people all over the world.

If my colleagues will examine the cable-wireless file, they will see that every one of Governor Dewey's speeches went · in full to London-as did those of Presi-

. dent Roosevelt. They will also see that they went in. full to every principal OWl outpost . .

If they will examine the bound file of the London Times in the Library of Congress, they will discover that that leading British daily published the full text of the Republican Party platform. If a British paper has ever before published the full text of an American party platform, if an American news agency has ev-er cabled the full text abroad, then I do not know of it. The London Times got the text from the OWI.

It is possible that some may regard it as boondoggling to send abroad the full text of speeches by their party's Presidential candidate. It is possible they may regard it as a waste of the taxpayer's money to cable the text . of their party platform so that officials and editors in a foreign capital may know on what ground their party takes its stand. But I

think it would be unseemly if those same people harbored suspicions of partisanship against the agency which has judged these speeches and documents of transcendent importance for foreign audiences.

One more point, Mr. President, and I shall have finished ·with this subject. I believe my party owes a special debt of gratitude to the OWI, and I should like to acknowledge it.

Whether we like it or not, whether we think it an oversimplification or not, the fact remains that the Republican Party was long regarded ·abroad as ·the party of isolation, and the possibility of its accession to office last November was at first regarded with a good deal of apprehension by foreign officials and in the foreign press. The leaders of the party gave tacit recognition to~this fact as early as September 1943, when they met at Mackinac Island and there threshed out a foreign-policy statement which was

. everywhere interpreted as the first public step in a metamorphosi~ of the party's position on foreign affairs. Thereafter, through the Republican votes for the Fulbright and Connally resolutions, through the party platform, through the speeches of the party's spokesmen, by meetings with Secretary Hull, through constructive thinking and contributions to the Nation's constructive thinking, by distinguished Republican statesmen of the Senate-not the least of whom is now at San Francisco, Senator VANDENBERG, where his thinking has brought forth excellent fruit-in these many ways the Republican Party made clear that American participation in postwar cooperation was not the special prerogative and trust of the Democratic Party.

If the party made this clear to voters at home, it was largely through the efforts of the OWI that it became clear abroad. A special guidance of the OWI reads:

We should not lose sight of the fact that the American people, the major American political parties, and the out~tanding political leaders are generally in agreement on international collaboration. We should recall the Mackinac, Fulbright, and Connally resolutions and use quotations from leaders in both parties to back up Mr. Hull's statement on this subject.

Mr. President, so successful was OWI ln carrying out this talik that, whatever the personal predilections of foreign editors and officials might have been, most of them were prepared to agree with the editor of one of the world's most distinguished journals, The Economist of London, that isolationism was no longer a significant issue in America party politics.

This complete impartiality of OWl was not merely_ a campaign manifestation because they knew the agency would be under extra-close scrutiny, nor was it undertaken in an effort to reassure our allies. It still continues. I note that on the afternoon when the Senator from Michigan [Mr. VANDENBERG] made his now justly famous speech of January 10, although the OWI did not have an advance text, the agency hurriedly dispatch-ed a thousand ·word excerpt to London. ·Later the complete text was mn.:h::d to all OWl outposts.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6441 Let me make one thing very clear. The

·men and women in OWl do not want or .exp.ect that agency to continue long after peace. But they do want the American story to live and flourish. They do not want it to die because no regular peacetime agency is yet ready with the personnel and experience to take up the work they have begun.

In view of the vital and disinterested job that OWl has dohe and is doing in presenting America abroad during these critical times, I think the appropriation for this agency should be restored.

Mr. President, I sincerely hope that the Senate will so vote, when the appropriation is before it, on next Monday, I understand. I also trust that the House of Representatives will accede to the restoration of OWI funds, so that its job, so vital to our foreign-relations program, can be continued without impairment.

Mr. CAPEHART. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. CAPEHART. Will the Senator

tell us exactly what OWI does in Europe and how it goes about sending out the information?

Mr. MORSE; I wish to assure the Senator that I should be very glad to take the time required for that discussion, but most of the points I would cover in answer to the Senator's question have been covered in the speech I have just finished making. If the Senator will not think me discourteous, I would suggest that the Senator read the speech in the RECORD when it reaches his desk tomorrow. He was not in the Chamber when I made it, and I would not wish to take the time of the Senate to answer his questions by repeating things I have already said in the speech that I just concluded.

Mr. CAPEHART. The Senator covered the election of last year, but my point is that I should like to know just exactly what the OWl is doing today, how it is getting out its information, and so forth, whether it is broadcasting it or whether it is printing circulars.

Mr. MORSE. The OWI uses the radio, it uses the newspapers, it uses mimeograph material, it uses news reels. It uses every information source which it can make available to itself in the countries in which it has offices, to tell what I have called throughout my speech the American story.

Mr. CAPEHART. I have just returned from Europe. The reason why I rise to ask these questions is that while I was abroad I was unable to find much net result from what the OWl was doing. We visited the broadcasting station the OWl has in Algiers. The OWl broadcasts there a few hours each day . . we asked a number of OWl men, as we went around Europe, exactly what they were doing. Very seldom were they able to tell us specifically. .

In other words, I should like to -know how the OWl is spending. its money and what it is doing. I have not been able

·to obtain a clear picture of it. I am a little hazy as to just what the OWl is doing and how it is doing it?.

XCI~()6

Mr.· McMAHON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me?

Mr. MORSE. I will yield to the Senator in just a minute. First, I should like to say to the Senator from Indiana that if he will check into the OWl's files here in Washington, where he will find copies and exhibits of the type of information which the OWl is making available in the European theater, he will find that a tremendous amount of information is being disseminated.

Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. McMAHON. Does the Senator

know whether the news which we received pertaining to the trip which the Senator from Indiana [Mr. CAPEHART] and his party recently made came to us through the OWl, or through the regular press channels?

Mr. MORSE. I do not know. Mr. CAPEHART. I believe I am in

position to answer the question. It was the work of the Signal Corps.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, will the Senator yield 1

Mr. MORSE. I yield. Mr. FULBRIGHT. I wish to compli

ment the Senator from Oregon on his speech. I am in agreement with his views. A few days ago I discussed this matter with Representative DIRKSEN, of Illinois, who had recently returned from a trip around the world. I believe he testified before our Committee on Appropriations. I think that most of us are familiar with his reputation and background. He certainly would not entertain a prejudice in favor of the OWl. He told us, however, that he was amazed at the extent of its activities and the importance of the work which it had done.

I believe the Senator from Oregon will agree that, as a Nation, we have been inclined to belittle the influence of ideas and education throughout our country. I believe that our support of the OWI is one way by which we can help remedy the situation.

Mr. MORSE. I completely agree with the Senator from Arkansas. I thank him for his contribution. I may say that I was dumfounded but, however, very much pleased, when I checked into the quantity · and quality of information which the OWl has already disseminated in Europe. It has done a magnificent job under very · difficult circumstances. It deserves the full appropriation which it seeks and I trust that the Congress will give it at least the amount now approved by the Senate appropriation committee. It really deserves the $42,000,000 originally requested because that amount of money would be well spent in telling the American story to the peoples of Europe and the Pacific. It is a story the \elling of which is vital to our foreign relations program. Its telling is essential if we are to create a better· understanding throughout the world of America and her policies.

ExHmiT A

REPORT ON FREE PRESS ToUR A historic 50,000 words was approved and

given to the world toda.y by directors of the

.American Society of Newspaper. Editors, meeting in the Hotel Statler under President John S. Knight. It is the report of three American newspaper editorial figures who, from Janu·ary to April, went 40,000 miles around the world to test and discuss freedom of the press and of communications in the postwar world.

The report was filed by Wilbur Forrest, chairman, who is assistant editor of the New York Herald Tribune and first vice president of the society; Ralph McGill, editor of "The

. Atlanta Constitution," and Dean Carl W. Ackerman, of the Graduate School of Journalism of Columbia University.

This is the first time recorded. by history that such a mission was undertaken, its main objective being a pledge in the peace treaties "• • * of governments not to censor news at the source; not to use the press as an instrument of national policy, and to permit a free flow of news in and out of signatory countries."

OBTAINED MANY PLEDGES

The three editorial writers say · they did not find much press freedom under wartime conditions. They got many pledges from Government leaders for postwar, some of them described as "lip service," and discovered in editors of most nations a real desire for more freedom of the press than most· nations have heretofore enjoyed or permitted.

Also for ' the first time in history three American journalists invaded Moscow and achieved with top Soviet newspaper editors and government press controllers a full and frank mutual survey of their different problems and conceptions.

This they did at two banquets and visits to the two largest Soviet daily newspaper plants and a call on Soviet communications officials.

The Russians were both extremely curious and challenging of the United States conceptions of free press. At the same time, the American envoys got from the Vice Commissar of Foreign Affairs an expresison of willingness to seek a common ground in the matter of freer exchange of news and more fair and adequate mutual writing and reporting.

A diplomatic ten-strike by Ambassador W. Averell Harriman is described in the report-a banquet at the United States Embassy in Moscow where, apparently for the first time, the full panoply of Soviet Russian news chiefs appeared to help welcome the visitors and to engage in extremely candid talks about their and the American press and information objectives.

RUSSIAN EDITORS LISTED

The Russian editors 1:!-t the Embassy dinner described in the report were P. W. Pospelov, of Pravda; N. C. Talensky, of Red Star; B. s. Burkov, of Komsolnoskaya Pravda; M. M. Barodin, of Moscow News; L. F. Ilyichev, of Izvestia; A. Danilov, of War and the Working Class; K. K. Olmenchenko, of Trud; P. G. Palgunov, of Tass service; K. E. Zinchenko, foreign office press chief, and U. S. Okov, of the Soviet Information Bureau. Ambassador Harriman was host.

Ambassador Harriman, said the report, sounded the keynote with .a description of the United States emergence from its own provincial and isolationist newspaper era and urged both nations' editors not to take everything in print too seriously.

Mr. Lazovsky (L. A. Lazovsky, Vice Commissar of Foreign Affairs) replied, the report continued. He said the chief thing the Soviet peoples and papers couldn't understand was the constant criticism of an ally by some of the American press • • • he toasted • • * the future peace of the world depending on a close alliance between Russia and the United States.

6442 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 "Chairman Forrest responded first, closing

with the Calvin Coolidge story of the Washington Monument at the time of a book criticizing Washington-the story closing, 'The Monument is still there.' "

RUSSIAN POINT OF VIEW

"Editors Prospelov, of Pravda (the paper of the Communist Party), and llyichev, of Izvestia (the paper of the Supreme Council of Soviets), declared in almost identical speeches their system was most representative of the wishes of the people and was a free press because it represented only the people.

"They insisted American papers did not always represent the wishes of the people, using the Roosevelt elections and opposition to many Roosevelt policies which had been adopted by the people as examples.

"They also said that many o~ the critical. items · about the Soviets in the American press were revealed to be untrue, but papers which had carried them prominently never took the trouble to admit the untruths when revealed.

"Their own articles, they said, were tested for truth and accuracy and always represenkd the will of · the people. They could not understand why American papers took so many ludicrous positions, for example, the charge that the Russians, while waiting to bring up men and materials for the attack on Budapest, had quit fighting for political rea.Sons. When the Red Army later demons' -:ated these widely circulated charges to be untrue, no paper came out and admitted the error.

"The third talk of any length was by General Talensky, of the Red Army. He praised the American Army and said the Red soldiers had a great respect for the American soldier. He believed the two nations must be friends and were friends, but, as an old hunter, lie knew the worst enemy a hunter had was mosquitoes. He said the Soviets sincerely wanted friendship, but it was difficult to smile and be friendly when there were so many mosquitoes about.

CAN'T FATHOM UNITED STATES SYSTEM .

"It was brought out _forcefully that the Soviet newspapermen are without exception the product of the revolution or men who were in exile or underground in other countries editing clandestine papers. They don't know any other system. They can't understand the American system wherein a reader Will continue to buy a paper · even though he disagrees with its politics.

"It is not good sense to oversimplify the S:>viet with generalities. The Russians said this was the chief fault of the W. L. White book. • • • We were asked if we believed it ethical and possible for him to come in classified as a military expert, stay 6 weeks and then go out and write more than 300 pages on Russia which would tell a true story.

"Some American officials said one of the problems in Russia has been correspondents who came with a chip on their shoulders and went about hunting up items which could be found to justify their dislikes. They dealt in irritations inStead of presenting a balanced picture of Russia.

"Harriman was delighted with the meeting. It was the first time there had been such a discussion between these editors and those of any other country. They had pledged consultation and cooperation."

VISITED "'IZVESTIA" PLANT

· The United States editors visited the "Izvestia" plant and news room and found it outwardly much like an American newsp3per-with newsprint likewise scarce, reporters covering "runs," the papers gloating in print over scoops, each paper paying rent and amortization to the owner government. Advertising is confined to theater and amusemeni diSJllay, tlle report said,

.. We stated," the report said of this visit, "the position of the American papers-that they were newspapers and not organs of a party; that advertisers did not control them and did not want to do so; that if they did they could not 'get away with it.'" We told them the people in America were very inquisitive about their papers, who owned them and what interests there were behind them.

We said that the test was the man with the 3 cents or the nickel. If he had no confidence in the paper he did not buy it.

They had read Sinclair's B1·ass Check, Seldes' Lords of the Press, and one or two other. such books. They see ve~y few Americ:an newspapers, the New York Herald Tribune and Times and some of the Hearst papers being their only contact.

Tass brings in about 13,000 words a day from America, but it is screened politically and does not give any real picture of America. In fact, one of the chief complaints we found from our diplomats and information officers was that our own news services, such as AP, UP, and INS, were doing the same thing, sending out items they thought would be used and displayed in an effort to build up their services without regard to whether people of foreign countries were getting a picture of A~erica and its news. Too often it is race riots, murders, Hollywood loves, divorces, and so on which contribute to a distorted picture of America.

KREMLIN OPENED TO. VISITORS

"The Izvestia editors," the report said, "declared the Russian Army generals would not have United States correspondents with their forces because the Americans had too often broken their word about releasing news and information."

The Kremlin was opened to the three visitors as a special courtesy. Then they visited Pravda, with its top circulation of 3,000,000, where the military editor, General Galaktionov, asked them why Hanson Baldwin, of the New York Times, had said the Reds did not have good generals and used masses of m~n to win by sheer weight and why Mark Sullivan, of the New York Herald Tribune, had written last October that for political reasons the Russians were not pushing their offensive in Romania. 'I'he report indicated the visitors conceded that subsequent events had proved both wrong, but declared the freedom with which they might express such opinions was fundamental with the American press freedom.

Then the Soviet editors gave the trio a dinner, at which Ilya Ehrenburg, described in the reports as "essayist" for the Government, demanded why Americans didn't freely marry Negroes and Jews and "would hear no other argument but that we were Fascist as h eart,'' "He also said,'' the report added, "the Hearst press trust was dripping Fascist poison into the soul of America and that we could not escape a Fascist future.

"To all this we replied vigorously. We learned later that the Government · had reprimanded him for another extreme statement.''

HOW EDITORS ARE CHOSEN

The Russian editor is appointed or elected by the Supreme Soviet Council, the Communist Party, labor, and so on, adds the report. It quotes Vice Commissar Lazovsky as asking whether and ):low all shades of opinion in newspapers could be represented in a single editors' society, how an editors' society could have a policy when owners made the policy, and whether the society had supported the Yalta Conference. But Lazovsky finally said, "I do not see why we cannot find a common ground."

Among other foreign press and governmental leaders interviewed and heard by the American trio were these, and. their commitments in conversation or letter as to free press and communications aims:

President Edouard Benes, of Czechoslovakia, who said his nation would st and for and assume freedom of public opinion, ex-pression, and press. ,

Davadas Gandhi, son of Mohandas K. Gandbi, wh_o addressed a meeting to welcome the visitors to Delhi, declared the cause of press freedom implicit in India's filght for freedom and published in his Hindustan Times an editorial warning the United States editors against mere lip service.

Generalissimo . Chiang Kai-shek, who promised abolition of China's censorship when her war was won-which he predicted for the end of 1946.

T. V. SOONG INTERVIEWED

Premier T.V. Soong, who echoed the same promise of ending censorship.

Prime Minister Nygaardsvold of Norway, who asserted Norway's press freedom had been constitutional since 1814 and would continue.

Brendan Bracken, Minister of Information of the United Kingdom, who, the report said, thought metropolitan editors of today were "office hays" and asserted his opinion that people were increasingly skeptical of news as printed.

'chtistopher Chancellor, director of Reuters, who said that service had been completely divorced from all British Foreign Ofiic~ direction.

Barrington Ward, London Times editor, who said the British papers had "voluntarily" withheld the news of King Edward's engagement to Mrs. Wallis Simpson in order to give him opportunity to change his mind.

Col. J. J. Astor, Viscount Rothermere, and Sir Walter Leighton, London publishers, who volunteered full support of A. S. N. E. pressfreedom campaign.

Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, who declared, "Every soldier in this war has a right to expect a free press."

Gen. George Patton, who declared, "I've always believed in the value of the fullest sort of publicity about all matters--especially controversial ones."

FIFTY FRENCH EDITORS

Andre La Guerre, press-radio director for the French Ministry of Information, who said that "unfortunately" government loans were temporarily needed to keep the new French news service in operation. "No man works for the .A. F. P.,'' notes the report, "until he has been investigated by the French Government and has a card from the investigating commission. In this matter they hope to screen out the collaborationists."

Fifty French editors, led by M. ·Albert Bayet, hero of the underground press, who gave the visitors an emphati.:: pledge of accord for treaty declaration of free news from all governments and press freedom.

Forty-five Belgian editors, who were said to be pessimistic about the free-press ideal.

Thirty Greek editors, from whom came the first proposal to the travelers for a world-press conference. ·

Armando Rossini, director of the Italian Government press, from whom there was a cautious commitment only.

His Holiness Pope Plus whose interest was sincere and natural and who gave us his unqualified support.

IDEALISTIC BUT IMPOSSmLE

Archbishop Damaskinos, Premier of Greece, who promised complete support and asked that the American press take more interest in Greece.

King Farouk of Egypt, who said he believed in a free press and news fiow, but whose Cabinet regularly interfered with both.

The late and assassinated Dr. Ahmed Mahrer Pasha, Egyptian Premier, who considered the visitors' mission "idealistic but impossible."

Sir Edward Grift', British Minister Resident of Egypt, who admitted the censox:ship at Cairo has been severe but believed it justified.

1945 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6443 Egyptian fright of the Russian infiuence was noted in the report.

Prime Minister Sukru Saracoglu, of Turkey, who said in a good-natured way he favored freedom of the press ("we didn't believe him, but we liked him," the report added), btit whose Government had just suspended three Turkish papers for political reasons.

.Sir Keith Murdock and 17 other Australian publishers and editors of newspapers a~d news services, who have won, some 12 months ago, a great victory over army censorship which h ad reached into the political news-a magnificen t victory.

The t hree Americans carried letters of recommendation from,the late President Roosevelt, Secretary of State Edward R. Stettinius, Jr., Senat or Tom Connally, and Representative Sol Bloom. They traveled by Army transport planes.

At Chungking Dean Ackerman conferred with the faculty of the Columbia School of Journalism and returned via the Philippines, while Forrest and McGill went by way of Australia.

General :findings included these: "It was evident * * * that many gov

ernments were controlling the press politically under the guise of war security . .

•·.rhese people (in Italy and Germany) emerge today from the ruin of war knowing little or nothing of the world around them" because of the prewar years of the controlled propagandist Nazi and Fascist press.

"Some editors abroad are under the impression t hat the American press is dominated by the advertiser, and that much of American thinldng is directed toward undemocratic policies by so-called newspaper •trusts' or chains."

The committee proposed support for a world press-freedom conference in Australia and recommended studying a system of bringing young foreign joumalists to American papers to widen their joumalistic horizon.

"Perhaps,'' the report concludes, "the seeds sown by your committee will grow and flourish."

The board of the editors' society adopted a resolut ion of support for the world press freedom conference, the time to be arranged when conditions permit, which had been proposed to the three editorial visitors by the Aust ralian press leaders.

The board today also adopted a resolution commending Secretary of State Edward R. Stettinius·, Jr., for his help on freedom. of the press, not ably at the United Nations Conference in San Francisco.

The board also adopted a resolution looking with apprehension on any merger of transm ission facilities which would eliminate compet ition. Other newspaper organizations h ad adopted similar sentiments as result of a proposal of 2 months ago by the Navy Department that all United States-operated international communication facilities be combined or jointly operated after the war.

EXECUTIVE SESSION

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the order entered prior to the speech of the Senator from Oregon, the Senate will now proceed to the consideration of executive business.

Accordingly, the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business. EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

The following favorable reports of nominations were submitted:

By Mr. GEORGE, from the Committee on Finance:

Harry M. Durning, of New York, to be collector of customs for customs collection district No. 10, with headquarters at New York, N. Y. (Reappointment).

By Mr. WALSH, from the Committee em Naval A1fairs:

Sundry officers to be commodores, for temporary service, in the Navy.

By Mr. McKELLAR, from the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads:

Several postmasters.

ADVERSE REPORT OF NOMINATION

. Mr. McKELLAR, from the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads, reported adversely the nomination of Rollin M. Meisenbach, to be postmaster at Pearl, Illinois.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. If there be no further reports from committees, the clerk· will state the first nomination on the calendar.

RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION

The Chief Clerk read the nomination of Claude R. Wickard to be Administra· tor of the Rural Electrification Adminis· tration for a term of ten years.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, we have "now come to the close of a period of more than a year and a half of almost continuous investigation and discussion with regard to the fitness of Mr. Wickard as Secretary of Agriculture, and as head of the Rural Elect rification Administra· tion while he was Secretary of Agricul· ture. His nomination to be Adminis· trator of the Rural Electrificat ion Ad· ministration is now before the Senate for confirmation. ·

I have no objection to Mr. Wickard be· cause he is a Democrat. I have no per· sonal feeling against him. As an indi· vidual, I wish h im well. My opposition to him is based upon the evidence which has been gathered over a long period of time, based upon sworn testimony, and passed upon by various committees of the Senate.

1. THE SENATE CONTRADICTS ITSELF

Mr. President, the nomination of Mr. Wickard to be Administrator of the REA presents a strange contradiction to the action of the Senate and its committees. By a vote of 11 to 6, the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry has recommended that Mr. Wickard, the former Secretary of Agriculture, be made Ad· ministrator of REA. Now observe how this action completely contradicts the previous actions of the Senate and its committees on practically the same sub· jects. To refresh the memory of Sen· ators, let me say that on June 23, 1944, pursuant to Senate Resolution 197, a subcommittee of the Committee on Agricul· ture and Forestry made its report to the Senate on the administration of the REA under the Department of Agriculture. The report was made by a bipartisan committee. It was issued without a dis· senting vote. It condemned the admin· istration of REA under Mr. Wickard in the Department of Agriculture. It also recommended that REA be m~,de inde· pendent at the earliest possible date.

This bipartisan report was the result of nearly 1 year's study and more than 2,000 pages of sworn testimony and doc· umentary evidence. It all ~ centered around the maladministration of REA by Mr. Wickard. The recommendation by the subcommittee for the independ· ence of the REA was designed solely to get it away from what was Mr. Wickard's incompetence and inefficient ad·

ministration while he was Secretary of Agriculture. .

On April 16, 1945, Calendar No. 235, the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry unanimously recommended to the Senate the following:

Your committee, after exhaustive consideration of the matter, has concluded that the functions of the · Administration can be performed better if it is reestablished as an independent agency of the Government.

Mr. President, why did this committee recommend unanimously that REA be made independent? It did so for the same reason that the previous . committee recommended that REA be talten out of the Department of Agriculture, because of the bad administration and hopeless political muddle which Mr. Wickard had made out of the REA.

On May 14, 1944, when approximately 70 Senators were present, the Senate passed unanimously without a single dis· senting vote the bill to make REA independent: Why did the Senate take this unanimous action? It 'did so because of t he bad administration of Mr. Wickard in the REA and it wanted to take REA out of the Department of Agriculture. We may conclude, accordingly, that the 11-to-6 vote to report favorably the nom«> ination of Mr. Wickard repudiates com ... pletely the 1-year Senate investigation of the REA, the unanimous action of this committee in recommending inde~ pendence for REA, and the unanimous action of the Senate in approving the recommendations of its 2 committees. 2. SENATORS HAVE NOT READ TESTIMONY OR WERE

NOT PRESENT AT HEARINGS

Due to the vast labors that confront each Senator, due to the exigencies of the war, and due to their preoccupation which made it impossible for them to attend the recent hearings on the nomination of Secretary Wickard, many Senators are not familiar with the facts of their own committees. Likewise, the Senators in charge of the nomination of Mr. Wickard frankly admitted they had not read the testimony of their own Senate committee condemning, after investigation, Mr. Wickard's bad administration of REA.

It is important, 'therefore, that Senators get the facts which their own committees have supplied, in order to pass fair judgment upon the qualifications of Mr. Wickard to be Administrator of the REA. 3. NATION-WIDE PROTESTS OF REA SYSTEMS

AGA!NST MR. WICKARD TO BE ADM·INifilTRATOR

OF I:EA

We are living in a democracy. The people's opinion should be determining. In this case, the opinions of the REA cooperatives and members should be the principal thing to determine what the REA systems want. They have to borrow money, they have to organize; they have to do the construction work, let the contracts, and pay the bills. Their testimony should have very great weight with the Senate of the United States.

Flrst a word as to the views of the REA systems on the independence of REA. As Senators know, there are some 800 REA systems in 46 States. When the bill for the incl,ependence of REA

6444 :coNGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE JUNE 2l came up, I did not receive a · single objection from any cooperative. None asked that REA be permanently retained in the Department of Agriculture. On the contrary, the opinion was unani .. mous that they wanted REA to be independent. There likewise was no differ- -ence of opinion as to why they wanted it to be independent. This desire for independence was due primarily to the bad bungling, ,and inefficient administration of REA in the Department of Agriculture by Mr. Wickard.

When Mr. Wickard's resignation was requested as Secretary of Agriculture, his appointment as Administrator of REA was about the last thing in the world that any of the REA systems expected. It took them completely by sur .. prise. As we all know, farms are many miles apart. The meetings of the Board of Directors of REA systems are very seldom. Consequently, it was extremely difficult for them to mobilize their opinions and make their views known in Washington in a few days. They previously had established an informal small committee for the independence of REA. They had no funds and they likewise had no quarters set up here like . those of the usual high-powered lobbyists. The farmer is a very independent citizen. What he reads he reads with

·understanding; if he is told anything he listens with discrimination, and whenever he puts his name to a document he knows for what purpose he signs the document and what it means.

I now want to introduce into the RECORD telegrams and letters from many sections of the United States which poured into my office within a few days after it was learned that the nomination of Mr. Wickard to be Administrator of REA had been submitted· to the Senate. An examination of them will disclose that they do not correspond to any pattern. They are different. They represent the sincere convictions of these farm people in their determined opposition to Mr. Wickard. The Secretary of Agriculture, through the local agency in every community and village of this country, has a powerful political machine. Likewise his political appointees in the REA assist him materially. All types of pressure were placed upon REA systems to favor Mr. Wickard, and when this was not possible, to prevent them from taking sides against him.

An examination of the testimony of the witnesses who recently appeared before the committee on the nomination of Mr. Wickard, will make these facts unmistakably clear. In some States, that were practically unanimously opposed to Mr. Wickard, secret ballots were taken. In the case of Iowa, they were opened by a notary public. Here they were free from Wickard's political friends so they could not intimidate the REA systems, as no one knew how anyone voted. I say, accordingly, it is a remarkable tribute to the courage of these REA systems that I am able to present as many letters and telegrams of opposition as I will now indicate to the Senate.

•

It proves conclusively that the vast majority of the REA systems are opposed to Mr. Wickard and do not want him as Administrator of REA. I shall read only the important portions of these communications without including any unnecesf;ary details.

The letters and telegrams I have received have come from boards of directors and officers of cooperatives. Mr. Wickard's nomination was submitted to the Senate on May 24. Within 2 days, and certainly without any suggestion from any quarter, letters and telegrams began to pour in to me. The first letter came on the 26th of May. The farmers get their news either by the radio or their local newspapers. Within 2 days letters ·and telegrams started pouring into my office from various sections of the country.

With the indulgence of the Senate, I desire to read extracts from some of the letters and telegrams. In some cages the letters are two pages long and in others one page. After I finish reading the extracts from the letters and telegrams I ask that they be printed in the RECORD as a part of my remarks.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. McFARLAND in the chair). Without objection, it is so ordered.

(See exhibit A.) Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Here is a telegram

from Florida representing 14 -REA cooperatives in that State; and signed by the Florida State REA Superintendents Association, Ernest G. Smith, secretary:

Florida REA superintendents went on rec· ord today · at their quarterly conference opposing appointment of Wickard as Admin· tstrator of Rural Electrification. We urge quick settlement of this issue in a just and fair manner. We only ask for a capable ad· ministration. ·

Here is one from Illinois: We, the directors of the Edgar Electric

Cooperative, Paris, Ill., oppose appointment of Claude Wickard for REA Administrator.

I read another one from lllinois: The board of directors are on record op·

posing the appointment of Claude Wickard as REA Administrator because of his past record.

Here is another telegram from Illinois: This cooperative serving 4,000 members is

flatly opposed to the confirmation of Claude R. Wickard as Admin,istrator of REA.

Another one from Illinois: In behalf rural electrification beg rejec·

tion Wickard as Administrator REA. Indi• vidual unsympathetic with program as shown 1n hearing Lucas bill S. 89.

Here is another one from lllinois dated May 26 which was the morning after the news went to the press that Wickard had been nominated for this position, or the day after it came to the Senate. I read a few lines of this letter:

We have noticed a serious blunder has again been made by our esteemed President of the United States since you have directed your letter to us of May 15.

It is indeed most regrettable that Prest· dent Truman should have taken the action he has in appointing Mr. Wickard Admin· tstrator of Rural Electrification.

I can put myself in sympathy with the President. This happens to be one of the unfortunate incidents that occur in all political families whether Republican or Democratic.

He says: In view of the complete failure which Mr.

Wickard has made in administering Rural Electrification for the post 4 or 5 years and in view of · the type of men he has select ed for REA, we cannot help but feel that some of our enemies in Congress and other places are endeavoring to completely ruin this won· derful program.

Here are several communications from Indiana. I understand the Senator from Oklahoma received some telegrams from Indiana taking the opposite view, in favor

· of Wickard, which were placed in the record of the hearings before the committee. Here is one from Indiana:

Steuben County directors feel a new man should be appointed outside of present con· troversy that has existed in REA. Too much opposition against Wickard for things to run smoothly.

Here is one from Rochester, Ind. Here is another:

The REMC oppose confirmation of Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA. Be· lieve him incompetent. Think him released as Secretary of Agriculture for poor administration. This REMC represents 1,930 farmers and families. Each REA independent agency free from politics. Your assistance appreciated.

That is from the Fulton County REMC of Indiana. It is signed by Fulton R. Murray, superintendent for board of directors.

There are several others here from the same source. I do not mean to say that all the REA cooperatives of Indiana take the same position. There is a difference

- of opinion there. Here is a long letter from Iowa. Some

one there who evidently had a great many ideas about the matter wrote this. He says:

Mr. Wickard lacks our confidence. We judge individuals by their past r~cord. Co· operatives are built upon confidence.

• • • On our own system, under Administrator

John M. Carmody, we know what the privata utilities do. They built spite lines and at. tempted to destroy our system and cut up our good territory.

• • "' • • REA got action under Carmody. In con·

trast to this loose inefficient joint operation of REA under Mr. Wickard, I recall the results and action we got when REA was an independent agency. The Administrator, Mr. Carmody, could say "Yes" or "No," and he meant it. ·

These are. the specific reasons why we feel that the past record of Mr. Wickard indicates he is not qualified to be Administrator of REA.

Here is ·a telegram from Iowa: Claude R. Wickard appointment not satiS

factory to vast majority of REA borrowers. We want a man of proven ability and one who believes in cooperative electricity. Utilities will not serve farms without competition. Confirmation of Wickard would be contradic· tion of Senate passage of Lucas bill with Shipstead-Aiken-Wheeler amendment for in· dependence. Use this wire in any way to prevent confirmation •

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6445 Here is another one from Iowa, a tele

gram to the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. THoMAs], a copy of which was sent to me:

The board of directors of this cooperative serving 2,300 farmers wish to go on record as opposing the appointment. It is felt that Mr. Wickard's statement and record do not indicate that he would be successful and capable. You may use this telegram in any way you wish to oppose appointment of Mr. Wickard.

There are several letters and telegrams from Iowa. The cooperatives of Iowa sent a delegation here consisting of something like 8 or 10 men. They had taken a secret ballot of all the cooperatives of Iowa. The ballots were· opened under the authority of a notary public. It was not a · case of one going out to see how they would vote. A letter was written to them and they weFe asked what they thought about it, and all but two voted in opposition to Wickard.

Here is one from Kansas: As president of the Butler Rural Electric

Cooperative Association, I am opposed to the confirmation of Mr. Claude R. Wickard as superintendent of the REA, as from his testimony and hearings had and held it appears that he is opposed to continuous and progressive activity of the REA and appears favorable to the utilities. I think it would be a great mistake to deliver over the REA ·and its future to those unfavorable to its progress and success.

Here is one from Kentucky: Our association is on record and is con

vinced that an independent Rural Electrification Administration responsible only to the President and Congress can best carry out the original intention of the Rural Electrification Act. Because of past controversies and remarks made before subcommittee of Agriculture and Forestry pursuant to Senate bill 89, April 2, 1945, we definitely oppose the approval of the Honorable Claude R. Wickard as the Administrator of the REA.

There is one from Louisiana: I have noted the record of general confu

sion and dissension arising both within and without ranks of REA, which apparently means that the transfer of REA to the Department of Agriculture, of which Department Mr. Wickard is Secretary-

And so forth. Here is another one from Louisiana,

-and here is one from Maine. This was sent to the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. THOMAS] and a copy sent to me:

Please advise your committee that we are opposed to the confirmation of Claude R. Wickard as REA Administrator. We consider his policies in the past have been detrimental to the best interests of REA.

Here is one from Michigan: The REA, as conceived and administered

in its early years, was generally favored by everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike. Since coming under Wickard's hand in the Department of Agriculture its reputation has suffered tremendously and public opinion is sl{eptical. · REA needs a fresh start wJ.th an Administrator of unquestioned ability and purpose. The appointment of Claude Wickard will keep alive the strife and turmoil in and about REA and severely handicap a once fine organization.

Here is one from Minnesota: As president of the P. K. M. Electric Cooper

ative and the Minnkota Power Cooperative, I am authorized by resolutions unanimously adopted to protest the nomination of Mr.

Claude R. Wickard to serve as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration.

This cooperative is partly in Minnesota and partly in North Dakota.

In our opinion Mr. Claude R. Wickard is unqualified to hold this important job. The fact that he was not considered good enough to be retained as Secretary of Agriculture, head of the War Food Administration, the Commodity Credit Corporation, and other Government agencies is indicative of the opinions widely held concerning his administrative ability. Nowhere in his biography as it appears on page 377 of the Congressional Directory is there listed accompliShments including his political achievements that would indicate he is in possession of the qualifications which should allow him to be entrusted with this highly . important administrative post.

Here is one from Minnesota: Subcommittee investigation reveals Wick

ard attempted to use REA in party politics contrary to intent of act; and our cooperative opposes his confirmation as Administrator. We want Administrator who ·is appointed on basis of ability not some incompetent who must be taken care of politically.

I read a letter from the Farmers Union .of Badger, Minn::

DEAR SENATOR: At a meeting of the delegates of the F~rmers Union representing 800 members (men and wives), a resolution was unanimously adopted going on record as op- ' posed to the appointment of Claude R. Wickard ,as Administrator of the REA, and you are so advised.

I received one communication from Minnesota favoring the confirmation of Mr. Wickard, and the chairman of the committee received a telegram from another cooperative in Minnesota favoring the confirmation of Mr. Wickard. In all fairness I think that fact should be noted in the RECORD.

I have a telegram from the Farmers Union at. Wisner, Nebr., as follows:

At the quarterly meeting of the Farmers' Union of Cuming County, of which there are about 1,000 members, the following resolu-tion was , unanimously adopted: ·

"Resolved, That we the members of the Farmers Union of Cuming County, go on record as being definitely opposed. to the appointment of Claude R. Wickard as REA Administrator."

Signed by Harold G. Dinklage, secretary of the Cuming County Farmers Union.

I have another one from Minnesota as folldws:

Resolved, That the Board of Directors of the Douglas County Cooperative Light and Pow~r Association assembled in special session the 9th day of June 1945, do oppose the appointment of Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA.

In order to save the time of the Senate I shall continue to read only extracts from letters and telegrams.

Here is another from Minnesota: We do not believe the best interests of REA

will be served with the appointment of Claude Wickard as Administrator. Your support solicited.

HERMAN GRAUPMAANN, President, McLeod Co-op Power

Association, Glencoe, Minn.

Another one from Halstad, Minn.: The board of the Red River Valley Coopera

tive Power Association wishes to impress on

you and the rest of the Committee on Agriculture that they are strongly opposed to the appointment of Claude R. Wickard as REA Administrator. We are convinced that the best interests of REA cannot be served by this man.

GEORGE AAMODT, Secretary.

Another from Worthi,;.gton, Minn.: Do not favor Wickard for REA Adminis

trator. NoBLES CooPERATIVE

ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, CHARLES A. BARNES.

~rom Mankato, Minn.: We, as a board of qirectors for the Blue

Earth Nicollet Cooperative Electric Association, representing a cooperative having a thousand miles of electric distribution line serving 2,200 consumers, do not believe that Mr. Wickard is the proper man for Administrator.

And so forth. These men have had to work during the years with val'ious administrators, and Mr. Wickard is the first individual concerning whom I have had any serious complaints.

Here is . another from Rochester, Minn.:

More than 2,200 members of the People 's Cooperative Power Association serving southeastern Minnesota desire to record their objection to the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA, as his record in the past is anything but good for the future of the REA movement.

Here is a letter addressed to me: The following is a copy of a telegram sent

to President Harry Truman, Senator Harold Knutsen, Congressman Dr. Walter Judd, Congressman Wm. Pittenger, and to Senator Elmer Thomas.

The Carlton County Cooperative Power Association . is opposed to the appointment of .Secretary Wickard as REA Administrator.

There are more letters and telegrams from Minnesota, but in order to save the time of the Senate I shall-not read them all. I have received many communications from Missouri.

I have here a copy of a letter sent to the President of the United States. A .copy was also sent to Hon. Claude Wickard and to the Minnesota delegation. This is one of the letters from Minnesota ·Which I mentioned which favor the confirmation of Mr. Wickard. In all fairness .I shall read a few extracts, and will ask to have the whole letter printed in the RECORD:

As the direct result of action taken by the board of directors of the Kandiyohi Cooperative Electric Power Association, I have been asked to address this letter of commendation to you, expressing to you our complete confidence in your appointment of the Honorable Claude ·Wickard to act as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration.

I ask that this copy of letter addressed to the President of the United States be printed in the RECORD.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

JUNE 1, 1945. Han. HARRY S. TRUMAN,

President of the United States, The White House,

washington, D. a. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: As the direct result of

action taken by the board of director.3 of the Kandiyohi Cooperative Electl'ic Power Aswciation, I have been asked to address this

6446 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 letter of commendation to you, expressing to you our complete -confidence in your appointment of the Honorable Claude Wickard to act as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration.

We feel very strongly that Mr. Wickard has all of the desirable qualities of leadership, foresight, and progressive spirit so nece:2 s~ry _ in a position of this kind; we feel that his confirmation by the Senate to act in this capacity will be a signal victory for rural Am.'erica. He ·has always had the best interests of the farmers of this Nation at heart, and we know that he will carry to his new position those qualities which will make for a progressive and useful administration.

Although this cooperative has felt, unofficially, that the REA should remain as a uni~ of the Department of Agriculture, we realize that the issue is debatable. In the final analysis, a strong administraticn, in any event, is necessary to produce the good effect the original bill creating the REA was designed to foster. In this regard, we reiterate our sinceye feeling that you have appointed a man who will do his best to foster that salutary end.

Respectfully yours, KANDIYOHI COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC

POWER ASSOCIATION, 0. N. GRAVGAARD, President.

Mr. SHIP-STEAD. I read from another communication from Missouri:

we· feel that our President is not on the right track in appointing Mi·. Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA, and all of the pres!dents of the local cooperatives in Missouri that we have talked to, feel the same way about this appointment.

We would lilte to ask you that you protest the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator, due to the past record that he has made as Secretary of Agriculture.

I read another one from Canton, ]\10.: It is the opinion of my board of directors

and our mGmbership that the REA should be an independent agency free of politics and we believe this can only be accomplished if headed with leadership who ,would work to that end.

I have received many letters, Mr. President, from Missouri. Some are quite long, and set forth many reasons why the writers of the letters are opposed to the confirmation of Mr. Wickard. I shall not take time to read them all. I. have letters from various parts of the country.

Here is one froni Ravalli County Electric Cooperative, Inc., Corvallis, Mont.:

We favor restoration of REA as an independent agency to keep REA out of politics. Wickard's policies indicate otherwise. We sternly oppose Wickard's appointment as REA Administrator.

Also another one from Montana setting forth various reasons for opposition to Mr. Wickard. It is quite lengthy. It sets forth 15 reasons why opposition is voiced to Mr. Wickard. The last reason is as follows:

Fifteenth. That con_,ftdence in the present agricultural REA is at such a 1ow ebb that many people feel that the supervision of the REA is under the control of the power interests.

Here is another one from Montana: At our meeting June 6, 1945, the incorpo

rated members of our REA project, respectfully went on record favoring the LucasShipstead-Aiken-Wheeler bilt separating the REA from Department of Agriculture and consistently therewith we likewise emphatically protest the confirmation of Mr. Wickard as Administrator.

I have 12 or 15 letters and telegrams from Montana to the same effect. That, however, Mr. President, is only the half of it. The writers of these letters are those most interested, and their voice is entitled to be heard. That is why, instead of rehashing a great deal of the testimony which has been brought before the committees, I am reading the views expressed in these communications for the RECORD and for the benefit of the Senate.

Mr. President, I have read many letters from Missouri. I ask that I be excused from continuing reading communications from Missouri because there are so many cooperatives in that State opposed to Mr. Wickard. The cooperatives of Nebrasl{a are on record in telegrams and letters as being opposed to the confirmation of Mr. Wickard. I read from a Nebraska cooperative:

We sincerely hope that our legislative bodies will see fit to reject the nomination of Mr. Wickard and that a capable and strong leader as Administrator will be approved.

. These letters are all from Nebraska. All the systems in Nebraska except one are opposed to the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard. I have information that one of the cooperatives is for him.

Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. BRIGGS in the chair). Does the Senator from Minnesota yield to the Senator from Nebraska?

·Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I yield. Mr. WHERRY. ·When the Senator

says that all the systems are opposed, he means the public power districts, does he not?

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Yes. Mr. WHERRY. Has the Senator read

into the RECORD yet the letter from Mr. Harold· Kramer, secretary and general manager of the Loup River public power district, or does he wish to make any comment on that letter? The letter. was addressed to the Senator.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I have received several such communications, requesting that I present a copy to each member of the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

Mr. WHEERY. The letter was directed to the Senator. The writer asks that the letter be referred to the proper Senate committee. In the first paragraph on page 2 he makes the same statement which the Senator has just made:

I have written to the project superintendents of the rm·al public power districts in Nebraska as to how they felt about the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator. Only one of them replied that he was in favor of Mr. Wickard, and his reason was that he thought Mr. Neal would continue to be the deputy and it ls his opinion Mr. Neal is a good man.

The rest of the districts are all opposed.

I ask also, if the Senator received a copy of an editorial by Edgar Howard? I know that the Senator is personally acquainted with him.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Yes . . He served for many years in Congress.

. Mr. WHERRY. Has the Senator seen a copy of his editorial?

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I have not a copy or it.

Mr.-WHERRY. I will hand a copy of it to the Senator. It explains the. attitude of the public power districts. In the editorial he calls upon both Senators from Nebraska to oppose the nomination of Mr. Vvickard.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, in conjunction with these letters and telegrams, I ask unanimous consent that the editorial by former Representative Howard of Nebraska be printed in the RECORD at this point as a part of my re-marks. · .

Mr. WHERRY. Mr. Howard is o.ne of the most prominent editorial writers in the Middle West. He is a lifelong Democrat, and for many years he served in the House.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I thank the Senator from Nebraska for . his contribution.

There being no objection, the editoriaf was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: · · [From the Columbus (Nebr.) Daily Telegram

June 15, 1945]

TRUTH AND OTHER THINGS

One of the strangest moves ever made in affairs of Government occurred recently in Washington. . Claude Wickard, Secretary of Agriculture, resigned "by l'equest," and was immediately appointed ~o an inferior post. Why did President Truman request Wickard to resign? Wpy appoint him to a post in which he will have large powers in solving rural-electrification problems? The best answers to these questions will be to e:h.'press opinion that President Truman has been woefully deceived by elements which desired Wickard in a post where he will be in position to harm, rather than help th~ cause of rural electrification. Why should that element seek injury to the cause of rural electrification? The answer is easy: The owners of gigantic private power plants do not like to see the farm folks secure electric energy for their farms through district power projects of their own. Here in Nebraska the opposition of Power Trust to rural electrification of the :farms by public district power_ projects has been cunning and brutal. That opposition suffered a body blow when Nebraslta provided legislation under terms of which public-owned power districts became able to function. Wickard's record is the record of a man who sees things through Power Trust eyes. I call upon Senators BUTLER and WHERRY to oppose the confirmation of Wickard as top authority in rural-electrification affairs. In that position he will, if following his· natural course, work injury to the greatest boon enjoyed by folks on the farm. I call upon Senators BUTLER and WHERRY to visit President Truman, tell him the story of the trials and troubles of the farm folks in Nebraska in their long fight with the enemies of public ownership of rural-electrification lines. I am confident the president has been deceived by the cunning angels of the mighty Power Trust, just as that monster deceived public officials in Nebraska until public sentiment drove Power Trust out of any part or parcel in the governing business in this agricultural commonwealth. Delay may be dangerous, Senators. Please do not delay.

EDGAR HOWARD.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Those who write to me do not say whether they are Republicans or Democrats. They write what they think about Mr. Wickard and REA.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6447 Both Republicans and Democrats are opposed to the nomination.

Here is another communication from Nebraska, from the president of the Nebraska REA:

The President's appointment of Claude R. Wickard as REA Administrator came as a surprise to me, and if the Senate has not confirmed this appointment before this letter reaches you, I am asking that you give very careful consideration before casting your vote of" confirmation.

This letter is dated May 28. The writer further states:

I deem it very important that the REA be · removed from the Department of Agriculture and returned to an independent agency. Thanks to you and all Senators who have worked to that end. But just as important and more so, it is necessary that the proper man be selected as Administrator.

Regardless of Wickard's qualifications, I do not believe he is the proper man for that position. tt was during his manageme~t of REA under the Department of Agriculture that much discord, confusion, and criticism arose. With that in mind, I do not see how Wickard could have the coordination necessary for the most harmonious administration of the REA.

There-are many telegrams. Here is one from Goldsboro, N. C.:

Due to his record against REA I disapprove Mr. Wickard's appointment as Rural Electrification Administrator.

FREELY SMITH.

Here is another one from North Carolina:

ENFIELD, N. C., June 4, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Due past record we are opposed to confir

mation Wickard Administrator REA. Our opinion confirmation would fail to give relief desired by establishment REA independent agency. We urgently request disapproval by committee of nomination.

- HALIFAX ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORP.,

BALFOUR DUNN, President.

Here is one from Ohio: NAPOLEON, OHIO, J·une 9, 1945.

The Honorable HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, United States Senate,

Washington, D. C.: To assure confidence of the public and

REA borrowers in the Rural Electrification Administration program must be headed by a forceful personality, the man with experience in finance and;or the power business. Mr. Wickard does not appear to possess such qualification, there_fore we urge rejection of his nomination as REA Administrator.

TRICOUNTY RURAL ELECTRIC CO-OP, INC.

There are 25 cooperative organizations in Ohio. All are on record as opposed to the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard. They have sent joint telegrams and they have sent individual telegrams.

Here is one from the Farm Bureau Council of Amanda, Ohio: ' We the undersigned members of the Farm

Bureau Adult Council, No. 3, of Fairfield County, Ohio, as .consumers of REA current wish to express our disapproval of the appointment of Claude Wickard as head of the REA.

There are several more from Ohio. I think there could not possibly be any more cooperatives in Ohio than are represented by the number of telegrams which I have received.

Here is one from Oregon, representing all 12 REA cooperatives in Oregon:

CORVALLIS, OREG. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.:

The following telegram sent to Senators CoRDON and MoRSE and to Representatives JAMES W. MaTT, HoMER D. ANGELL, LowELL STOCKMAN, and HARRIS ELLSWORTH; "It is the opinion of the Oregon State Rural Electric Cooperative Association, Inc., that the testimony before the committee investigating REA in the Congress shows that Wickard is not a proper person to head REA as an independent organization. Reference, CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD .. April 2, 1945, pages 31, 32, and 55. A letter he sent to Andrews shows that he strongly favors REA be retained in the Department of Agriculture."

GEORGE W. HENDRIX, Presi dent. OREGON RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE

ASSOCIATION, INC.,

By the way, the organizations in Oregon sent a very fine lady all the way across the continent to testify before the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. She said she could not obtain reservations, but she made up her mind that she was coming anyway, and she traveled all the way from Oregon.

Here is one from South Carolina: GREENVILLE, S. C., June 8, 1945.

Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, United States Senate:

Following resolution unanimously adopted in closed session South Carolina Managers Conference: Resolved, That the South Caroline REA cooperative managers oppose the confli'mation of nomination of Claude · R. Wickard as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration.

H. E. RoBERTS, Secretary.

Here is another one from South Carolina:

MONCKSCORNER, S. C., June 7, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPS'l'EAD,

United States Senator, Washington, D. C.: .

Members in annual meeting voted unanimously against confirmation of Wickard.

C. H. WILSON,Secretary, Berkeley Electric Cooperative.

Here is another one from South Carolina: Hon. ELMER THOMAS,

United States Senator, Chairman, Agricultural Committee,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

By approving Wickard as Administrator for REA this and many other cooperatives are going to default because they will not be able to expand enough to pay their debts.

That is putting it pretty strong. At any rate, that is their opinion.

Many rural homes will be left without service because the power companies will not go into the thinner territories to serve those people. Wickard has never shown that he was for REA, therefore we feel that he will be a hindrance to our development and success and to the rural farm electrification, which is our goal. We will thank you very kindly for doing everything in your power to prevent Wickard's appointment.

GEORGE R. PARK, President, Fairfield Electric

Cooperative, Inc.

Here is another one from South Carolina:

We feel that the appointment of Mr. Wickard as REA Administrator is contrary to the best interests o~ the program, and re·

spectfully urge \hat you withraw his appointment.

In the letter to me is incor}1orated a copy of the telegram sent to the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. THOMAS]:

I now ·read part of a letter which I have received from the Santee Electric Cooperative, Inc., at Kingstree, s. C.:

SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., K ingstree, S. C., May 30, 1945.

Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR: In review of progress made • in making Rural Electrification Administra

tion an independent agency, I wish to express to you our thoughts and appreciation of your efforts and wish further to commend you for objecting to the appointment of Wickard as Administrator, as it seems that all the trouble started in Rural Electrification Administrat ion after it was put under the Department of Agriculture of which Wickard was in charge and our cooperative appreciates your efforts in trying to keep him from dominating the indep~ndence of REA. We feel that Mr. John M. Carmody would make a wonderful Adml.nistrator, as his records show its success during the time he was Administrator while Rural Electrification was an independent agency.

For your information our cooperative is in financial shape where we do not have to take the things forced on us by Mr. Wickard and Mr. Neal, as we have- met all our obligations and have paid over $100,000 more than is due on our $690,000 allotment. We are now serving over 900 miles of distribution line and 3,000 members, and each member is 100 percent for ·Rural Electrification Administration, which they think and feel is the greatest achievement that the Government has sponsored for the rural people. Please accept the above as suggestion only, and if you have any other in mind we would take your nomination and support it to the fullest, but we do not feel that Wickard or Neal either one is qualified to be Administrator of this great program.

Yours very truly, J. W. WALLACE,

Project Superintendent.

Here is a telegram from North Dakota:

GRAND FoRKs, N. DAK., June 7, 1495. Han. H. M. SHIPSTEAD,


In our opinion imperative that Wickard be defeated as REA Administrator. Please vote against his confirmation.

ANTON ENGE, Sec~etary, Electric Cooperative, _Inc.

Here is a letter· from South Dakota: LINCOLN-UNION ELECTRIC Co.,

Alcester, S. Dak., J·une 8, 1495. Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. SHIPSTEAD: Enclosed we are sending a copy of a telegram which was recently wired to the chairman of the Agriculture Committee, the Honorable ELMER THOMAS.

Yours respectfully, . OSMOND T. TWEDT,

Secreta1·y.

The attached telegram reads, as fol· lows: Hen. ELMER THOMAS,

Chairman of the Agriculture Committee, Washington, D . C.

At a regUlar meeting of the Board of Di· rectors of Lincoln-Union Electric Co. of Alcester, S.Dak., an REA proje~t. held June 6, 1945, the following resolution was adopted:

Whereas our attention has been called to the fact that Claude Wickard is now being

6448 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE -considered !or the .office of Administrator of Rural Electrification Admfnistration, and

Whereas the past record and attitude on the part of Mr. Wickard is such that his appointment will undoubtedly be detrimental to entire REA program: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the board of directors register its protest and opposition to the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA; be it further ·

Resolved, That the board hereby definitely go on record as favoring the REA as a separate and independent agency; be it further

ResolVed, That the secretary forward this resolution by wire to chairman of Agriculture Committee and copies thereof to all congressional Members from South Dakota, to the President of the United States, and to such persons having shown a special interest in this matter.

LINCOLN-UNION ELECTRIC Co., OsMoND T. TwEDT, Sec1·etary.

Here Is another letter from. South Dakota:

BLACK HILLS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC.,

Custer, S. Dak., June 5, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: DEAR Sm: Enclosed find copy of telegram

stating our views of the confirmation of Mr Wickard as Administrator of REA.

Yours truly, BLACK HILLS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC.

JUNE 5, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. This association is opposed to the con

firmation of Mr. Wickard as Administrator and feel that he is very incompetent and does not understand the problems of REA.

BLACK HILLS ELECTRIC ASSOCIA'I'ION.

Mr. President, I have received a statement by Dr. K. T. Hutchinson, president of the Tennessee Rural Electric Cooperative Association, at Murfreesboro, Tenn. His statement is too long for me to take the time to read at this point, but I submit it for the RECORD, and ask unanimous consent that it be printed.

There being no objection, the statement was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: . We oppose the confirmation of Secretary

Wickard exclusively on the basis of his record as Secretary of Agriculture.

If he has been a success as head of the Dzpartment of Agriculture, why is he now being replaced by President Truman?

If he was a success- as head of the Department of Agriculture why did President Roosevelt strip him of all administrative responsibility in connection with the agricultural program during the early war period?

Is it because he is incompetent and unable to perform the duties of Secretary of Agriculture that he is being replaced as Secretary of Agriculture?

Should a man of proven incompetency be selected to administer an organization which has $600,000,000 of the taxpayers mane~ under its jurisdiction?

What assurance do the people have that Mr. Wickard is sumciently competent to administer this program after he has failed in his previous assignment. If for some particUlar reason he is entitled to a sinecure forfavors done surely there should be another suitable appointment rather than as administrator of a program which will soon have jurisdiction of over a billion dollars of Government funds and a program which directly_ a1fects the lives of 7,000,000 rural families.

We feel that- shortly after the REA was placed under the Department of Agriculture that administration of the REA program was

more and more concentrated and centralized. We feel that as the 800 cooperatives acquir~ experience that they shoUld day by day be permitted to make more and more of their own decisions and assume more responsibility for handling their own affairs. · At the present time we as trustees and directors of a cooperative organization having over $1,250,000 of assets, about $300,000 of it is our own money, we do not have the right to hire our own manager. The man we hire to manage our local affairs must be ap-· proved by the REA headquarters in St. Louis, 400 miles away by a man who knows nothing about our local problems. That is the kind of supervision and centralized control which exists today under Mr. Wickard's and under Mr. Neal's administration.

This is only one of many examples which could be cited showing the tendency to centralize administrative responsibility within the REA rather than within the local cooperative which i'n reality has the major respoJ1Sibility for the success of the program.

The method used by Secretary Wickard in the liquidation of the former Administrator, Harry Slattery (his subordinate after the reorganization), was not only administratively unethical but actually disgraceful.

If Mr. Slattery was incompetent, as S~cretary Wickard contended in the Budget hearings, why was he not dismissed rather than retained on the public pay roll for 2 or 3 years at an annual salary of $10,000 with no duties, authority, .or responsibilities?

Both the Budget hearings and the REA investigation hearings will show that Secretary Wickard actually, by a written memorandum, withdrew all major administrative responsibilities from Mr. Slattery, and transferred them to a man who -up to the present time has not shown that be is as competent as the previous Administrator he replaced. Is this the kind of administrative techniques Secretary Wickard will continue to use if he is confirmed as REA Administrator? It is because we are afraid of that, that we oppose his confirmation.

We feel that it was poor administration to replace a man of proven administrative ability who was doing a good job with an inexperienced unknown, whose only outward qualification was that he was a defeated candidate for Governor of a backwara Eastern State.

We feel that the REA is or should be a business organization, and the $600,000,000 of the taxpayers' money which has been loaned to the 825 cooperatives, private utilities, and public-power districts will be repaid in full, if the administrative affairs of the REA are ltept under the control of qualified competent persons. The future of this program, however, is doubtful if incompetent, politically minded, and inexperienced leaders are placed in control of this great organization which serves farm people.

Surely a more competent and better qualified appointee than Secretary Wickard should be available, and we respectfully request that his appointment be withdrawn and a more capable and better qualified person be selected in his stead.

We not only oppose Mr. Wickard's appointment because of his past record as secretary of Agriculture, but also because of his recorded statement that he believes the REA should remain. a part of the Department of Agriculture. Upon this point of view we who are familiar with the implications are 1n basic disagreement.

We do not believe that the REA program can ever function satisfactorily as a part of the Department of Agriculture. The layers and layers of authority, the red tape, and political alliances existing within the Department of AgricUlture . will bog down any Administrator who tries to operate an action program such as the REA program as part of the Department of Agriculture. It

. is an impossible situation, We believe that

all action programs such as the REA program should. be separate and distinct from routine supervisory and education programs, such as the programs now being administered by the Department.

Not until the REA is again established as an independent agency can it properly fulfill its destiny as a service organization capable and qualified to meet the demands and aspirations of rural people seeking electric service to illuminate their homes and their lives toward a higher living standard, a permanent agricultural economy, and a better rural America.

K. T. HUTCffiNSON, President, Tennessee Rural Electric

Cooperative Association.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Here is a telegram from Tennessee:

DECATUR, TENN., June 8, 1945. We do not believe confirmation of Ron.

Claude Wickard as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration is to best interest of rural electrification program, because of past controversies, we believe appointment of someone not involved in them would be better. We urge that Rural Electrification Administration be restored to its independent status.

VOLUNTEER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, J. W. LILLARD, President.

.. W. S. BATES, Manager.

Here is another telegram from Tennessee:

TRENTON, TENN., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Building: We render electric service to 20,000 farm

people; many thousand yet unserved. Do not think that Hon. Claude Wickard should be confirmed as REA Administrator. We urge you vote against confirmation.

FLOYD JONES, Manager. GIBSON Co. EMC.

Here is another telegram from Tennessee:

DECATUR, TENN., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C.: Because of past controversies we do not

believe appointment of Hon. Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration will accomplish desired results in restoration of that agency to independent status. We believe appointment of someone not involved in controversies would be better.

VOLUNTEER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, J. W. LILLARD, President. W. S. BATES, Manager.

There are a great many more commu• nications from Tennessee. In order to save time, I will turn them over to the Reporter, and I ask unanimous consent that the telegrams and letters be printed in the RECORD. · There being no objection, the letters

and telegrams were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

TENNESSEE RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION,

Decatur, Tenn., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


DEAR SIR: At the request of Dr. K. T. Hutchinson, our president, we quote below a copy of telegram w.e sent May 26 to all ruralelectrification projects which purchase power !rom the Tennessee Valley Authority:

"Our association has gone on record as favoring restoration of Rural Electl'ificatlon Administration to its former status as an independent Government agency. Because of past controversies we do not believe appointment of Hon. Claude Wickard as Ad-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6449 ministrator will be to best interest of ruralelectrification program. If you favor freeing Rural Electrification Administration, we urge thl'!.t you and others immediately wire your protest to your Senators."

We als·a attach copies of telegrams we have sent by our association and Volunteer Electric Cooperative, of which the writer is manager, to the following: Senator K. D. McKELLAR, Senator ToM STEWART, Senator WALTER GEORGE, Senator RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Senator li.ENRIK SHIPSTEAD, Han. EsTES KEFAUVER.

Yours truly, W. S. BATES, Secretary.

Senator K. D. McKELLAR, Senator ToM STEWART, Senator WALTER GEORGE, Sc:1ator RICHARD B. RUSSELL, Senator H.ENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

MAY 28, 1945.


Hen. ESTES KEFAUVER, House Office Buildtng;

Washington, D. C.: Because of past controversies we do not be~

lieve appointment of Hen. Claude R. Wickard · as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration will accomplish desired results in restoration of that agency to independent status. We believe appointment of someone not involved in controversies would be better.

VOLUNTEER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE. J. W. LILLARD, President. W. S. BATES, lr!anager.

DECATUR, TENN., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C.: We are distressed because we do not believe

appointment of Hon. Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration will free that Agency from effects of past controversies and restore it to its independent status. We believe appointment of someone not involved in past controversies would be better. ·

TENNESSEE RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION,

Dr. K. T. HUTCHINSON, President. W. S. BATES, Secretary.

MURF·REESBORo, TENN., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRU-<:: SHIPSTEAD;

We, the board of trustees of the Middle Tennessee Electric Membership Corp., serving 7,000 families, oppose the confirmation of Wickard's appointment as REA Administrator. This cooperative wants REA free from Wickard and Department of Agriculture. Wicl~ard's statement before subcommittee of the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry of Senate on April 2 indicates that he would make a weak Administrator for all-out rural electrification. REA needs a strong Administrator at this time let us have your support in securing a strong Administrator for reason that the postwar rural-electrification program will not be hampered.

THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE MIDDLE TENNESSEE ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORP.,

K. T. HUTCHINSON, President, J. W. ODoM, Treasurer.

¥ILTON, TENN., May 30, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD.

DEAR Sm: In regard to Wickard's appointments of the Administration, I believe if he is elected it will weaken the Rural Electrification Administration's position. We do not want that to . happen. Will you please help us with a good man.

Many thanks, yours, S. E. McELROY,

Trustee of the Middle Tennessee Electric Membership p_orp.

MURFREESBORO, TENN., May 29, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD.

DEAR SENATOR: We Wish you WOUld take a stand against the confirmation of Wickard as REA Administrator, as he is not sold, according to speeches or remarlts he made before the subcommittee on Forestry and Agriculture as of April 2, 1945, on the co-op plan of service as we now have. We believe that under his administration the postwar REA plans would be jeopardized.

Respectfully, J. W. 0DOM,

Secretary-Treasurer Middle Tennessee Electric Membership Corp.

MURFREESBORO, TENN., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


Tennessee State Grange feels Wickard unsuited, unsafe to become Administrator of REA. We fought · to remove REA from Department of Agriculture to get it away from Wickard's influence.

PAUL B. DYKES, Master, Tennessee State Grange.

K. T. HUTCHISON, Chairman, Executive Committee,

Tennessee State Grange.

FRANKLIN, TENN., May 30, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


I am opposed to the confirmation of Wickard's appointment as REA Administrator. I prefer to see REA free from Wickard and Department of Agriculture. Wickard's past record indicates he would make a weak Administrator for all-out rural electrification. REA needs a strong Administrator at this time.· Let us have your support in securing a strong Administrator for REA so that the postwar rural-electrification program will not be hampered.

J. T. TRICE.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Here is a letter from Texas, reading as follows:

FARMERS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. Greenville, Tex., June 4, 1945.

Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: I am in receipt

of your telegram of June 1, in which you state "Hearing on Wickard nomination for Administrator REA, June 11." Within an hour and a half, i: -received a telephone call from Earl Murley, of Indiana; 40 Knox, Vincennes, Ind., relative to this hearing and a request that I be in Washington June 11 to testify in the hearing. Unfortunately it seems highly improbable that I can be gone from here at that time. ·

It seems that Mr. Murley, along with other officials of various REA cooperatives over the Nation, has learned of the considerable difficulties experienced by this cooperative (the Farmers Electric Cooperative, Inc. of Greenville, Tex.), and its two subsidiaries the Farmers Electric Refrigeration Cooperative, Inc., of Emory, Tex., and the Collin County Refrigeration Cooperative, Inc., of Wylie, Tex. Resulting from the muddled and chaotic condition now prevailing in REA, which has taken more than .a year's lapse of time between the receipt of allotment for the construction of the refrigeration cooperatives, and the actual letting of contracts for their construction; and during which time we have had to contend with every type of obstructionary tactics that REA could put in our way. We were forced to let the Emory job the fourth time, and each time at a higher cost, before getting the Administrator's approval of a contract, and only after appealing to Speaker SAM RAYBURN (in whose congressional district it is located) for help; On the Wylie Jop we were plocked, ~t ~rst, by ~EA's Lega~

Division on title to a building being purchased, by their refusing to permit the only procedure by which title could be cleared. Costing us our option which forced us to reoption at a higher figure, we were then blocked by Designs and Construction Division, headed by Guy Thaxton, because we furnished our plans and sp~cifications and refused to pay a fee to the only architect which they had approved in Texas (an incompetent). This situation had all the earmarks of the old Copper-Weld deal as revealed in Senate Resolution 198. Again we had to appeal to Senator CONNALLY and Mr. RAYBURN. At this time corporal punishment was being administered to the electric cooperatives through the refusal of approval of our U-1C construction work orders from August 1944 through May 1945.

In January 1945, a $20,000 allotment was made the electric cooperative with which to purchase and remodel an office building. When the loan papers were received it was found that an amendment to our loan contract was incorporated in it, affecting the previous $912,000 borrowed. This amendment is an abortive thing and would deprive the cooperatives of every right of control and management previously granted it.

I am enclosing a copy of the amended loan contract as submitted with provisions of section · 29. I thinl~ you will agree with me that the Congress never intended when passing the act creating REA, that a bunch of bureaucratic administrators of REA should perpetrate such a crime on the cooperatives.

The board of directors of this cooperative refused execution of this document, and was later furnished an acceptable one, but since which time REA has been trying to get back the 42 copies which we had of the abortive one. The tragedy of this situation is that scores of other cooperatives executed the abortive contract.

During all the time that this scandalous situation has prevailed in REA, Mr. Wickard as Szcretary of Agriculture, has possessed full power of removing the rotten apples from REA's barrel. Yet he had done nothing about it and I think this sums up the general situation, regarding Mr. Wi~ltard's case and qualifications as Administrator for REA.

We feel that it is imperative that someone with the right attitude, executive ability, and purity and honesty of purpose, should administer the affairs of REA, and we feel that Mr. Wickard measures short of that requirement.

Yours very truly, CHARLES M. CURFMAN, Manager.

P. s.-CopH~s of the loan contract with comment have been furnished Congressmen PACE of Georgia and PoAGE of Texas.

Here is a letter from Baltimore, Md.: BALTIMORE, June 2, 1945.

Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, Senate Office Building,

washington, D. c. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: I have a letter

from Fred Brenckman, Washington representative of the National Grange, reading in part as follows: "If you know of any specific charges that can be brought against him and for which we would be able to present satisfactory proof, I wish you would let us have them." This was in reply to my letter to him, and also letter to National Master· A. S. Gess, asking them to .do everything possible to defeat Wickard. I am writing Mr. Brenckman that I am asking you to contact him and give him the facts as to why Wickard must be defeated if we are to save REA: Please give him the information you deem best and I sincerely hope the National Grange will help you in this fight.

Before the yote to set REA free again came up in the Senate I was able to get Senator BYRD to .agree to support our cause even though he is fighting more bureaus. He ag:teed that REA should be freed from Wickard. He has been away from Washington :With, ~ Naval Affairs ,C::omm1ttee group sinqe

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 2:( Wickard was appointed. His secretary as .. sures me that my letters of protest against Wickard will be handed him the minute he returns. I believe he will help and if he can obtain a few Democratic Senators' support (as I think he may be willing and able to do) it will be of great h.elp to you.

I have written Senator THOMAS and lodged my protest before the Agricultural Committee. I_f you know of anything else I can do please let me know.

'I'hanking you with all my heart for the grand fight you have made to save REA and praying that you may be able· to defeat Wickard, I am,

Sincerely yours, JAMES H. ROGERS,

Here is a telegram from Wisconsin:. JUNE 7, 1945,

Hon. ELMER THOMAS, Senate Office Building,

washington, D. C.: In behalf of our cooperative be advised that

we desire . harmony in REA which cannot be obtained with Claude Wickard as Admin· istrator, who in our opinion is in large part responsible for the present and past discord in REA. We are also definitely for inde-pendency for REA. .

ST. CROIX-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, N. C. ANDERSON, President. WIL~M RUTZEN, Manager,

Here is a letter from Wisconsin: CHIPPEWA VALLEY

ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, Cornell, Wis., June 7, 1945.

Senator HENRIK SHIPsTEAD, Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: We are enclosing

·copy of the telegram which was sent to the Agricultural Committee regarding our stand in the appointment of Claude Wickard as Rural Electrification Administration Administrator.

All the farmers want is an able Administrator and it is our sinaere belief that any appointment outside of Wickard would have been 0. K. The farmers are interested only in a capable, conscientious Administrator and we believe that if such an appointment can finally be made that REA will again show the Nation that it cari again become one of the best managed and capable Government agencies.

REA itself has suffered severely from per .. sonnel change due to its present political condition and we hesitate to think what would happen to a number of the capable executives remaining if Wickard is allowed to become Administrator.

Mr. Ludwig Anderson, manager of Head of the Lakes Electric Cooperative, Superior, Wis., if conditions permit will represent the cooperatives from the State of Wisconsin at the hearing Monday, June 11, in Washing .. ton, and we trust that his presence will be of assistance in this vital matter.

It is anticipated that necessary action on his representation will be taken here today or tomorrow at a. meeting of the Wisconsin REA managers at Wautoma, Wis.

Please rest assured that all REA coopera .. tives appreciate your fight in seeing that REA gets a square deal.

Yours very truly, R. L. CLEAVES,

Manager.

Senators ELMER THOMAS, ·HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, GEORGE E. AIKEN, RICHARD B. RUSSELL, CHARLES TOBEY, SCOTT W. LUCAS, · Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C.: Board of directors of this cooperative :feel

it would be a great mistake to approve ap ... pointment of :Wickard as REA Administrator.

CHIPPEWA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,

H. E. GRAPE, ~resident

Here is another telegram from Wiscon.-. sin:

CORNELL, WIS., May 31, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD:

Board .of directors of the cooperative feel 1t would be great mistake to approve appointment of Wickard as ·REA Administrator.

H. E. GRAPE, President, Chippewa Valley Electric Cooperative.

Here is a letter from Superior, Wis. It was written on :May 26, two days after the nomination of Mr. Wickard came to the Senate. It reads as follows:

HEAD OF THE LAKES COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION,

Superior, Wis., May 26, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR Sm: I notice ·by the morning paper that you intend to oppose the confirmation of Claude'Wickard as REA Administrator. I feel that if there were time enough you would be able to obtain a strong sentiment on the part of managers, and executive force and members of the various REA cooperatives endorsing your stand just as they endorsed your stand of independence of REA from the De· partment of Agriculture.

I am sure this appointment by President Truman is a mistake. I would not have been more amazed if the President had appointed Steven Tate or Bob Craig, and I am sure I do not speak for myself alone. I doubt if there is anything we can do in this situation except hope for the best, and to congratulate you on this stand.

Yours very truly, LUDWIG ANDERSON, Manager,

Here is another telegram from Wiscon• sin:

SUPERIOR, WIS., May 28, 1945, Hon. HENRICK SHIPSTEAD,


Appointment of Wickard to head REA would be serious mistake. Advise you review evidence bearing on this lately obtained by your own subcommittee.

RAY CLEAVES, LUDWIG ANDERSON,

Directors for Wisconsin Committee for Independence of .REA.

Here is a copy of a letter which was sent to the Senator from Oklahoma, and a copy was sent to me. It reads as fol· lows:.

CLARK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, Greenwood, Wis., June 5, 1945.

Chairman Hon. ELMER THOMAS, · Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. THOMAS: I had intended to

send you a wire, but I believe a personal letter will include more of what I have in mind.

At the present time our cooperative consists of approXimately 3,000 members and in their behalf I am appealing to you to reject the nomination of Mr. Wickard as Ad· ministrator of the REA. As far as we are concerned, Mr. Wickard has definitely proven to us that he is not the man to head REA for the 10 years. Just a glimpse at any of the testimony of Mr. Wickard or his group at the Senate investigation of REA certainly bears out our opinion. His testimony on the Lucas bill leaves no doubt in the mind of any cooperator as to whether or not he is an enemy of REA cooperatives. During the time REA was under the jurisdiction of the Agriculture Department there has developed two factions. One for Mr. Wickard and his group. The other definitely opposed to them and their tactics. To again get REA to operate emoothly an absolute ~anger :wm p.ave ~.o J;)e appointe~. ;He ~an•

not belong to either faction and expect to straighten REA out.

We are interested only in the welfare and future of rurai electrification, From that standpoint we feel there are two things wh1ch must take place in REA or it will. not continue to function for the benefit of the rural people of America.

First. It must be independent. Second. It must be wisely guided by an

Administrator who belongs to none of the factions as they exist at present in REA and who is not bound to any political group.

I hope you will consider this letter in the same light as it was written.

Cooperatively yours, W. A. DALLMAN,

Manager.

Mr. President, in addition to submitting these telegrams and letters, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD the statement made by Ludwig Anderson, of Superior, Wis., who ap .. peared at the committee as a representa .. tive of a Wisconsin cooperative.

There being no objection, the state.ment was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

My name is Ludwig Anderson. I am the manager of the Head of the Lakes Cooperative Electric Association at Superior, Wis. I am here to represent my organization and under. direction of my board of directorS'. I am another paid employee, just as you Senators are our paid employees. I am trying to represent my constituents here, just as we citizens expect you to represent us in the United States Senate. While I can only speak with authority for my own cooperative organization, I assure you that I am convinced that if there could be a referendum of individual members of REA cooperatives in Wisconsin, a secret ballot such as that held in Iowa, you would have close to unanimous opposition to Mr. Wickard's confirmation.

I shall not attempt to discuss Mr. Wickard personally. I .do not know the man well enough. I shall orily attempt to deal with the record which he has made as the official who assumed authority over REA. Incidentally, there is no politics in my presentation. I am an independent in politics, but I voted for Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Truman, and I have the most sincere wish that Mr. Truman's administration will be successful. I think he has made a fine start. I believe the onlYi serious mistake he has made up to this point is his nomination of Mr. Wickard. And I sincerely believe that in opposing Mr. Wickard here we are doing the greatest possible service to President Truman and to the cause of good·government.

I have prepared this statement because I wanted the privilege of presenting an orderly; statemen't of opposition without being confused or diverted as was the case when Mr. Moore was prevented from telling a very important story here last Monday morning. He wanted to tell how REA regional chiefs were unable to attend an important annual meeting of the Missouri State-wide Association, at which they were scheduled to speak because someone had spitefully cut off their travel allowance for that trip. Perhaps you Senators will believe it was only a coincidence that this happened immediately after the State-wide had rejected a bid for Mr. Wickard to speak at that meeting. Well, gentlemen, farmers are suspicious folk; we 're inclined to believe that is the sort of thing that would happen during every political campaign for the next 10 years if Mr. Wick· ard's appointment is confirmed.

The REA program must be kept entirely free from partisan political influences, from the influences of the material supply companies, from bureaucratic political influences, from the influences of those who dare to declare that they will run REA from out~ide if :they ~annot run it from the insid~.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6451 If this REA program is now destroyed because of vicious anc;I selfish political influences, then the · country will be denied the opportunity to develop a sound pattern to apply to other similar cooperative programs. We must be eternally vigilant against the selfish political influences and we are trying here with our limited resources and limited experience to be vigilant. That is our obligation to REA and to our country and as citizens we are trying to perform our obligation and we have no apologies to anyone for doing so.

I h ave heard quite a bit of gossip expressing fear of reprisa:ls because of our testimony here. I believe the gossip is well-founded because it is reasonable. The gossip is that cautious leaders of REA cooperatives back home are saying that "Wickard cannot be defeated, he is going to be Administrator of REA for ten years and you had better go along with him now and· not stick your neck out." But I believe we have a duty here and that we are just beginning to organize to perform that duty and to save REA. Regardless of what this committee recommends, I believe we have to take this fight back to the country and to never let up in our vigilance to protect REA cooperatives.

I h 2.d thought, and so had my associates, that every Senator would give proper weight to the testimony given to the Senate subcommittee which investigated the .REA. We thought the record made there of sworn testimony was so conclusive in support of REA independence and in opposition to Mr. Wickard that the two issues were inseparable, and that the Senators would instinctively recoil at the possibility of placing him in charge for the next ten years. We hope the Senators will still justify our belief.

. The farmers of my part of the country have long understood that President Roosevelt had lost confidence in :Mr. Wickard's ability as Secretary of Agriculture. President Roosevelt, apparently, stripped Mr. Wickard of most of his authority as Secretary. Then President Truman confirmed this lack of confidence by accepting his resignation as Secretary of Agriculture. What possible justification can there be for shoving Mr. Wickard off onto the REA program?

Mr. Wickard would begin as Administrator of REA with very serious lack of confidence in him on the part of a large number of cooperatives: The REA organization is in bad shape l'ight now, or all the stories we hear in the field are in error. Right now, the REA needs help, it needs confidence in the Administrator, it needs a house-cleaning! Once there was complete confidence, tremendDus enthusiasm and high morale. All that has been badly injured, in many places destroyed since Mr. Wickard has been in control. Now let's take a look at the record on which I am basing my opposition to Mr. Wickard.

First, the Becker memorandum. It wa!! prepared by Mr. Jol).n Becker, of Wisconsin, and was given to John M. Carmody after Mr. Carmody bad retired from REA. The memorandum is in the printed bearings of the Senate subcommittee. It tells a story of a base political conspiracy to milk REA and REA cooperatives. If the story can be confirmed, then no one can vote approval of Mr. Wickard because be became involved in the conspiracy and became intimately asso-ciated with the conspirators. ·

Robert B. Craig was Deputy Administrator of REA. He told Mr. Becker how he proposed to control REA from inside or from the outside, how he would build a most powerful political farm organization to influence the Congress, how the organization would collect 10 cents a year from each family in the REA cooperatives and how this would give the organization $100,000 a year, how the organization would organize subsidiary organizations to manufacture electrical appliances and give other service and how this

would give it additional funds and tremendous additional power.

In the face of the wish and the hope of Senator George W. Norris to keep REA out of politics, in the face of the realization on the part of every member of long-established cooperatives that partisanpolitical influences will wreck cooperatives, in the face of the testimony of Mr. Carmody denouncing the proposal I insist that if these charges can be confirmed, everyone associated with that effort must be condemned.

What is the record? Read the testimony. An organization similar in practically every detail to Mr. Craig 's proposals to Mr. Becker was formed and Mr. Craig was the guiding hand in forming that organization. Mr. Craig denied talking with Mr. Becker but I do not believe anyone who will read the record will b<Jlieve Mr. Craig. The testimony shows that finally Mr. Craig said Mr. Becl{er's memorandum was the result of divination.

The organization was ·formed. It became known as the National Rural Electric Coopera~ive Association. I think most of my assoCiates here became members of it. We believe in a national organization but our REA did not join. We were suspicious of a cooperative ·being built from the top down. Our fears were justified. The record shows that Mr. Craig finally admitted that be formed the organization, that tho first group of REA cooperative leaders who met to s<Jt up the organization were handpicked. Mr. Clyde Ellis, a former Member of Congress, was chosen as the manager. Mr. Tate, a big marble producer from Georgia, became the president.

The record shows that apparently Mr. Harry A. Slattery, then Administrator of REA, went along with the organization at the start. The break came when Ellis and Tate incorporated two insurance companies in Maryland and reached out to take Government money to finance the insurance companies. The testimony is clear that Slattery presented his doubts to Mr. Wickard and asked for a legal opinion. The testimony is clear that finally Mr. Slattery had to put out what is known as "the stop, look, and listen letter" to cooperatives, to warn them to beware of the proposal. Ellis and Tate and other members of the ·board of the organization were conferring with Mr. Wickard and Mr. Carl Hamilton, assistant to Mr. Wickard. Slattery hal~ed the very questionable enterprise and Ellis and Tate called for his scalp. They threatened to drive him out of REA.

He was eventually driven out by Mr. Wickard. We must remember that until this incident developed, Mr. Slattery was applauded by Ellis and Tate and by Wickard. The minute Slattery stopped the insurance enterprise, the fight for his scalp began. They finally got Slattery. The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and Wickard were successful. I do not see how anyone who will read that· story can vote to confirm Mr. Wickard. Why did he not strike out at this insurance scheme? Why did not he and Mr. Hamilton advise us of what was going on and warn us? The least that can be said for Mr. Slattery was that he risked the displeasure of these men by doing what he thought was his duty.

The failure of Mr. Wickard to be concerned, even alarmed, by what was divulged in the Becker memorandum disqualifies him for a vote of confidence now. Let him retire . and prove his worth and then return. We cannot build a real organization of Government employees if we refuse to hold public servants responsible for their failures. Certainly we should not reward failure.

This record goes from bad to worse. Some employees of REA who had won

their spurs under Mr. Carmody apparently became alarmed because of the influence in REA by a material supply company, the Copperweld Co. They urged that an investigation be made of REA. Just where the investigations began and ended is not entirely

clear from the· testimony, but that is not necessary. An investigation was made. It was made by investigators of the Department of Agriculture. The investi&ators were not subject to Mr. Slattery but to Mr. Wickard. The National Cooperative Rural Electric Association, which was demanding Mr. Slattery's scalp, also was denouncing socalled deadwood in the organization and was demanding an investigation. This investigation was also made.

The Senators who read that report know that it verified some of the worst suspicions. The friendship of then Deputy Administrator Robert Craig with Copperweld Co. representatives, the wining and dining and entertaining of REA employees by Copperweld · Co. The story is one of the dirty stories we baclt in the "sticks" hear about these Washington lobbyists who prey upon Government employees. The other investigation repudiated the attacks on the "deadwood" employees.

Witnesses later told the subcommittee of how the Copperweld Co. exerted influence of various kinds and degree to compel them to buy materials from this company. It all ties together,· dovetails into a story which I think should have caused Mr. Wtclmrd to whip · everyone involved in that story out of office. I cannot see how any responsible official of government can sit complacently by with that kind of a dirty mess spread before him.

What did Mr. Wickard do? He buried the report. It only became exposed when the subcommittee of the Senate revealed it. Mr. Slattery testifies that had he known what the report revealed he would have fired some of the employees. But Mr. Slattery, who was willing to act, was denied knowledge about the report. Why? Mr. Wickard testifies that he could see no good that could have been accomplished by showing Mr. Slattery the report. A request on the House of Representatives to begin impeachment proceedings against Mr. Wickard would not have been too much to ask unless he could satisfactorily explain his actions. Why was Mr. Wickard concealing the report? Could it be that Mr. Wickard did not learn of it until the subcommittee exposed it? If he did not, who did the job in Mr. Wickard's organization? Has he fired his subordinates who buried the report? He cannot escape guilt from the record already made in. this sworn testimony.

It is not unfair to say that Mr: Wickard and ·Mr. Hamilton had, by this time, become very friendly with Mr. Ellis and Mr. Tate and others in the NRECA. They were tied together, with Mr. Craig, in the job of getting Slattery out of their way. The story is that in the buried report the employees of REA who are criticized were the friends and assistants of Mr. Craig. About this time the Copperweld Co. became openly associated with the conspiracy. Mr. Craig resigned from REA and went to become, immediately, the vice president of the Copperweld Co. and at a high salary. These. men were all out to get Slattery.

Now, I aslt you, as our Representatives in the Congress, if you are going to confirm Mr. Wickard and approve Mr. I:Iamilton and justify their conduct? Are you thus going to become partners in this conspiracy? The REA must be kept clean. As one representative of one REA cooperative, I demand of my -representatives that they shall not put the seal of approval on that kind of conduct in government.

To continue _ with the record. A Deputy Administrator was to be appointed in REA. Mr. Wickard appointed Mr. William Neal of New Hampshire. Who was Mr. Neal? He had been the Democratic candidate for gov .. ernor in New Hampshire. He was the presi• dent of the one REA cooperative in New Hampshire. Here and there I have heard many stories about that cooperative. I have heard that the 1·esponsible officials in REA,

• 6452 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE JUNE 21 in the planning division, went to New Hampshire and proposed to organize three cooperatives there. When they returned, Mr. Craig vetoed their plans and insisted on having only one, a State-wide, and Mr. Neal was president of that board. I have heard that money was dumped into that cooperative at that time until it became a matter of scandalous gossip in REA. We suspicious farmers believe that money was being dumped into that coo.perative to help Mr. Neal's candidacy for governor.

Mr. Neal's friend, a Mr. Huntress was named manager of that cooperative. Lines were built at extremely high exorbitant costs. I think an inv~tigation will prove that what I have been told is true, that REA auditors were constantly warning Mr. Neal of the bad condition in the cooperative. Finally, we got to the point where the cooperative that money was dumped into is now about $160,-000 in the red-if the latest reports are truedefalcations of about $14,000 were discovered, the manager had his wife on the pay rolt, had the office in his home, furnishings for the house were bought with the cooperative borrowed money. It is classed today as the worst REA cooperative of all REA cooperatives.

Yet Mr. Wickard appointed Mr. Neal Deputy Administrator. Then he retired Mr. Slattery · by taking away all of his authority. Finally· forces Slattery to resign. The .gang of conspirators are now inside REA and in complete_ command. Craig was with Copperweld which grew fat off REA business. Craig's henchmen who were exposed in the investigation by' the :Qepartment are in the saddle. Neal is in charge. Wickard sits in supreme command. Craig and Ellis and Wickard and the Copperweld Co. are tied together.

I ask you again, what is there in the record .to justify any REA cooperative having any confidence in Mr. Wickard?

Now, I know there will be objections to the following statement but I think it must be made. Late last summer, the REA began to issue publicity about an REA postwar planning bill. It was true that an election campaign was coming on. The bill was finally introduced in the Senate. Mr. Wickard suddenly pitched into the political campaign. Mr. Wickard appeared in the doubtful States. He appeared in my State. He appeared at REA meetings. He did not go into the sure States of the South, however, he went into the doubtful States upon which the electlon might hinge. Now I too wanted to see Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Truman elected. But I resent this kind of association of REA and REA cooperatives with- a political campaign. I say it violates the spirit of this law. And if there .were no law, I still insist that anyone who was really interested in REA would have been scrupulous to refrain from activity in the political campaign, would have been careful to avoid mixing the REA coopsratives up with a political campaign.

There is the record as . I see it. You can vote to become a party to this conduct if you wish. We can do no more here as citizens. But I love REA and the cooperative movement Eo much, that I, for one,· will not stop here. The fight will then have just begun as far as I am concerned.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. SHIFSTEAD. I yield. Mr. LUCAS. The Senator has just

finished reading a number of telegrams and letters from various cooperatives, and they deal with the nomination of Mr. Claude Wickard to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Yes. Mr. LUCAS. Has the Senator deter

mined the total number of cooperatives from wbich he has received telegrams

and letters opposing the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard?

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. They have come from approximately 36 States. There are about 300 of them. I have not read them all.

Mr. LUCAS. Does the Senator mean that 300 cooperatives in the entire United States--

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. No; Jaltogether. I do not have all of them here. They are still coming in, every day.

Mr. LUCAS. Of course, the Senator knows that the testimony before the committee was that there were only a small number of cooperatives at that time, as I recall, opposing the nomination.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. At what time? Mr. LUCAS. When we had the hear

ing before the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, there were only a small percentage of the 850 cooperatives in the 48 States of the Union which had made any protest.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. That is true. Mr. LUCAS. There were only a few

which made any direct objection, and they gave no reasons whatsoever, other than that they did not think Mr. Wickard would be a good Administrator.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Of course, I have received letters and telegrams from more than 500 of the 850 cooperatives.

Mr. President,· I call attention to the fact that the letters and telegrams began to come in within 2 days after the nomination of Mr. Wickard was submitted to the Senate, and they have continued to come in. However, most of them came before the committee held the hearing; I received more than 400 of them before the committee hearing was held.

Mr. LUCAS. The Senator knows that a propaganda campaign was organized and was carried on right here in Washington, and that those engaged in that campaign contacted every cooperative in the United States. The Senator knows that the present controversy grows out of the old fight that Harry Slattery had with Claude Wickard. Slattery has resigned, and he is not now in any way connected with the Rural Electrification Administration. I dare say that if it had not been for the group that was organized in Washington for the sole purpost of sending letters and telegrams to every cooperative in the United States, the Senator from Minnesota would not have received one-tenth of 1 percent of the. telegrams and letters he has received. The Senator knows what organized propaganda is; he gets it every day.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I know · that very well, and I know of the organiz~d political propaganda which has been brought to bear on the cooperatives, in an effort to make them retract their statements of opposition to the nomination.

I wish to say in regard to the group which came to Washington that it was many days after the nomination was submitted to the Senate that I received a call from a person who was interested in the matter. He wished to know if I was going to be in the city on a certain day. Thereafter, seven or eight persons from various States called on me and Wished to know whether they could have a hearing held by the committee on the

nomination. They said, "We want to oppose the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard. Can we obtain a hearing?" '

At that time I was able to show them approximately 150 or 200 telegrams which I had received up to then.

I said, "Well, I do not know wbtther it will do you any good, but I will ask for a hearing for you if you wish to be heard."

Those men met together in Washington that night-! do not know where, but I believe it was in one of the hotels. With the aid of friends in various places, they decided to start a campaign·against Mr . . Wickard. They had been selected by the board of directors of an organization to come to Washington and see if they could not obtain a hearing. I did not ask them to come, or to send any letters. The letters to which I have referred came to me unsolicited, and at least half of them were r~ceived before anyone had come to me with regard to obtaining a hearing.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I yield. Mr. LUCAS. Has a single cooperative

which protested against the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard, charged that he has interfered with it in any way from the standpoint of its efficiency or from the standpoint of politics?

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Trouble has occurred whenever business was done with the St. Louis office.

Mr. LUCAS. That hardly answers the question. The Senator knows that

· not a single person who testified before the committee said that Wickard had interfered in any way whatever with the •particular cooperative in which he, the witness, was interested; but, on the contra_ry; the testimony was that the cooperative was in good condition, and that Wickard had not interfered with its management.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. The Senator was not present all the time while testimony was taken.

Mr. LUCAS. No; but I have read the test!mony.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I think the Senator should read all the testimony. He should read the sworn testimony covering approximately 2,000 pages, on which my statement is based.

Mr. LUCAS. It is the old story of the difference between Wickard and Slattery. The Senator apparently wishes to renew that controversy which has existed for the past 2 years. Slattery is no longer in office and he wishes to vindicate himself.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. The Senator from Illinois may have his own opinion with regard to that matter. The opinion of those representing the cooperatives is not in agreement with that of the Senator.

Mr. President, as the evidence before the committees disclosed, the top man in REA today is Mr. William J. Neal. Most of the REA systems throughout the United States are very successful. They owe the Government no default money on their loans. There has been good management of their systems. They have generally paic substantial amounts

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6453 to the Government -in advance payments on their loans.

Mr. Neal is Mr. Vvickard's top man. He is Acting Administrator. He is the man whom Mr. Wickard sent out illegally to replace the lawful Administrator of REA. Mr. Wickard did not have the decency to prefer charges against Mr. Slattery, a 10-year Presidential ap·pointee, who -had an outstanding record as a successful Administrator of REA.

Who was Mr. Neal? He was the former president of the worst-managed of an the REA systems. As the testimony- in connection with the nomination of Mr. Wickard discloses, Mr. Neal was intimately connected with all the illegal activities of the manager of his former cooperative, New Hampshire 4 Merrimack. Under Mr. Neal's loose policies, approximately $15,000 in Federal funds were stolen. That system is $180,000 in the red, in its operations, and it is in default nearly $40,000 in back payments on its Government loan. This is the top man whom Mr. Wickard has in REA today. His was a political appointment of a very low order.

Who is the next man who Mr. Wickard has in a top position in REA? He is Mr. O'Shaughnessy. He is now the head of the important Design and Construction Division. If we turn to the sworn testimony which the Senate investigation committee took pursuant to Senat-e Resolution 197, and particularly to part 1, pages 104 and 105 and following, and part 2, page 201, we will find that the man who changed plans and specifications and forced REA systems to use copper material, is now the key official in that Division. The present Acting Chief of the Design and Construction Division is Mr. O'Shaughnessy, the very man who is accused of these practices. Mr. Wickard did nothing in regard to such practices. It illustrates the character of the persons who are in the top key positions in the REA. How can the REA co-op members have any confidence in such an organization? 4 , THE KINDS OF REA MEMBERS THAT PROTESTED

AGAINST THE NOMINATION OF MR. WICKARD

I wish Senators would turn to the five volumes of teStimony which were taken before the Agriculture Committee from June 11 to June 13, 1945, and note the kind of persons that testified against Mr. Wickard from various parts of the United States. Those persons were composed of busy farm-ers and others. They left their important work and came themselves to the Government in order to object personally to Mr. Wickard. They were solid, substantial citizens, presidents of boards of directors, presidents of REA power cooperatives, as well as board members, and managers of REA systems. With courage and specific facts they gave a picture of obstruction, confusion, and delay inside the REA. They were honest in their views that the confusion about which they were complaining would exist as long as Mr. Wickard continued in office and was surrounded by the Deputy Administrator, Mr. Neal, division heads, and others who were indicted for their corruption and bad administration of REA today.

The REA cooperative movement is based upon confidence. The vast ina- ·

jority of REA systems, according to the testimony, do not have any confidence in Mr. Wickard. Therefore, he cannot serve as a successful Administrator of REA with a group of such obviously prejudiced and incompetent people about him. 5. MR. WICKARD'S VIEWS OF PRIVATE UTILITIES

If we examine the testimony of the witnesses who appeared against him, it will be seen that they are particularly bitter against Mr. Wickard's weak and inefficient stand in regard to private utilities. For nearly 30 years the private utilities have had an opportunity to provide rural electrification at rates which the farmers could afford to pay. They did nothing but "skim" off the cream.

. They went down the main highways and left the vast majority of the farms in pockets in the adjoining areas. They demanded high cash contributions. They demanded high minimum bills. In short, their rates and charges were prohibitive. That is why REA was necessary. To speak at this late date about private utilities furnishing service upon an area coverage basis, displays a complete lack of understanding of why the REA movement was born and prospered. A man entertaining such a fallacious idea has no place in the REA where courage and vision are needed every day in dealing with the private utilities for power contracts, adequate wholesale rates, competition in adjoining- territory, and in preventing spite-line construction. Mr. Wickard is not ·the man who should sit in such an administrative position. 6. DEMORALIZATION OF THE STAFF INSIDE OF REA

The evidence at the recent Wickard hearing disclosed that complete demoralization exists inside the REA today. Division is placed against ·division. Loyal REA employees who helped builq this magnificent organization now find themselves helpless. It is small wonder that the representatives of the REA co-operatives testified that delay, confusion, and run-arounds are the rule in REA. It is a hopeless political muddle-. If Mr. Wickard becomes chief, he will bring in more "deadwood", and the real people who made REA will be driven out, just as many loyal employees have already been driven· out or, have resigned in disgust. Mr. Wickard's appointment will only perpetuate this confusion.

7. DISREGARD OF CIVIL SERVICE

I desire to read just one paragraph from the testimony of the former Admin~ istrator of REA, Harry Slattery, showing how Mr. Wickard has completely wrecked the civil-service procedure in REA. As Senators know, most REA employees, with the exception of the lawyers, and e:hrperts and consultants, are under civil service. However, by the mere device of abolishing an employee's job it is possible to discharge him. The Civil Service Commission will not question it. Here are the facts:

The difference between politics and civil service is the former pays no attention to the law, while the latter follows the acts of Congress. I want to take you inside my office and show you how Mr. Wickard completely destroyed my staff, which I contend is illegal and should be enough to remove him from public otfi.ce. The position o.L every single

professional assistant in my office . was abolished. Veterans from the World War; some of our finest staff who helped build REA; men with the REA from the beginnin g; some wit h 9 years of .REA service; wit h a rating of excellent, were given 30 days' notice and fired by Mr . Wickard.

Th e so-called reason was economy. In view of the fact that the same functions were t ransferred to other offices and· oth er people were hired-some 200, I was advised, can only meim one thing, politics and a complete disregard for civil-service law.

That was the testimony in volume III of the hearings before the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry on the nomination of Claude R. W'ickard to be Administrator of the REA. It will be found on pages 277 and 278.

This makes a mockery and a joke out of the Civil Service. It means that politics will reign free in the REA if Mr. Wickard continues control.

8. RETALIATION ON WITNESSES

The men who came before the committee to testify against Mr. Wickard were the courageous few. On each of their systems they were doing a good job. They had no complaint to make about the management of their own REA system. Their objection was to their dealings with REA headquarters under Mr. Wickard. I want to make this public statement now: · These men are American citizens. They testified honestly and in good faith. They gave us the facts. The members of the c.ommittee listened to them with great respect and courtesy. No one doubted their veracity. As one member of the Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee, I want to assure these gentlemen that they need have no fear of retaliation. They will be accorded the full protection that ·an other citizens are accord€d by law when they come before this committee· and testify to the facts, as they have done so well in this case, 9. IF YOU CONFIRM MR. WICKARD, YOU SUPPORT

THESE EVILS

This is one of the most ~mazing nomi-.nations I have ever known during my 23 years in the Senate. In effect, it is a complete repudiation of everything two Senate committees have found. It is also a complete repudiation of the actions of the United States Senate. All the difficulties in REA are to be attrib·uted directly to the bad administration of Mr. Wickard. If he is confirmed, Senators are voting against their own recommendations and thos·e of their nonpartisan committee. Mr. Wickard should .not be confirmed as Administrator of REA.

EXHIBIT A

MISSOURI STATE RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ASSOCIATION 1

Poplar Bluff, Mo., May 30, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, '

United States Senate Office B·uilding, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: Greater problems and developments have occurred since our trip to Washington during the week of May 6. Our committee's visit to Washington during that weelt was m-ost pleasant. The splendid interest and earnest sponsorship by you was a real accomplishment, and all our people are extremely well pleased.

However, more obstacles have been thrown in our patl> that are creating more difficulty

6454 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 than before. I wish to express my appreciation for the excellent cooperation and assistance given our committee, composed of Dr. K. T .. Hutchinson; Tennessee, Mr. Earl Murley, Indiana, and Mr. Darwin Kindler, Ohio, during their trip to Washingto;n last week. I believe your inspiration has brought about a determination for our committee to proceed with all vigilance toward the end that Wickard be not confirmed by the United States Senate as Administrator of REA. If we should allow this confirmation to be made, REA would suffer the most critical about-face in its intention that it has ever realized in the past, which would spell the doom of efficiency and. far-sighted planning required in the administration of our REA program. This is my sincere conviction, not biased, or based on any thought of the future_ for myself.

It is my thought that we are dependent on your leadership, as United States Senator, in leading the fight in our battle at this time. We have complete confidence in your ability and sincere belief in this cause. The plan, as outlined and agreed to by our committee while in your counsel, meets with my entire satisfaction. We shall pursue the course accordingly. Please advise me further of any developments or of any information we should possess. If you are successful in your request for a hearing on Wickard's confirmation before the Agricultural Committee of the Senate, please advise immediately the time and place of such hearing.

Enclosed is list of the State committeemen for Committee for Independence of REA elected at our meeting in St. Louis on April 14.

Very truly yours, ANSEL I. MOORE,

Chairman.

PoLK COUNTY RURAL PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT,

Stromsburg, Nebr., June 5, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, ·Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: We are extremely disap

pointed at the appointment of Claude Wickard as Administrator of REA. We are definitely not in favor of Mr. Wickard's appointment because of the statements made by him in the testimony on the Lucas bill (S. 89). There is no question but what it will be the "end of a good beginning" if private utilities are permitted. to reach out and adversely effect REA expansion. The private utilities have always definitely operated for as much profit as possible. The REA is for rural service without profit, thereby making it available to l_ong-forgotten rural areas. Rural communities cannot afford the benefits of electricity unless it is conducted on a "nonprofit basis." If Mr. Wickard's line of thinking becomes a reality, he certainly will defeat the purpose for which REA originally was set up and has so far functioned. To endanger REA to private utilities, to say the least, is a very serious matter. Therefore, we definitely recommend the appointment of a man who stands firmly for the principles of REA; and we furthermore recommend that REA be restored to an independent status.

Very respectfully yours, M. G. LINDBURG,

President. NELLIE G. BENSON,

Vice P1·esident. GEORGE H. BOND,

Treasurer. GEORGE F. BUCHTA,

Member. MERWIN D. CARLSON,

Member. WILLIAM KOSCH,

Member.

CUMING COUNTY RURAL PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT,

West Point, Nebr., June 6, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C. DEAR Sm: The appointm~nt of Mr. Wickard

as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration was a great surprise and disappointment to our people and undoubtedly to many more throughout the Nation.

A copy of our resolution favoring independence of REA was forwarded to you under date of May 3, 1945. We now believe more than ever before in the need for REA independence and that the REA must be headed by a strong and capable leader.

Mr. Wickard's past record relative to his connection and policies with REA, as was brought out so clearly in the subcommittee's hearing, as well as his testimony on the Lucas bill (S. 89), clearly indicates that he does not even believe in the Rural Electrification Administration and its fine power districts and co-ops throughout this great Nation. These facts make Mr. Wickard, without a doubt, a very undesirable Administrator and one that would possibly put the REA and its fine program to ruination at the earliest opportunity.

We sincerely hope that our legislative bodies will see fit to reject Mr. Wickard's nomination and that an independent REA and a strong and capable leader as Administrator will soon be approved.

Yours very truly, R. CHESTER GRAFF,

Pre~ident.

BAYARD, NEBR., June 9, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, \

Senator, Washington, D. C.: Our board of directors is very much opposed

to the appointment of Mr. Wickard as REA Administrator; will appreciate all opposition to his appointment.

H. C. MaRANVILLE, Manager, Chimney Rock P·ublic Power

District.

LOUP RIVER PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT, Columbus, Nebr., June 8, 1945.

Hon. HENRIK SiiiPSTEAD, · United States Senator, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: * * * As you

may or may not know, Nebraska has a public power district law, and practically all of the rural electrification development has taken place under' this la.w rather than under the cooperative law. We have approximately 25 rural public power districts blanketing the State. They are unanimously in favor of an independent Rural Electrification Administration directly under the control of Congress

. rather than a department within one of the _large governmental bureaus. While independent under Morris L. Cook and John Carmody, the REA made its magnificent strides. Since it was placed under the Department of Agriculture it became involved in strife, conniving, bickering, and intrigue. The blight of bureaucracy dated from its. subordi-nate status. ·

It is very irriportant to note that Mr. Wickard wa& the Secretary of Agriculture during this period. Perhaps the fighting within the organization (and I think everyone in and out of the organization will admit that there has been internecine warfare) is the result of the REA being subordinate to the Department of Agriculture. However, Mr. Wickard knew of the condition and was unable to rise above it and slash through the red tape created by his own Department. I do not believe that he has demonstrated himself to

. be the right man as Administrator of the REA.

I have written to the project superintendents of the rmal public power districts

in Nebraska as to how they felt about the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator. Only one of them replied that he was in favor of Mr. Wickard, and his reason was that he thought Mr. Neal would continue to be the deputy and it is his opinion that Mr. Neal is a good man. His business relations with Mr. Neal have been favorable and, therefore, he wants Wickard as Administrator. AU of the other replies have expressed displeasure and opposition to the appointment of Mr. Wickard and hopes that the Senate will not confirm him.

There are two reasons why these superintendents hesitate to express themselves. First, they fear reprisals from the REA if Mr. Wickard actually assumes the helm. Second, they dislike to oppose President Truman, especially while he is on his "honeymoon" period. The facts remain, however, that this is the one outstanding case in which they fear Mr. Truman has resorted to politics rather than getting the best man for the job. Nevertheless, some of them are willing boldly to take the position which their conscience dictates. Following are excerpts from some of the letters:

"The appointment of Mr. Wickard startled me, considering the detrimental factual evidence against him in the congressional investigation hearings. This move, of course, is pur.ely and simply the spoils system in action and, of course, from President Truman's standpoint good politics. My personal opinion is that if REA is to be independent with Wickard as Administrator we are in a worse mess than before. Ninety-nine percent of the trouble with the Administration now is the stooges he has planted in the organization who know nothing and care less about the program. What will result if he has full control of the Administration? I feel that we have been a political football long enough. I am taking a bull in the china shop attitude in voicing my opinion to Senators WHERRY, BUTLER, etc. I am certain that you will find this opinion prevalent among the managers in Nebraska."

Another project superintendent: "It is m.y .opinion that since Mr. Wickard has been involved in the REA already as Secretary of Agriculture, and the majority wish is for 8.n independent REA because REA has become a political football, the new ' Administrator should be a man who has no political connections and who can administrate the program as it should be."

Another writes: "I was very disappointed to hear of Mr. Wickard's appointment. It is my belief that he has used the REA as a political football and is largely responsible for the chaos within the REA. If he is confirQled we w~ll be out of the frying pan into the fire. I am surprised that he would consent to acceptance of a subordinate position after being the top man in the Department of Agriculture. There is a "nigger in the wood pile" some place. There must be some scheming in mind because men do not ordinarily in the prime of their life leave the head job for a lower one.

There are others, but no need of burdening you nor the record with these.

The Nebraska Senators and Congressmen are aware that this district, the Loup River public power district, of which I am the general manager, is a part of the Nebraska Public Power System which sells electricity at wholesale . to practically all of the rural public power districts. We cooperated and aided all of them coming into existence, dating baclt with the start of the REA. We have a sliding scale rate for this, with a ·bottom of 7Y:z mills per kilowatt-hour, which most of them earn at this time. This is not as low as in the TV A or Bonneville areas,· but we on the plains of Nebraska do not have the great Tennessee and Columbia River sys-

•

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-=-SENATE 6455 tems and are just as far removed !rom coal and natural gas as you can get in the United States.

We are very much interested in the Rural Electrification Administration program and the future of rural electrification. I believe that President Truman has made the first, or at least the outstanding mistake of his entrance into the Presidency. I believe you Senators will be doing him a favor if you reject the nomination of Mr. Wickard, w:pich will require him to give a little more study to the problem.

Thank you, Senator SHIPSTEAD, for the splendid and courageous battle which you have fought on behalf of the rural electrification program. We in Nebraska have, perhaps, more of an interest in it than any place else in the United States for the reason that our Senator Norris was the father of the original bill. I am confident that if s~nator Norris were alive at this time he would be fighting alongside you in your present efforts.

Yours ver-y respectfully, HAROLD KRAMER,

Secretary-General Manager.

COLUMBUS, NEBR., June 8, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, .b. C.: Am sending you air-mail special delivery

letter of opposition to Mr. Wickard's con· firmation. Requesting you to file same with proper committee.

HAROLD KRAMER.

TE-AAMAH, NEBR., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD:

Wickard unsatisfactory. Don't fence us in. Vote "no."

E. D. BECK, REA Manager.

GoLDSBORO, N. C., June 9, 1945. Honorable HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senat e Office Building, Washington , D. C.:

Due to his record against REA, I disapprove Mr. Wickard's appointment as Rural Electrification Administrator.

. FREELY SMITH.

GoLDSBORO, N. C., June 5, 1945. Honorable HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


Due to past record of Mr. Wickard, this cooperative opposes his appointment as Rural Electrification Administrator.

W. L. JoNES, Manager, Tri-County Electrical Corp.

SPRING VALLEY STOCK FARM, Bancroft, Nebr., May 28, 1945.

Senator HuGH BuTLER, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR: The President's appointment of Claude R. Wickard as REA Admin· istrator ·came as a surprise to me, and if the Senate has not confirmfld this appointment before this letter reaches you, I am asking that you give very careful consideration before casting your vote of confirmation. ·

As president of a successful REA and a past president of the Nebraska State Association of REA Districts, I have naturally taken an active part in the development of tb.e REA and am deeply interested in the success of the REA at large.

I deem it very important that the REA be removed from the Department of Agriculture and returned to an independent agency. Thanks to you and all Senators who have worked to that end. But just as important and more so, it is necessary that the proper man be selected as Administrator.

Regardless of Wickard's qualifications, I do not believe he is .the proper man for that position. It was during his manag}'lment of REA under the Department of Agriculture that much discord, confusion, and criticism arose. With that in mind, I do not see how Wickard could have the coordination necessary for the most harmonious administration of the REA.

Yours very respectfully, R. CHESTER GRAFF.

AMANDA, OHIO, May 29, 1945. Mr. HENRIK SH!PSTEAD,


DEAR Sm: We the und-ersigned members of Farm Bureau Adult Council No.3 of Fairfield County, Ohio, as consumers of REA current, wish to express our disapproval of the appointment of Claude Wiclmrd as head of the REA.

R. C. Riegel, Amanda, Ohio; Fred J. Salt, Amanda, Ohio; Marion Rubb, Lancaster, Ohio; Wilbur Allen, Amanda, Ohio; Howard Peters, Lancaster, Ohio; Harold E. Hughes, Lancaster, Ohio; . Fred D. Bates, Lancaster, Ohio; Gene Bates, Lan· caster, Ohio; Minnie Riegel, Amanda, Ohio; Edna Peters, Lancaster, Ohio; Mildred Salt, Amanda, Ohio; Viola B. Hughes, Lancaster, Ohio; Velma Rose, Lancaster, Ohio; Lola B. Davies, Amanda, Ohio; Loretta Ruff, Amanda, Ohio; Dorothy Allen, Amanda, Ohio; Beatrice Ruhle, Lancaster, Ohio; Herbert N. Ruff, Amanda, Ohio; Norman P. Davis, Amanda, Ohio.

ATTICA, OHIO, June 10, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SH.IPSTEAD,


Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD: We appreciate your efforts to date for behalf of an independent REA. Our board of directors approve your efforts to prevent Wickard's confirmation. Have wire your Senators.

NORTH CENTRAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.,

R. J. WILLIAMS, Manager.

OHIO RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVES, INC., June 4, 1945.

Han. Senator SHIPSTEAD, United States Senate, Semate Office

Building, Washington, D. q. MY DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: The follow

ing is an excerpt taken from the minutes of a special meeting of the Ohio projects which was held at Ives Hall, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, Friday, June 1, 1945, at 10 a. m.

C. F. Hesler, president of the Statewide, presided and the followiJ)g personnel from, the Ohio projects was present: W. R. Joslin, Ohio lA Miami; George Hefferline, Ohio 31 Holmes; E. H. Dye, Ohio 94 Adams; H. E. Carter, Ohio 29 Pike; Powers Luse, Ohio 87; Carl Jenny, Ohio 50 Union; L. E. Beuhler, Ohio 55 Coshocton; C. D. Dunlap, Ohio 41 Licking; A. E. Steinbrecker, Ohio 68 Fulton;

, Walter William, Ohio 56 Logan; Thomas R. Kern, Ohio 33 Auglaize; P. L. De Bolt, Ohio 59 Morrow; A. E. Halterman, Ohio lA Miami; Darwin Kindler, Ohio 65 Fairfield; C. R. Breckenridge, Ohio 65 Fairfield; H. K. Monroe, Ohio 39 Paulding; R. J. Willfams, Ohio 60 Seneca; W. 0. Ziegler, Ohio 24 Delaware; C. L. Cogsil, Ohio 84 Carroll; E. A. Mizer, Ohio 32 Belmont; Harry McAlister, Ohio 32 Belmont; F. S. Brown, Ohio 84 Carroll; Harry Bovard, Ohio 56 Lorain; Ray H. High, Ohio 33 Auglaize; C. F. Helser, Ohio 65 Fairfield. -

Several. discussions concerning the separation of REA from Agriculture were con-

ducted by those present and the subject of the approval of Claude Wickard as administrator of REA was brought up. After considerable reporting of information, and discussions of the possibilities of approval, it was moved by Mr. Luse, and seconded by Mr. Kindler, that we take a poll of this group to determine the feeling of the group on the approval of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA.

After further discussion the chairman called for a vote and declared the motion carried.

It was moved by Mr. Joslin, and seconded by Mr. Kern, that the meeting be polled to determine the stand of the individuals and projects for or against Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA. All of the above persons voted "No" on the roll call, against the approval of Mr. Wickard. In addition, certain ones voted for their boards of directors who had previously taken action.

They were as follows: Ohio 31 Holmes, Ohio lA Miami, Ohio 56 Lorain.

It was under~tood that the result of this poll should be sent to Senators Shipstead, Taft, Burton, Elmer T'nomas, and to ·President Truman.

Your consideration of this action will be greatly appreciated.

Respectfully yours, A. E. HALTERMAN,

Secretary-Treasurer.

BRIDGEPORT, OHIO, June 4, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: OpposEd to Wickard as REA Administrator,

want REA kept independent and out of politics.

D. G. THEAKER, Director, Belmont Electric Cooperative,

St. Clairsville, Ohio.

BELMONT, OHIO, June 1, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


Please sustain the Senate's action in making REA independent; as a board member of Belmont 32 I don't want to see Mr. Claude Wickard approved as REA Administrator for many reasons. First, he is not the man for the job; second, no cooperative should be politically dominated and under Wickard it has been. His appointment of Mr. N<'lal as Acting Administrator of REA indicates favoritism on the part of Wiclmrd.

E. A. DuNFEE, Secretary.

LANCASTER, OHIO, May 31, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D . C.:

Request right to be heard by Senate Agricultural and Forestry Committee in opposition to confirmation of Wickard as REA Administrator will testify as to waste of time and money by REA personnel; use of REA personnel and funds for political purposes; lack of organization in REA under domination Secretary Wickard. Date of June 11 prefetred.

DARWIN KINDLER, Member REA Independent Committee.

CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO, May 28, 1945. Mr. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C: DEAR MR. SHIPSTEAD: As an incorporator

and organizer of South Central Rural Electric Cooperative, Lancaster, Ohio, I know what is means for farm folks to have electric service brought to them regardless of whether they happen to be located right to mean profit to the power as was naturally the case when p~ivate utilities had control.

6456 CON"GRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 REA has been doing a good job and should

be continued and encouraged, but must have a man as administrator who is sold on , the idea; Claude Wickard is not such a man as he has made definite statements to the €ffect that he would fayor returning the whole job to private utilities if they did the job which we know they would not do with only profit motive in mind. Please use every effort to prevent his appointment.

Respectfully, M. G. STEELY.

ST. CLAIRSVILLE, 0HI9, June 2, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senator Office Building: · As a member of REA I do not want Wickard

for Administrator for REA. The members of REA want a clean administration.

HAROLD WILKINSON.

FuLDA, MINN., May 27, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD. '

DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: First I wish to~ Congratulate you on your VictoriOUt. fight, for the REA. First the investigation you brought about, that showed up the coruptness that had been going on within the r.usiness ofthe REA while under the Department of Agriculture and with Claude R. Wickard at the head of that Department. It is ditficult to understand, why the President should consider Wickard for any appointment, considering his deplorable administration as Secretary of Agriculture.

I hope you will ~in your fight in preventing Claude R. Wickard from getting the appointment as administrator of -the REA.

It seems to me that Harry Slattery, would be the proper man, his ability and honesty cannot be questioned, that has been proven:

Well here is poping for more power to you. Respectfully yours,

NELS P. RADICK.

Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, Senate Office Building,

MAY 31, 1945.

· Washington, D. C. HoNoRABLE SIR: In a very short time we are

going to be · a new consumer of electricity on an REA line.

We disapprove of Mr. Claude· A. Wickard as head of the REA.

We have tried to get electricity for 10 years from a company, less than 4 miles from our farm, which charged from $5 to $10 minImum, and now it is possible for the farmers to have electricity at a minimum of $2.50 per month.

very truly yours, LUTHER SMITH .

. SOUTH BLOOMINGVILLE, OHIO.

BELLAIRE, OHIO, June 1, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office B1tilding: Members for REA independence; against

Wickard for Administrator. A. C. NIPPERT,

Director, Belmont Electric Co-op.

ST. CLAIRSVILLE, OHIO, May 29, 1945. Senator HENJUK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: Am very much surprised to learn of the

political manhandling of REA as a member I want the business run in a businesslike manner and absolutely free from polltics. Keep up the good fight. Our project has 8,100 members, and I am sure they all feel as I do.

T. A. JOHNSO~.

ST. CLAIRSVILLE, OHIO, May 29, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: As a member of the Belmont Electric Co

operative, I am very much interested in the

welfare · of REA. Please do ali you can to get REA out of political influence and made · independent. I want you to oppose Wickard's appointment.

HENRY DANIEL.

NORTH BALTIMORE, OHIO, May 28, 1495. Senator HENRIK SHIP.STEAD:

We seriously question advisability or Wickard appointment as REA Administrator'.

HANCOCK WooD E'LEC:TRIC CooP.

ST. CLAIRSVILLE, OHIO, May 26, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


· I have read your statement of May 25 concerning appointment of REA Administrator. Our project of 3,100 members wants a nonpolitical Administration and, above all, independence as a member of Board. I certainly . want the REA mess cleared up: Keep up the fight.

BELMONT ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, J. MELVIN WATSON.

LANCASTER, OHIO, May 28, 1945. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, '

United States Senator: I oppose the appointment of Claude R.

Wickard as REA Administrator. REA has brought and must continue to bring great benefits to the American farmer, give us John Carmody or a man of his type.

JOHN W. EAKIN, Director of South Central Rural .EZectric.

GRAND .FoRKS, N. DAK.: May 25, 19-15. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTE.AD,

- Unit~d States Senate, Washington, D. C.:

Wickard is undesirable as REA Adminis- : trator in the opinion of "ur cooperative for ~any obvious reasons. Please vote and work hard to defeat him decisively. This telegram has been sent to all Senators on Agriculture Committee and LANGER. If we can help further contact Freeman.

VICTOR M. EDMAN, Minkota Powe1· Cooperative.

LANCASTER, OHIO, May 26, 1945, Hon. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD:

As member of REA I Vigorously oppose confirinatioh of Wickard as REA Administrator,

BUY BELT, Member and Trustee of South Gen

. tral Rural Electric.

LANCASTER, OHIO, May 26, 1945. HBNRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, washington, D. c.:

Bitterly oppose confirmation of Wickard as REA Administrator. Give us an honest nonpolitical head · who will not wreck REA.

GEORGE RUBLE.

MILLERSBURG, OHio, May 28, 1945, Hon. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Butlding, Washington, D. C.:

We favor Senate bill 2034, Rural Electri.Acation Administration, an independent agency. We also favor the appointment of an independent administrator not heretofore connected' with the Agricultural Department, Unanimous vote of directors March 15, 1945.

LLOYD ALEXANDER, President.

LANCASTER, OHIO, May 25, t'945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, ; Washington, D. C.:

South Central Rural Electric Cooperative serving 10,000 families and approximately 50,-

000 people bitterly opposes the confirmation _of Wickard's appointment as REA Administrator. Since REA has been under Wickard 's domination ouT experience proves that Wickard's administration has · been poor. Confusion and indecision within REA has become increasingly bad. REA has been used as political football by Wickard and associates. Malfeasance and misuse of REA by Wickard is apparent. Evidently Wickard has been removed as Secretary of Agriculture because of poor administration. This cooperative wa:nts REA free from Wickard and Department · of Agriculture. It is apparent from Wickards' testimony before Agricultural and Forestry Committee of Senate on April 2, 1945, that he has sold out to private u t ilities. He testified "If private utilities will do the job of eJectrifying rural America let's fold up right now." He further said he would like to see that happen and be relieved of the responsibility. Sound administration of REA must be secured. Rural electric cooperatives all over the country will most certainly oppose that type of man for REA Ad.ministrator.

H. NEWE~L STEVENSON, President, South Central

· Rural Electric Coqperative.

NORTH BALTIMORE, OHIO, May 28, 1945. Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, · United States Senate:

Survey of Ohio co-op managers indicates general and serious doubt' as to Wickard's ability as REA Administrator why not a man of · Carmody's type and qualifications.

R. P. LUSE, President, Ohio Electric

9oopera.tives Managers Association.

CoRVALLIS,. OREG., June 10, 1945. Han. !IENRICK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senator; United States Senate,

Washington, D. C.: · The following resolution adopted · by our board of directors this date:

''Be it resolved; That it is the will of this cooperative that the Rural Electrification Administration be divorced from the Agricultural Department and all other departments of Government and set up as an independent agency; and be it further

"Resolved, That it is the will and wish of this cooperative that Mr. Wickard be rejected as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration, and that a man be named to said Administration on his merits as an Administrator, and that all political considerations be rejected by the Senate as an element of consideration in said appointment.

"I move the adoption of this resolution. "Said resolution adopted by the board of

directors of the Benton Lincoln Electric Cooperative, Inc., this 9th day of June 1945.

"Attest:

"GEORGE W. HENDRIX, "Chairman.

"GEORGE· C. WINTERS, "Secretary."

May we solicit your support. GEORGE W. HENDRIX,

President, Project Oregon 4, Lincoln.

ROSEBURG, OREG., May 28 1945. Han. Senator HENRICK SHIPSTEAD:

Feel advancement of REA in future depends on unity within the organization. Strongly urge disapproval of appointment on Wickard or Neal.

DoUGLAS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, IN0.1

GEORGE CORDRAY, Manager.

•

1945 CONGRE-SSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6457 FAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.,

Winnsboro, S. C., June 5, 1945. PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,

Washington, D. C. Hon. BURNET R. MAYBANK,

United States Senator, Washington, D. C.

Han. OLIN D. JoHNSTON, United States Senator,

Washington, D. C. Hon. J. P. RICHARDS,

United States Congressman, washington, D. a.:

Attached is a copy of telegram sent to Hon. ELMER THOMAS, chairman of the Agricultural Committee, regarding Mr. Wickard's appoint-. ment as Administrator of REA for the next 10 years. I feel that you are familiar with the fact that Mr. Wickard is very much in favor of the power companies finishing the job that we have started out to do after they ' would not do it themselves. We certainly thank you most kindly for your cooperation with us in using your influence to keep Mr: Wickard from being appointed as Administrator of REA.

Yours very truly, GEORGE R. PARK, President.

BLACK RIVER ELECTRIC CoOPERATIVE, INC.,

Sumter, S. C., June 5, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPsTEAD: Below are copies

of telegrams we have sent to the White House and· to Senator ELMER THOMAS urging ·:Mr. Wickard's appointment as ·REA Administrator be rescinded and disapproved: "President HARRY S. TRUMAN,

"The White House, Washington, D. C.: "We feel that the appointment of Mr.

Wickard as REA Administrator is contrary to the best interests of the program . and respectfully urge that you withdraw his appointment. "Han. ELMER THOMAS,

."Senat~ Office Bui.lding, ·"Washington, D . C.:

"In view Mr. Wickard's recoi:d, we urge disapproval of appointment as REA Administrator. Feel that on basis of record he does n_ot have interest of REA program at heart."

We feel that in view of Mr. Wickard's record as brought out at the hearings in the REA investigation proves him to be unqualified for the Administratorship, and does not have the interest of REA at heart.

Any effort you may exert toward .preventing Mr. Wickard's approval will, we believe, be to the best interest of the REA program and the existing cooperatives.

Yours very truly, P. ·M. BRowN, President.

JACKSONVILLE, FLA., June 14, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: Florida REA superintendents went on rec

ord today at their quarterly conference opposing appointment of Wickard as Administrator of Rural Electrification. We urge quick settlement this issue in a just and fair manner. We only ask for a capable Administration.

FLORIDA STATE REA SUPERINTENDENTS,_ ERNEST G. SMITH, Secretary.

PARIS, ILL., June 12, 1945.: Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD.'

We, the directors of the Edgar Electric Cooperative, Paris, lll., oppose the appointment of Claude Wickard for REA Administrator.

CLAYTON PERISHO, Pre.sident.

XCI--407

STEELEVILLE, ILL., June 8, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,


The board of directors are on record opposing the appointment of Claude Wickard as REA Administrator because of his past record.

EGYPTIAN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE AsSOCIATION.

HARRISBURG, ILL., May 31, 1945. Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

· United States Senate, Washington, D. C.:

This cooperative, serving over 4,000 members, is flatly opposed to confirmation of Claude R . Wickard as Administrator of REA. We would appreciate your efforts against this appointment before the Agriculture Committee as well as in the Senate.

. SOUTHEASTERN ILLINOIS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,

A. F. LENTZ, Manager.

DoNGOLA, ILL., May 31, 1945. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

. Senate Agricultural Committee, Washington, D. C.:

In behalf Rural Electrification beg rejection Wickard as Administrator REA. Individual unsympathetic with program as shown -in hearing Lucas b1ll, S. 89. · SOUTHERN ILLINOIS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE.

. WAYNE-WHITE COUNTIES ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,

Fairfield, Ill., May 25, 1945. Hon. HENRII-t. SHIPSTEAD,


DEAR SIR: This will acknowledge receipt of the letter which you have directed to president, board of directors, managers, and members of REA systems as of May 15, 1945, wherein you have advised with regard to Senate action in approving REA as and to be an independent agency.

We have noticed a serious blunder has again been made by our esteemed President of the United States since you have directed your letter to us of May 15.

It is indeed most regretful that President Truman should have taken the action he has in appointing Mr. Wickard Administrator of Rural Electrification.

We out here in the field who have the direct responsibility of causing these cooperatives to follow a successful and prosperous path cannot for the life of us understand why we, the people, have not been able to make it clear to our Presidents that we most desire- and need a good, clean, strong, honest man to head what we feel is one o:t: the finest Government agencies in existence

· today. We admire the splendid work and the tre

mendous effort you and your colleagues have put forth in our endeavor. Worchl cannot express our sincere appreciation for the splendid fight you have put up for us and for our cause.

In v~ew of the complete failure which Mr. Wickard has made in administering Rural Electrification for the past 4 or 5 years, and

· in view of the type of men he has selected for REA, we cannot help but feel that some of our enemies in Congress and other places are endeavoring to completely ruin this wonderful program.

While we dislike very much to have to lean so heavily on someone's shoulder, still we have no alternative than to respectfully ahd urgently request you to roll up your sleeves still further and to spit on your hands some more and take a new hold on the REA matter and endeavor to cause President Truman's selection of REA Administrator to fall by tbe wayside the ~arne as Mr. Williams did . .

It is our opinion we need a man at the head of Rural Electrification who we are certain

will have the COJ;llplete confidence of our United States Senators and Congress, the President of the United States, and the more than 800 REA -cooperatives who are going to rely more and more on good administration. This man should not be hand-tied in any way. · He should not be politically obligated to any individual, group, or faction. He should have a clear conscience and should be able to administer R~ in a way which he thinks is for the best benefits of the American farmers and to help and assist all cooperatives in the big undertaking they have amigated themselves to.

It is most discouraging to us, who have the responsibility of working out our problems, when our President is persuaded to select such men as they have to administer such an important agency.

Without doubt, I am expressing your sentiments in this letter. However, we want you to know how we think and believe about this matter and we are certain the committee for independent REA will again get into motion at an early date and endeavor t'o prevent Mr. Wickard f:rom being approved by either or both the Senate and the House, and speaking for our 4,200 members and for the 9,000 prospective members, who will be served by this cooperative as rapidly as reconversion will permit, making a total of 12,000 or 13,000 members in the area this cooperative serves, we will support you and the committee for independent REA and others in our endeavor to have the right man installed as our Administrator.

No doubt you have already taken action to head this thing off. However, anything that we can do to help will be done. ·· We will write a letter to our Senators and Congressmen of this State requesting them to vote against confirming confirmation of Mr. Wickard's appointment.

Yours very truly, F. A. TANNAHILL, Manager.

P . S. ; We are enclosing a copy of a letter similar to the letters we have written to all our Senators and Representatives.

WAYNE-WHITE COUNTIES ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,

Fairfield, Ill., May 25, 1945. Hon. C. W. BRooKS,


DEAR MR. BRooKS: This is to .advi.se we have just learned of President Truman's action in selecting Mr. Wickard, former Secretary of

. Agriculture, to be Administrator of REA. You are, of course, very familiar with the

whole REA matter and we are, therefore, not attempting to rehash or review any of the past regarding same.

In view of the President's late action a new problem has been created and we are again forced to request your support in the matter.

We ·who have the direct responsibility of causing our cooperative to pay out and to be successful, so that we can assure you men who have so kindly approved appropriations so that we can extend service to your constituents in this area, feel that our opinion should be given consideration even by the President of the United States, and we regret more than words can say that the President has taken such unexpected steps as to select and appoint Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA. We do not understand nor can. we ~ee through why such a step was takelil by the President. · .

It certainly must have been apparent to the President of the complete failure Mr. Wickard has made of Rural Electrification in the more than 4 years that he had charge of that Department, and why the President insists on cramming Mr. Wickard down our throat is beyond us.

In view of this, we respectfully and strongly urge your support in vetomg the President's

6458 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE '21 action, as we · definitely do not · want Mr. Wickard to head REA.

Rural electrification is only in its infancy. For example, this cooperative serves an area Which extends into 10 'counties, but we serve all of Wayne, White, Edwards, and Hamilton Counties. In 1941 we completed the "D" section or the fourth section, which allowed this cooperative to put in operation approximately 1,000 miles of line. Today we have 1,018 miles of line in operation, and we are serving 4,200 members. Our future program when we have ecompleted all extensions will involve more than 3,000 miles of line, and we will be serving in the neighborhood of 12,000 members. From this you can readily see that we anticipate considerable growth and that we are about one-third expanded. From this you can readily see that Congress is going to be requested to support appropriations for REA expansion programs for several years to come, and we think we should have a man at the head of REA who has the respect and the confidence of our Senators and our Congressmen, and you are not to be criticized in any way for insisting that you have a man of confidence heading so important an agency as REA is today and as REA will be in the future, and to know that this man's whole interest is to accomplish the thing which you are vitally interested in and that is to extend rural electric service t.o your constituents in the State of Illinois.

As indicated, we regret very much to have to bother you with this matter, but we thinlt that so long as the pot is boiling we should not take it off the fire until it is ready. In other words, we think that so long as there is not an · Administrator approved as yet, that we should not accept any Tom, Dick, or Harry, but that we should select the man who can best admi~ister our affair.s and install him so that as the program gains momentum in the postwar era we ·will all have confidence that we are receiving the best administration possible.

It is the sentiment of the board of trustees of this cooperative that our Senators and Congressmen insist that the right man be installed ·to administer REA, and we therefore respectfully request Mr. Wickard's appointment be vetoed, and, if necessary, the Senate and Congress select the proper man for the job.

You are in a much better position to select the proper man, and we are going to rely on you to do this for us. Therefore, will you kindly give this matter your serious consideration when the bill comes before the Senate. Your past cooperation and interest in our program has been greatly appreciated by this Board of Trustees, and your efforts will not go unnoticed. We thank you in advance for anything and everything that you can do for our cause.

Yours very truly, F. A. TANNAHILL,

Manager. P. s:: We wish to add that we are not

thinking in terms of politics in any way, shape, form, or fashion in requesting your support. In other words, we are very indifferent as to the politics of the man who is selected as Administrator of REA. We are, however, vitally interested in the man's qualifications. We thought it well to bring this point out because we do not think rural electrification can at any time-ever stand to be accused of being a political proposition.

JUNE 9, 1945. RUSSELL J. RINEHART,

Indiana Statewide Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc., Indianapolis, Ind.:

Steuben County directors feel a new man should be appointed outside of present controversy that has existed in REA. Too much opposition against Wickard for things to run smoothly.

RALPH A. BAK~R.

- ROCHESTER, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD:

The REMC opposes confirmatJlon of Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA Believe him incompetent. Think him re~ leased as Secretary of Agriculture for poor administration. This REMC represents 1,930 farmers and families. Wish REA independent agency, free from politics. Your'. assistance appreciated.

FULTON COUNTY REMC, lDIANAN 29, FULTON R. MURRAY,

Superintendent for Board of Directors.

MAY 26, 1945. Senator HoMER E. CAPEHART,

Washington, D. C.: Steuben County REMC board members

feel that Claude R. Wickard is not the man for REA Administrator considering the fact that he has been the main figure in REA st rife. Strongly recommend well-qualified man outside of present REA set-up.

DANIEL C. 0URY, President, Steuben County REMC.

MAY 26, 1945. Senator WILLIS,

Washington, D. C.: . Steuben County REMC board members

feel that Claude R. Wickard is not the man for REA Administrator considering fact that he has been the main figure in REA strife. Strongly recommend well-qualified man outside of present REA set-up.


JUNE 5, 1945. Han. ELMER THOMAS,


The following telegram was sent to Senator WILLIS and Senator CAPEHART on May 2~, 1945:

"Steuben County REMC board members feel that Claude R. Wickard is not the man for REA Administrator, considering fact that he has been the main figure in REA strife. Strongly recommend well-qualified man outside of present REA set-up."


JUNE 5, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C.: The following telegram was sent to Sen

ator WILLIS and Senator CAPEHART on May 26, 1945:

"Steuben County REMC board members feel that Claude R. Wickard is not the man for REA Administrator, considering fact that he has been the main figure in REA strife. Strongly recommend well-qualified man outside of present REA set-up."

DANIEL C. 0URY, President, Steuben county REMC.

ANGOLA, IND., Jttne 5, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,


The following telegram was sent to Senator WILLIS and Senator CAPEHART on May 26, 1945: •

"Steuben County REMC board members feel that Claude R. Wickard is not the man for REA Adtninistr,ator, considering fact that he has been the main figure in REA strife. Strongly recommend well-qualified man outside of present REA set-up."


VINCENNES, IND., May 28, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, · Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: On behalf 01 the representatives of the National Committee for the Independence of REA, permit

us to take this opportunity of expressing our appreciation for the splendid cooperation and assistance you have given us to date, especially your recent opposition to the confirmation of Secretary Wickard as the proposed Administrator of REA.

As the letters in your file disclose, and amply supplemented by advice from REA systems in practically all parts of the United States, the main reason this committee was established was to get out from under the domination of the Department of Agriculture, and particularly Mr. Wickard. After canvassing the situation fully, we would like to request that you ask the chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and F'orestry to give representative members of REA systems an opportunity to be heard and express their views in opposition to the nomination of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA.

In view of the fact that our systems are located in 46 States of the Union, some of them as remote as 3,000 miles or more from this city, we would request that you obtain as much time as possible so that these members of REA systems may have an opportunity to come to Washington _to testify.

We would appreciate your early views hereon.

Yours sincerely, EARL MURLEY,

Vice President, National Association, Committee for Independence of REA.

LAGRANGE, IND., May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D. C.: We wish to inform you the Lagrange Coun

ty Indiana REMC is opposed to the appointment of Claude Wickard as Administrator of REA. We have so informed our two Sena. tors from Indiana.

LESTER WEIR, President of Board.

OAKTOWN, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HOMER CAPEHART,


As director of Knox County REMC, serving 10,500 rural residents, I oppose Wickard's nomination as administrator of REA. Made hopeless botch as SeCl:etary of Agriculture.

. WILBUR ASHLEY.

VINCENNES, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HoMER CAPEHART,


As director of Knox County REMC, serving 10,500 rural residents, I oppose nomination of Wickard because he used REA as a political football while Secretary of Agriculture.

VERNIE McNEAL.

WHEATLAND, IND., May 26, 1945 .. Senator HoMER CAPEHART, .

Senate Office .Building, washington, D. c.:

As director of Knox County REMC, serving 10,500 rural residents, I oppose Wickard's nomination as administrator. Want REA free of political domination.

A. BERT CLARK.

RUSHVILLE, IND., May 26, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senator, Washington, D. C.:

Just Wired Senators CAPEHART and WILLIS as follows:

"This corporation's 1,700 members urge you oppose confirmation Claude R. Wickard for REA administrator .as unqualified and type that would use rural electrification in poli· tics. We want REA independent."

RUS:fi COUNTY REMC.,

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6459 VINCENNES, IND., May 26, 1945.

Senator HOMER CAPEHART, Senate Office Building,

Washington, D. C.: As director of Knox County REMC, serving

10,500 rural residents, I oppose Wickard's nomination as Administrator. His confirmation would prolong present existing political muddle of REA.

RILEY OSBORNE.

FKANCISCO, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HOMER CAPEHART,

Senqte Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

As director of Knox County REMC, serving 10,500 rural residents, I oppose Wickard's nomination. Believe him to be incompetent. Want R.EA free of political domination.

Mrs. Ross MCELLHINEY, Treasurer, Board of Directors.

JASPER, IND., May 26, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


We are opposed to Wicltard as REA Administrator. B.~lieve present condition of REA due to his political manipulations. Urge that you use your vote and infiuence to prevent his confirmation.

L. B. WHITE, Superintendent, DuBois Rural Electric

Cooperative, Inc.

PosEYVILLE, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HOMER CAPEHART,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D . C.:

As director of Knox County REMC, serving . 10,500 rural residents, I oppose confirmation of nomination of Wickard. His unfitness for job proven by political mess made of REA during his regime as Secretary of Agriculture.

WILLIAM F. BAUTZ.

PATOKA, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator .HOMER CAPEHART,


As director of Knox County REMC serving 10,500 -residents I oppose confirmation of Wickara's nomination as Administrator. Incompetency proven by present political and economic muddle of REA.

. LAWRENCE CARITHERS.

PETERSBURG, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HOMER CAPEHART,

Senat e Office Building, Washington, D . C.:

As dir~ctor of Knox County REMC serving 10,500 residents, I oppose confirmation of Wickard's nomination as Administrator. Want REA an independel}t agency free of political influence. · ·

Lours L. LAMB, Vice President Board of Direc-tors.

BICKNELL, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HoMER CAPEHART,


As director of Knox County REMC serving 10,500 rural residents, I oppose nomination of Wickard. Believe he favors private utilities.

MRS. CHARLES E. WAMPLER, Secretary.

JASPER, IND., May 26, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


we· are opposed to Wickard as REA Administrator. Believe present condition of REA due to his political manipulations. Urge that you use your vote and infiuence to prevent his confirmation.

PETER L. FRIEDMAN, Presid!Jnt ·Dubois Rural Electric Co- ·

operati ve, Inc.

BICKNELL, IND., May 26, 1945, Senator HOMER CAPEHART,


As director of Knox County REMC, serving 10,500 rural residents, I oppose Wickard's nomination as Administrator because he played politics with REA as Secretary of Agriculture.

ERNEST B. MILLER, Pr esident, Board of Directors.

OWENSVILLE, IND., May 26, 1945. Senator HOMER CAPEHART,


As director of KRox County REMC, serving" 10,500 residents I oppose confirmation of Wickard's nomination as Administrator. Unfit for job. Believe he favors private utilities.

LUTHER ARMSTRONG . .

STATEMENT OF JOHN H. HENDRICKS, PRESIDENT, EASTERN IOWA LIGHT & POWER COOPERATIVE, DAVENPORT, IOWA (He also has a farm at West Liberty, Iowa,

established with this REA cooperative since its establishment in 1935. This system is the ninth REA cooperative established in the United States. It has approximately 5,4.00 members and has 2,200 miles of line at the present time.)

I am opposed to the confirmation of the former Secretary of Agriculture, Mr. Claud3 R. Wickard, to be Administrator of REA. I have had an opportunity to observe the opera tion of REA when it was an independent agency of the National Government. I have also · had a fine opportunity to examine the function of REA since it has been under Mr. Wickard in the Department of Agriculture.

We farm people are simple and direct. We do not waste too many words or make long speeches. I could fill up a volume on why Mr. Wickard should not be Administrator of REA. I merely want to tell a few of the main reasons:

(1) Mr. Wickard lacks our confidence. We judge individuals by their past record. Cooperatives are built upon confidence. Under oath, Mr. Wickard testified he would be willing to turn over the REA cooperatives to the utilities if they could do a good job. We know how the private utilities have operated in the past. This is a statement that no man would make if he had any knowledge of their practices. The utilities never showed any type of concessions that was favorable to the farm areas until af~er the REA got started.

On our own system, under Administrator John M. Carmody, we know what the private utilities do. They built · spike lines and attempted to destroy our system and cut up our good territory.

If we had had a man of Mr. Wickard's point of view, our cooperatives and most of the others would not be alive today, according to my judgment.

It took the cooperatives to furnish service to all at a rate the farmer could afford to pay. Thus, in my own case, the private utilities wanted $1,000 to serve me. Contrast that with the rate on our system where a member pays out no cash and the minimum monthly bill is only $3.

This statement of Mr. Wickard's is a giveaway. We cannot rely u pon a man with that point of view for Administrator. He is too weak.

(2) We have no confidence in ·Mr. Wickard's appointments. He has selected as the Acting Administrator today, Mr. William J. Neal. As the testimony discloses, he was president of the poorest managed cooperative in the United States. His manager got away with $15,000 in caEh. The cooperative owes the REA $38,000 on its line, and in opera-

-tions it is $180,000 in the red. This · is the man whom Mr. Wickard said- was a good

choice. We can have no confidence in appointments like this and those of a similar nature which will no doubt continue under Mr. Wfckard.

(3) RE-a got action under Carmody. In contrast to this-loose, inefficient, joint operation of REA under Mr. Wickard, I recall the results and action we got when REA was an independent agency. The Administrator, Mr. Carmody, could say "yes" and "no," and he meant it.

These are the specific ,reasons why we feel that the past record of Mr. Wickard indicates he is not qualified to be Administrator of REA.

Respectfully submitted. JOHN H. HENDRICKS.

GARNER, IowA, June 8, 1945. Honorable HENRIK 8HIPSTEAD,

· Washi ngton, D. C.: Claude R. Wickard appointment not satis

fact ory to vast majority of REA borrowers. we. want a man of proven abilit y and one who believes in cooperative electricity. Utilities will not serve farms without competition. Confirmation of Wickard would be contradiction of Senate passage of Lucas bill with Shipstead-Aiken-Wheeler amendment for independence. Use this wire in any way to prevent confirmation.

M. c . JAMES, President, Hancock County REA.

POCAHONTAS COUNTY RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE,

Pocahontas, Iowa, June 7, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,


DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: The following is a copy of the telegram sent today to the Honorable ELMER THOMAS, chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, relative to the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration:

"Hearing to consider the appointment of Wickard as REA Administrator is set for June 11. The board of directors of this Cooperative serving 2,300 farmers wish to go on record as opposing the appointment. It is felt that Mr. Wickard's statements and record do not indicate that he would be sincere and capable."

You may use this telegram in any way you wish to oppose the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator. We appreciat e the good work which you are doing.

Yours truly, R. R. CEJKA,

President.

'THOMPSON, IOWA, June 8, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate: We are not in favor of Wickard. His back

ground is not satisfactory-WP. are in favor of Gillette.

WINNEBAGO REA, ELMER 0. BEGLAND.

SIBLEY, IOWA, June 8, , 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: We oppose the Wickard appointment as

Administrator of REA. REA inefficiently handled under Secretary of Agriculture. We favor the- Shipstead-Aiken-Wheeler bill for independence of REA, with able Administrator tree of politics.

OscEOLA ELECTR~c CooPERATIVE, INc.

PoCAHONTAS, IowA, Ju ne 7, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate Office Build.ing, Washington, D . C.:

The boerd of directors of Central Electric Federat-ed Cooperative of Pocahontas, Iowa,

6460 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 unanimously adopted the following resolution at their regular meeting June 6, 1945: R esolved, That this cooperative, serving 8,000 farmers in eight Iowa counties, vigorously protest the appointment of Wickard as REA Administrator and we recommend that the United States Senate refuse · to confirm the appointment, and that we recommend the appointment and confirmation of an administrator who has a record of sincerity and ability.

CENTRAL ELECTRIC FEDERATED COOPERATIVE.

HUMBOLDT, IOWA, May 28, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

W ashington, D. C.: In executive session our board of directors

unanimously and vigorously opposes confirming Wickard as REA Administrator be-· cause of past record of incompetence and bungling in REA affairs. Now that REA is on the way to becoming independent, we hope that it will not be used as a political football. We would heartily endorse the appointment of Guy Gillette as Administ rator.

HUMBOLDT COUNTY RURAL ELECTRIC CORP,

H. F. KRAMER, President,

GREENFIELD, IowA, May 29, 1945. Sen a tor HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Washington, D . C.: We feel that it would be very detrimental

to the prosperity and development of rural electrification to have Claude Wickard apppinted as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration and we request that you oppose his appointment as such a.nd support the appointment of Guy Gil-lette for that office. ·

FARMERS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, !NC., ALBERT RAY, President.

MARION, IowA, May 29, 1945. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: After reviewing Senate investigation REA

and Secretary Wickard's statement during hearing Lucas bill, S. 89, April 2, 1945, can Congress conscientiously approve his appointment as REA Administrator. This cooperative thinks differently. Letter from board following.

LINN COUNTY RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION,

. R. D. PALMER, Manager:

GLIDDEN, IOWA, June 6, 1945. Ron. RENRIK SHIPSTEAD:

We respectfully urge you to oppose the confirmation of Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of the REA, account of his previous attitude toward the REA.

GLIDDEN RURAL ELECTR C COOPERATIVE, W. H. REEVER, President.

ESTHERVILLE, IOWA, May 25, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD.

DEAR Sm: I wish to thank you for your fight on REA and for the victory you obtained tn getting it taken away from the Department of Agriculture. Personally I don't like the President's appointment of Wickard as Administrator. He proved to be a flop as Secretary of Agriculture and I believe he also appointed Neal as Deputy Administrator of REA. While we are changing why not get someone of proven ability. Again I wiSh to thank you for your efforts.

Very truly yours, MAX M. SOETH.

STORM LAKE, IOWA, May 29, 1945, Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building: We favor independence of REA and passage

of the Lucas bill. We oppose giving the Ad•

minlstratorship to Wickard or anyone else as · a political reward.

BUENA VISTA COUNTY RURAL ELEC• TRIC COOPERATIVE,

0. J. GRAU, President.

CRESCO, IOWA, May 28, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Uni ted States Senate, Washington , D. C.: We disapprove the appointment of Wickard

as REA Administrator very strongly. Would appreciate your h andling the matter accordingly.

C. E. CHRISTENSEN, Hawkeye Tri Count y Electric Cooperati ve.

SIOUX FALLS, S.DAK., May 20, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Agricultural Commi ttee, Washington, D. C.:

The Lyon Rural Electric Cooperative, of Rock Rapids, Iowa, is opposed to the appointment and confirmation of Claude Wickard as REA Administrator.

EMIEL ScHUTTLOFFEL, PTesident.

PLEASANT, IOWA, May 28, 1945, Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

• Senate Office Buildi ng: This REA cooperative serving 1,125 farms

with a large expansion program ahead feels that the selection of Claude Wickard as Administrator was most unfortunate. -

PARKE F. CORNICK, Southeast Iowa Cooperative ElectTic

Association.

. HAMPTON, IOWA, May 28, 1945, HENRIK. SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Agricultural Committee: Please be advised that our cooperative,

Iowa 30 Franklin, of 1,700 members, is 100 percent against the appointment of Claude Wickard as REA Administrator.

A. G. RUST, Presi dent.

STANTON, IOWA., May 28, 1945. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Agricultural Committee: . This ·is to inform you that the board and

personnel representing 700 rural members of · the Nyman Electric Cooperative in Iowa strongly oppose the appoinment of Mr. Wickard and are unanimously for Mr. Gillette .

L. c. PETmtSON, President, Nyman Electric Cooperative.

MARION, IOWA, May 28, 1945. Ron. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate AgTicuztuml Committee, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR: We, the undersigned directors of the Linn County Rural Electric Cooperative Association, earnestly request that you pppose the nomination of Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration because we believe he is not impartial. This is borne out by his own statement during a hearing on the Lucas bill, S. 89, conducted by the Senate Agricultural Subcommittee on April 2, 1945. As set out on page 14 of said hearing, he said:

"If the private utilities will do the job of electrifying rural America, let them do it. That is what I would like to see. I f they will go in and take the whole area and give everybody electricity at a reasonable cost, let's help them in every way we can to do it, because that relieves us of the responsibility of doing it and of advancing those funds."

The present unsatisfactory status o! the Rural Electrification Administration has developed while under the Agricultural Department which he has headed for the last 4 years. This appointment, according to the

REA Act, 1s not to be made on the basis or- political activit y.

Yours truly, H. A. W. KocH. J. C. FUHRMEISTER. L. L. R '\. NDAU. WALLACE K. ROGERS. A. D. BRENNAMAN.

GARNER, IOWA, May 26, ~945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate: Appointment of Wickard Administrator

cancels co-ops desires in obtaining independent agency.

M. c . JAMES, President, Han cock Count y REA Co_-op.

BUTLER RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE AsSOCIATION, INC.,

El Dorado, Kans ., June 7, 1945. Hon. ELMER THOMAS,

Senate Office Building, • Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: As president of the Butler Rural Elect ric Cooperative Association, I am opopposed to the confi.l'm~tion of Mr. Claude R. Wickard as Superintendent of the REA, as from his testimony in hearings had and held it appears that he is opposed to continuous and progressive activity of the REA and appears favorable to the utilities. I think it would be a great mistake to deliver over the REA and its future to those unfavorable to its progress and success.

· Yours very truly, A. H. GISH, President.

HoPKINSVILLE, KY., June 7, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Se.nate Office Bui'lding, Washington, D . C.:

Our association is on record and is convinced that an independent Rural ElectrifiGation Administration, responsible only to the President and Congress, can best carry out the original intention of the Rural Electrification Act. Because of past controversies and remarks made before subcommittee of Agriculture and Forestry, pursuant to s. 89, April 2, 1945, we definitely oppose the approval of the Honorable Claude Wickard as Administrator of REA.

PENNYRILE RURAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE CORPORATiON,

E. LACY, PresiderN;,

HOMER, LA., June 8, 1945. Hon. HARRY S. TRUMAN,

President of the United States, White House, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. TRUMAN: As a member Of an REA electric cooperative in Louisiana receiving service on its lines for the past several years, I am vitally interested in the welfare of these REA cooperatives and eagerly desire to see electricity made available to all farmers who do not have it.

There has recently come to my attention the appointment of the Honorable Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of Rural Electrification Administration. I have noted with regret the general confusion and dissention arising both within and without the ranks of REA which apparently began with the transfer of REA to the Department of Agri~ culture of which Department Mr. Wickard is Secretary. There is little doubt in my mind but that this dissention may become even greater and more dangerous to the future of REA if Mr. Wickard is confirmed as Administrator of that organization. For this reason, if it is possible, I would be most grateful if the appointment of Mr. Wickard could be retracted and some other person appointed Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administ·ration who has not been included in or connected with so much

•

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SEN·ATE 6461 trouble and confusion as that mentioned above and some'one who bas the welfare of REA at heart and the sincere desire to see the complete and unhampered expansion of its program.

Your kind consideration to the above matter will be greatly appreciated.

With my very best personal wishes to you, I am,

Respectfully yours, Rev. A. E. BROWN,

Chai1·man, Louisiana Primitive Baptist Association.

KINGMAN, MAINE, June 6, 1945, Han. ELMER THOMAS,

Senate O.ffice Building, Washington, D. C.:

Please advise your committee that we are opposed to the confirmation of Claude R. Wickard as REA Administrator. We consider his policies in the past have been detrimental to the best interests of REA.

KINGMAN ELECTRIC Co., PALMER A. GRIFFIN,

President.

CLAIBORNE ELECTRIC CooPERATIVE, INc., Homer, La., June 6, 1945.

President HARRY TRUMAN, White House, Washington, D. C.

DEAR PRESIDENT TRUMAN: The president of our cooperative called a special meeting of the board of directors to discuss the question concerning the appointment of the Honorable Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA. The board . realizes that harmony has not existed within and without REA since it was established under the Department of Agriculture.

We.. believe that your appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA was in good faith. However, after all of the controversy that has existed before and since the Senate investigating committee investigated REA and from the testimony that is in the record it appears that if Mr. Wickard is confirmed as Administrator of REA there may be very little harmony.

Our cooperative would like to see· harmony again exist in REA as it did when Mr: John M. Carmody was Administrator. We feel that under such an administration we could completely do the job that Congress intended for us to do when they passed the REA Act.

we realize that you are very busy ana are burdened with many problems of our Nation, however, we would greatly appreciate your giving our wishes some consideration · if possible.

With kindest regards and best wishes to you and yours, we are,

Sincerely yours, THOMAS E. STEVENSON,

System Manager.

CLAIBORNE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., Homer, La., June 6, 1945.

Hon. ELMER THOMAS, United States Senator,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR THoMAs: In view of the con

siderable dissension that exists within the cooperatives by the appointment of Secretary Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA. The President of this cooperative called a special meeting of the Board of directors, to discuss the question and it was unanimously decided that in view of the dissension that exists within and without REA, that the Honorable Claude Wickard should not be confirmed as Administrator for REA. The board realizes that harmony has not existed since REA was established under the Department of Agriculture and they feel that Mr. Wickard himself is greatly responsible for this, inasmuch as the Senate investigating committee of REA securecl testimopy that the

Administrator of REA was bypassed by Mr. Wickard in carrying out policy.

Our cooperatives feel that the President should appoint someone for Administrator of REA that has not been involved in all of the controversy that has been going on for some time and still exists within and without REA. Our board of directors feel that if REA could have an Administrator of the John M. Carmody type within a few days harmony would again exist.

I can assure you that our cooperative will appreciate anything that you may be in a position to do that will contribute to the improvement of relations with all of those that are concerned.

With kindest regards and best wishes, I am,

Sincerely yours, THOS. E. STEVENSON,

System Manager.

CLAIBORNE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., Hom~r, La., June 6, 1945.

Hon. ALLEN J. ELLENDER, United States Senator,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR ELLENDER: In VieW of the

considerable dissension that exists within the cooperatives by the appointment of Secretary Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA. The president of this cooperative called a special meeting of the board of directors to disC~$S the question and it was unanimously decided that in view of the dissension that exists within and without REA that the Honorable Claude Wickard should not be confirmed as Administrator for REA. The board realizes that harmony has not existed since REA was established under the Department of Agriculture and they feel that Mr. Wickard himself is greatly responsible for this, inasmuch as the Senate Investigating Committee of RE.( secured testimony that the Administrator of REA was bypassed by Mr. Wickard in carrying out policy.

Our cooperative feels that the President should appoint someone for Administrator of REA that has not been involved in all of the

• controversy that has been going on for some time and still exists within and without REA. Our-board of directors feels that if REA could have an Administrator of the John M. Carmody type within a few days harmony would again exist.

I can assure you that our cooperative· will appreciate anything that you may be in a position to do that will contribute to the improvement of relations with all of those that are concerned.


System Manager.

HoMER, LA., June 6, 1945. Han. ToM CoNNALLY,

_United States Senato1·, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR CoNNALLY: I am a member of a rural electric cooperative and realize the great benefits that the rural people receive from REA electricity. I am interested in the further advancement of these REA lines into the rural areas that will eventually serve all of our people.

I am aware that for some time there has been considerable dissension within and within and without REA and the evidence that has been submitted to the Senate investigating committee, investigating REA, clearly indicates that .Secretary Wickard of the Department of Agriculture bypassed the Administrator of REA and, it is quite evident that he is responsible for a large portion of this dissension.

Our President has appointed him as Administrator of REA. 1 believe he did this in good faith, however, I feel that Secretacy :Wickard sl_l.oulcl n.ot be confirmed for this

position as it appears that harmony would not exist under his administration.

I and others feel that the President should appoint someone as Administrator of REA that has not been involved in this controversy that has existed within and without REA for a period of time.

With kindest regards and best wishes to you, I am,

·sincerely yours, A. E. BROWN,

Chairman, Louisiana P1·imitive Baptist Association.

P. S.-I feel sure you remember me, as the Texas boy minister back iii 1911, Lamar and Fannin Counties, and chairman of Red River Association, 1914 to 1915, and always your supporter, ·

HOMER, LA., June 6, 1945. Hon. SAM RAYBURN,

Speaker of the House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN RAYBURN: I am a mem• ber of a rural electric cooperative and realize the great- benefits that the rural people receive from REA electricity. I am interested in the further advancement of these REA lines into the rural areas that will ev.entually . serve all of the people.

I am aware that for some time there has been considerable dissension within and Without REA and the evidence that has been submitted to the Sena.te investigating committee investigating REA clearly indicates that Secretary Wickard of the Agriculture Department bypassed the Administrator of nEA, and it is quite evident that lie is responsible for a large portion of this dissension.

Our President has appointed him as Administrator of REA. I believe he did this in good faith; however, I feel that Secretary Wickard should not be confirmed for thiS position as it appears that harmony would not exist under his administration.

-I and others feel that the President should appoint someone as Administrator of REA that has not been involved in this controversy that has existed within and without REA for a period of time .

With kindest regards and best wishes to you, I am,

Sincerely yours, A. E. BROWN,

Chairman, Louisiana Primitive Baptist • Association.

P. s.-You, I am sure, remember me, from · 1911 as the Texas boy minister from Lamar

County. I married a Honey Gr ... ve girl, daughter of M. J. McDow, was chairman of Red River Association from 1914 to 1915. Many thanks for any consideration.

CLAIBORNE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., Homer, La., June 6, 1945.

Hon. JoHN H. OvERTON, United States Senator,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR OVERTON: In view of the con

siderable dissension that exists within the cooperatives by the appointment of Secretary Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA, the president of this cooperative called a special meeting of the board of directors, to discuss the question and it was unanimously decided that in view of the dissension that exists within and without REA, that the Honorable Claude Wickard should not be confirmed as Administrator for REA. The board realizes that harmony has not existed since REA was established under the Department of Agriculture and they feel that Mr. Wickard himself is greatly responsible for this, inasmuch as the Senate Investigating Committee of REA secured testimony that the Administrator of REA was bypassed by Mr. Wickard in carrying out policy.

Our ·cooperat.ive feels _that the President should appoint someone for Administrator ot:

6462 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENAT~ 'JUNE_ 21 REA that has not been involved in all of the controversy that has been going on for some time and still exists within and without REA. Our board of directors feels that if REA could have an Administrator of the John M, Carmody type within a few days harmony would again exist.

I can assure you that our cooperative wm appreciate anything that you may be in a position to do that will cont ribute to the improvement of relations with all of those that are concerned.

With kindest regards and best wishes, I am,


System Manager.

CLAIEORNE ELECTRIC_ COOPERATIVE, .INC., . Homer, La., June 2, 1945.

Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, United States Senate,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: We have been in

formed that hearings on the appointment of the Honorable Claude Wickard before a Senate committee will begin on June 11, 1945.

The president of our board of directors has called a special meeting of our board for June 5 to consider the action, if any, our cooperative will take in this matter. The president informed me that any action taken regardless, he desired that it be legal and democratic. At the same time he informed me that I had better make reservations to go to Washington for this hearing. However, it is possible for the board not to favor this suggestion that he made.

We are now in a heavy construction period on our project, and it seems to me that I have been absent for . one thing or another, which always keeps me back with my work. Talking with Ansi! Moore over the telephone today, be suggested t hat under the circumstances you may be able to get me a priority by plane from Shreveport to Washington. If this. is possible, the · best routing appears over the Chicago Southern to Memphis, Tenn., transferring at Memphis, Tenn., to the American Airlines to Washington. I would desire to leave Saturday. morning, inasmuch as I understand there will be some discussion of the subject with various other cooperatives on Sunday, as they are making provisions to arrive on that day. If it is possible for you to secure me a priority by plane return trip from Shreveport, La., I will appreciate your doing so and advising me Western Union collect.

The president of our board bas wired both of our Sen a tors · requesting that Mr. Wickard not be confirmed as Administrator of REA in view of the confusion that now exists within and without REA.

With kindest personal regards, I am, Sincerely yours,

THOS. E. STEVENSON, System Manager.

JUNE 9, 1945. Hon. ELME~ THOMAS,

United States Senator, washington, D. C.:

The REA as conceived and administered in it s early years was generally favored by everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike. Since comi!l.g under Wickard's hand in the Department of Agriculture its reputation has suffered tremendously and public opinion is sltept!cal.

REA needs a frebh start with an administrator of unquestioned ability and purpose.

The appointment of Claude Wickard will keep alive the strife and turmoil in and about REA and severely handicap a once fine organization.

CLOVERLAND ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, Eo. DoLL, Presldent.

ALVARADO. MINN., June 9, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, . Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: As president Of

the PKM Electric Cooperative and the Minnkota Power Cooperative, I am authorized by resolutions unanimously adopted to protest the nomination of Mr Claude R. Wickard to serve as Administrator of the Rural l!1lectrifica tion Administration

Briefly, our reasons for opposing this nomination are as follows:

1. In our opinion Mr. Claude R. Wickard is unqualified to hold this important job. The fact that he was not considered good enough to be retained as Secretary of Agriculture, head of the War Food Administration, the Commodity Credit Corporation and other Government agencies is indicative of tJ:e opinions widely held concerning his administrative ability. Nowhere in his biography as it appears on page 377 of the Congressional Directory is there listed accomplishments including his political achievements that would indicate he is in possession of tb~ qualifications which should allow him to be trusted with this highly important administrative post.

2. His nomination constitutes a political appointment contrary to section 9 of the Rural Electrification Act. The success of the act is highly dependent upon strict adherence to this section of the law and the Senate should seize this opportunity to tell the Nation that politics have no place in this fine farm agency which has had the practically united support of both major parties since its original enactment into law.

3. The nomination of Mr. Claude R. Wickard to serve as Admir.istrator of REA is merely an attempt to use the Rural Electri'fi.cation Administration as a political burying ground for a faithful contributing party worker to whom a moral obligation is owed but who has otherwise indicated he is a liability. Such a move constitutes an insult to the intelligence of farm men and women everywhere who want to see this agency run as a clean show above board and one beyond the realm of party politics.

4. The Rural Electrification Administration has paid heavily for its "shotgun wedding" with the Department of Agriculture that was carried out without too much fore-thought on the part of its parents. ·

It lost one of the best administrators 1t could ever hope to have when it lost Mr. John M. Carmody who quit the minute it went into the Department of Agriculture simply because he refused to become a politician.

It lost a man with morf:l than 30 years of hitherto unquestioned public service wh en Harry Slattery resigned because he could no longer tolerate the politics his superior officer, Mr. Claude R. Wickard, approved of and was responsible for.

It lost a competent engineer who . had worked in REA for more than 7 years when · Ward Freeman took the opportunity to get out because things were getting so bad he could not see fit to continue further as a part of this ;_)olitical machine that was i:n the making.

How many more quit outright, how many more had their jobs abolished, how many more were relegated to jobs of minor importance, and how many more quit to join the Navy in the hopes that this mess would be all cleaned up when they come back, I have no way of knowing. I do know, however, that REA no longer functions as it used to and noticeably so which is not hard to un;.. derstand when you fit your own pieces of evidence available to the evidence contained in the 2,000 pages of testimony and sworn facts collected by the subcommittee whtch made a partial investigation concerning the

administration of REA while under the Department of Agriculture.

5. The men that man more than MO of the 813 REA-financed co-ops all agreE': that REA has not been as it should or as they want ·it under Mr. Claude R. Wickard and th~i Department of Agriculture. They say· this regardless of their political party affiliations simply because they recognize things are not right and because they feel politics have no place in this important farm agency which serves one and all alike, or is supposed to. They say things are not as they should be because of their results obtained from dealing with REA after it went into the D,epartment of Agriculture indicate that the agency is no longer run on a business basis as a business institution should be.

Co-op board members and co-op managers are just plain sick and disguested and it is their desire as it is the desire of the whole

. Nation to ~ee REA set up as an independent agency under the guidance of a powerful and capable manager who will see to it that REA is run as it should be.

Surely you and the members of your committee will agree that the voices of '!;he people in the ·field who actually direct and run this great program must be granted an audience in the decision of a matter so vitally important to the work which they are charged with doing.

6. Under the present set-up in REA, it is considered doubtful if the large-scale construction program necessary to electrify rural America could be undertaken and carried through to a successful conclusion with things as they are. Things are · so balled up and employees of REA are so confused that no one dares to stick out his neck far enough to make -anything that resembles a commitment. It is getting to oe common knowledge that the only sure way of getting an answer on anything is· for the manager and his board to make a trip to St. Louis. Telegrams and letters have ceased to be of avail as any co-op manager will tell you. In my opinion, that would only continue to exist if the appointment of Mr. Claude R. Wickard is confirmed since . it is a . known fact he · has been the Administrator of REA in fact for quite some time due to his usurping of powers and functions legally assigned to another man.

7. In my own cooperative, the P. K. M. Electric Coop, I have evidence that indicates our project was delayed and portions of jt never built simply because funds intended for its construction were transferred to another State to help some politician who was in need of votes. At least I was told by a

. responsible regional head he understood we got a dirty deal and was, therefore, anxious to rectify the mistake by helping us all he could. Such kind of practices have no place in REA and had it been an independent agency under the guidance of a powerful and capable man free from the influence of votes, I am sure it would never have happened.

8. In another instance we were further delayed because we were told it was against the policy of the Secretary of Agriculture to install poles where conductor was not available. T~is policy was declared and held to despite the fact our line was staked, we had the poles, the contractor and the engineer wer~ willing to proceed and recommended that we do so. Ironically, it later developed that had these poles been installed as only common sense would dictate they be, we could have received authorization from WPB to complete. this line. Instead, the cooperative has been forced to carry over $80,000 in inventory from that day until this and the 300 or 400 farmers affected still milk by hand. This isn't as a result from any ruling on the part of the War Production Board. It comes directly from the Secretary of Agriculture's office, according to REA field personnel who said they had tried to get

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6463 this ruling changed but could not simply becallse Claude R. Wickard could not be budged. That is the kind of results you get when you put some politician in•harge of an important job instead of a hard-hitting, practical-headed businessman.

9. The generating cooperative of which I am also president has had about equal ex• perience in dealing with the present admin .. istration, now under the control of Mr. Wickard's policies.

In December i943 REA was notified of the need for additional generating capacity. In March 1944 the cooperative and the engine company signed a contract and subsequently filed a priority application. In August 1944 the priority was granted. In January 1945 REA finally approved the engine contract, and on March 12, 1945, we were notified the allotment had been made. As I write this on June 9, REA legal red tape has not cleared sufficiently to enable us to request an advance on these funds, and as a result incoming orders cannot be paid. Worse than this is the fact that REA's failure to expedite this in anything even resembling a business fashion has caused the co-op to write an endless amount of letters, make numerous trips to St. Louis and elsewhere, only to find out now that delivery of the engine will not be made in time for us to meet our impending fall loads. What has all this got to do with Mr. Wickard's nomination for the post of REA Administrator? Well, I can assure you such a thing would never happen if Mr. Wickard had not permitted his ambitious-minded political pupils to regionalize REA an~ pla~e the important generating-plant sect10n m the hands of men who are line engineers with no concept of what a power plant consists of. However, it is in line with the policies of Mr. Wickard and a part of his · scheme to get the organization into the hands of the men who were willing to cooperate with him in building the agency into a t~ght-fitting political bulwark.

There is other evidence and plenty of it that REA is not functioning as it should; . 2,000 pages of it and material for thoueands more if Congress would make the money available to really investigate REA since it has been under Mr. Claude Wickard.

Evidence which indicates impending disaster for this fine farm agency if Congrees and the President fail to recognize their responsibilities and insist on REA being run as a clean show with a nonpartisan administration. If ·they will do so, REA can be expected to do a good Job and thousands of American farm homes will be assured of electricity at the earliest date possible. If they don't, then thousands of farm folks will be delayed on receiving the benefit of electricity, thousands of others will never get it and REA will be relegated to the position of that of "just another Government agency ...

In conclusion, may I explain my position. Personally, I have nothing at stake in this matt-er. · I have REA electricity on my farm which I am· sure they won't take away from me and money enough of my own to buy my own plant in case they do.

I do, however, have 3,000 farm neighbors in my home territory and 35,000 more in the area served by the Minnkota who do not have it and no other way than REA to get it. As long as I am continued as president of these two cooperatives I intend to fight and work for those people in a manner which I believe will insure them getting this service as quickly and as cheaply as possible. However, from what I have read and seen of REA since it has been in the Department of Agricul .. ture under the direction of Mr. Claude R. Wickard, I cannot do other than ask for the decisive rejection of his nomination and I so ask you to work toward that end at this time.

:Yours very truly, VICTOR M. EDMAN.

ZUMBROTA, MINN., June 13, 1945. Hol].. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate: Subcommittee investigation revealed Wick

ard attempt to use REA in party politics contrary to intent of act and our cooperative opposes his confirmation as Administrator. We want Administrator who is appointed on basis of ability, not some incompetent who must be taken care of politically.

GOODHUE COUNTY COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION.

MINNESOTA FARMERS UNION, Badger, Minn., June 12, 1945.

Senator SHIPSTEAD, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR: At a. meeting of delegates of the Farmers Union, representing 800 members (men and wives), a. resolution was unanimously adopted going on record as opposed to the appointment of Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA, and you are so advised.

JALMAR WELLEN, Chairman.

WISNER, NEBR., June 15, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: At the quarterly meeting of the Farmers Union of Cuming County, of which there are about 1,000 members, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:

"Resolved, That we, the members of the Farmers Union of Cuming County, go on record as being definitely opposed to the appointment of Claude R. Wickard as the REA Administrator." ·

' '

Very truly yours, HAROLD H. DINKLAGE,

Secretary, Cuming County Farmera Union.

DoUGLAS COUNTY COOPERATIVE LIGHT AND POWER ASSOCIATION,

Alexandria, Minn., June 11, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

· Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: In confirmation

of telegram sent you this morning we are setting forth below the resolution adopted at the special meeting of the board of directors of the Douglas County Cooperative Light and Power Association held in Alexandria, Minn., on June 9, 1945:

"Resolved, That the board of directors of the Douglas County Cooperative Light and Power Association assembled in special session on the 9th day of June 1945 do oppose the appointment of Claude Wickard as Administrator of the REA. If Mr. Wickard was sincere when he gave the testimony on the Lucas bill (S. 89) as reported on page 31 of the stenogJ:apher's typewritten transcript of the hearing, an( the board believes that he was sincere when he made that statement and do hereby very emphatically oppose his selection as REA Administrator and believe that he should by all means be relieved of the responsibility of being Administrator of the REA; and be it further

"Resolved, That the secretary be directed to send a copy of the resolution to the Senate Agriculture Committee and the Committee for the Independence of the REA."

Very truly yours, CLIFFORD R. HovE,

Manager.

ALEXANDRIA, MINN., June 11, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Wa.Shington, D. C.: Resolved, That the board of directors of the

Douglas County Cooperative Light and Power Association assembled in special session on the 9th day of June 1945 do oppose the appointment o! Claude Wickard as Adminis-

trator of the REA. If Mr. Wickard was sincere when he gave the testimony on the Lucas b1ll (S. 89) as reported on page 31 of the stenographer's typewritten transcript of the hearing, and the board believes that he was sincere when he made that statement and do hereby very emphatically oppose his selection as REA Administrator and believe that he should by all means be relieved of the responsibility of being Administrator of the REA.

DOUGLAS COUNTY COOPERATIVE LIGHT AND POWER ASSOCIATION.

GLENCOE, MINN., June 8, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Chamber, Washington, D. C.: We do not believe the best interests of REA .

will be served with the appointment of Claude Wickard as Administrator. Your support solicited.

HERMAN GRAUPMAANN, President, McLeod Cooperative

Power Association.

HALSTAD, MINN., June 8, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIP£TE~D,

Care Senate Office Building: The board of the Red River Valley Coopera

tive Power Association wishes to impress on you and the rest of the Committee on Agriculture, that they are strongly opposed to the appointment of Claude A. Wickard· as REA Administrator. We are convinced that the best interests of REA cannot b3 served by this man.

GEo. AAMODT, Secretary.

WoRTHINGTON, MINN., June 7, 1945. HENRIK -SHIPS'i'EAD,

Washington, D. C.: Do not favor Wickard for REA Adminis

tl·ator. NoBLES CoopERATIVE ELECTRIC, C:E-IA.S. A. BARNES.

CENTRAL MINNESOTA COOPERATIVE POWER ASSOCIATION OF REDWOOD COUNT,

Clements, Minn., June 5, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, washington, D. c.

DEAR MR. SHIPSTEAD: This is a copy of a telegram sent to Hon. ELMER THOMAS, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: ' "Mr. Wickard has never been a supporter of REA, so we would not like to have him appointed Administrator."

L. B. FREDERICKSON, President.

c. H. SoNNENBERG, Manager.

BLUE EARTH-NICOLLET COOPERATIVE ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION,

Mankato, Minn., June 5, 1945. The Honorable HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


DEAR Sm: I am informed that the S:mate Committee on Agriculture will have a committee meeting on Monday, June 11, at 10 a. m., for the purpose of considering Mr. Wickard as Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration.

We, as a board of directors for the Blue Earth-Nicollet Cooperative Electric Association, representing a cooperative have a thousand miles of electric distribution line serving 2,200 consumers, do not believe that Mr. Wickard is.the proper man for Administrator.

After having read the hearings of the investigation committee, it seems quite evident that Mr. Wickard was not particularly concerned about the welfare of the Rural Electrification Administration while he was Sec· reta.ry of Agriculture. I also note that in Mr. :Wickard's testimony on the Lucas bill (S. 89).

6464 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 as reported on page 31 of the stenographer's

- typewritten script of the hearing, that he seems very much in favor of having the private utilities take over the task that the Rural Electrification cooperatives have done so well and that the utilities had failed to do.

I hope that you might find it convenient to convey our opinions to the committee at the hearing.

Cooperatively yours, L. P. KRAUS,

President. C. L. PALMERSTON,

Manager.

RED LAKE FALLS, MINN., June 9, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senator, · Washington, D. C.:

Board of directors feel Wickard's appointment definite thre9.t to welfare of REA. Urge · you to expend every effort to defeat his con· firmation.

CARL SWANSON, President, Red Lake Electric Cooperative.

ALEXANDRIA, MINN., May 28, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

Agriculture and Forestry Committee: Request you oppose Wickard as Adminis

trator REA. Appreciate your vote to make REA independent. Let's keep it that way,

C. R. HovE, Minnesota Rep1·esentative, Independent

REA.

ROCHESTER, MINN., June 5, 1945. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

· Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

More than 2,200 members of the Peoples Cooperative Power Association, serving southeastern Minnesota, desire to record their objection to the appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administrator of REA, as his record in the past is anything but good for the future of the REA movement.

H. C. BLUMENTRITT, President, Peoples Cooperative Power As· · sociation,

CAJ:U,TON CoUNTY COOPERATIVE POWER ASSOCIATION,

Kettle River, Minn., June 5, 1945. Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, .


DEAR SIR: The following is a copy of a telegram sent to President Harry Truman, Senator Harold Knutsen, Congressman Dr. Walter Judd, Congressman William Pittenger, and to Senator Elmer Thomas.

"The Carlton County Cooperative Power Association is opposed to the appointment of Secretary Wickard as REA Administra· tor."

Yours very respectfully, A. A. GOODWIN,

Manager.

MONTEVIDEO, MINN., June 1, 1945, Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate. DEAR MR. SHIPSTEAD: The great WOrk yoU

have been doing in behalf of REA which was so much needed at this time, in fact it has been necessary ever since the association was thrown into the hands of Agriculture, making it a political football. The way it looks to me and hundreds of others that practically ever since the grand old Administrator, John M. Carmody, left his post with uo. And more especially since Mr. Wickard too~ over the job, in fact in my estimation if he were allowed to continue it would ruin all we have did up to now as you well know. I have been at the job ever since the REA came into being and can speak from experience, ever since we lost Mr. Carmody

there has been uncertainty and unrest as to' where we were going to end.up at. When they started to get rid of Mr. Slattery things began slipping badly and has gradually gotten worse until now it must be put on its own as we started and really went along fine, thanks to Mr. Carmody.

In fact I am not sure that there is any place in the Government set-up for Mr. Wickard he is too closely allied with public utilities for to work with farm set-up, especially the REA. It must be a separate set-up if expected to go ahead as should and can if separated from any other association at once. And there must be some more house cleaning in REA. There are too many in it for selfish interests that as you know

~ will ruin any thing, even a church. Now friend SHIPSTEAD, I want to thank you

for your attitude and good work in behalf of the REA, the best thing ever did for the farmers. Just lteep on going. These are my own views of the situation, not speaking for the association.

Yours truly, C. A. WINSLOW,

President, Minnesota Valley Cooperative Light & Power Association.

CENTRAL MINNESOTA COOPERATIVE POWER ASSOCIATION

OF REDWOOD COUNTY, Springfield, Minn., May 31, 1945.

Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, United States Senator,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: Yesterday after

noon I received a telegram from Mr. Earl Murley, vice president of National Association for Independence REA, asking that I notify him as to whether I can go to Washington and testify as a witness before the United States committee on the Wickard appointment.

I regret to inform you that because of the accumulated work while I was serving in the Minnesota State Senate, I have been very busy and will not be able to go to Washington

. for that purpose no matter how much I believe in the justice of the cause and no matter how much I believe that Mr. Wickard is an unfit person to be in charge of the REA.

I called our president on the telephone this morning and asked him concerning this ·proposed trip and he does feel while this is a worthy cause and should be supported in every respect, nevertheless, he is fearful if the local cooperative sticks out its neck, that we will be punished later on if the proposed move does not succeed. It is a pitiful thing to make such a statement but such things have been done in the past and no one can tell what the future may be until we get good trusted men into this office.

If there is anything else I can do to help this cause along, I shall be happy and glad to do it.

Sincerely yours, ALEXANDER SEIFERT,

Attorney for Association.

BLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, Ironton, Mo., June 5, 1945.

Hon. HENRIK: SHIPSTEAD, United States Senator,

washington, D. c. DEAR SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: In reply to your

letter of May 15, 1945. We wish to thank you for the good work that you have done in getting the approval of the ShipsteadWheeler-Aiken amendment to the Lucas bill to make REA an independent agency.

We feel that our President is not on the right track in appointing Mr. Claude R. Wickard as Administrator of REA, and all of the presidents of the local cooperatives in Missouri that we have talked to, feel the same way about this appointment. . We would like to ask that you protest the ·appointment of Mr. Wickard as Administra-

tor, due to the past records that he has made as Secretary of Agriculture. ·

Thanking you for the good work that you have dO:Qi toward REA and assuring you of our cooperation, we · are

Yours very truly, ,_ )f.- E. W. FRITZ, President.

CANTON, Mo., June 7, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Chamber. DEAR SENATOR: It is the Opinion of my

board of directors and our membership that the REA should be an independent agency free of politicis and we believe this can only be accomplished if headed with leadership who would work to that end.

B. L. ANDERSON, President, Board No. 23, Lewis County.

TRENTON, Mo., June 5, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office, Washington, D. C.: We are a cooperative of 1,500 active mem

bers and an additional sign-up of 1,000 members all wanting electric service and feel that for the good of REA that it must be an independent agency with an administrator with cooperative ideas and business ability and do not feel that Mr. Wickard is the man for this position.

GRUNDY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.

MARYVILLE, Mo., June 6, 1945, Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


In view of the fact that Mr. Wickard has never taken interest in REA and that he expressed his desire for the utilities to build rural lines instead of REA and for the general welfare of REA we request your protest to the appointment of Mr. Wickard as administrator of REA.

NODAWAY V/ORTH ELECTRIC COOPE:tATIVE.

CHILLICOTHE, Mo., June 6, 1945 . Hon. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD,


We hereby wish to protest confirmation of Claude Wickard as administrator of REA. His maladministration of REA since 1939 and poli~ical manipulations as revealed by the recent Senate investigation of REA and his recently stated "if the private utilities will do the job of electrifying rural America lets fold up right now" make him thoroughly objectionable. Withdrawal of REA would permit utilities to resume old practices of high rates and minimums. Our Cooperative now serves approximately 1,500 consumers construction is under way to 82'J additional members and 3,1o·o applications are on file for postwar construction. Your support in behalf of th~s protest is earnestly solicited.

J. S. HOPPER, President, Farmers Electric Cooperative.

Bo"tJRBON, Mo., May 31, 1945. Senator HEN!.t!K SHIP STEAD:

The board of directors of Crawford Electric Cooperative, Bourbon, Mo., oppose the confirmation of Claud<a Wickard as Rural Electrification Administrator. We ask your assistance when the matter comes before the Senate.

A. M. PRITCHETT, President.

IRONTON, Mo., May 28, 1945. HENRIK SH.IPSTEAD,

United States Senator: We would like to ask that you protest the

.appointment of ,Claude R. Wickard for Administrator of REA.

BLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOP::::RATIVE, E. W. FITZ, President~

!

1945 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6465 RAVALLI COUNTY ELECTltiC

COOPERATIVE, INC., Corvallis, Mont., June 13, 1945.

Han. HENRIK SHIPSTEAD, United States Senate,

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR SHIPS~EAD: The following

telegram was sent to chairman, Han. ELMER THOMAS, expressing our honest belief regarding the appointment of Claude R. Wickard as REA Administrator. His appointment, we feel, will destroy the benefits we hoped to gain by having REA restored a.s an independent agency.

"We favor restoration of REA as an independent agency to keep REA out of politics. Wickard's policies indicate otherwise. We sternly oppose Wickard's appointment as REA Administrator."

We hope you can understand our point of view and will act accordingly.

Thanking you kindly. THOMAS J. MICKA., Manager.

GLASGOW, MoNT., June 8, 1945. Senator HENRIK SHIPsT:UD,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. c.

MY DEAR ·FRIEND SENATOR SHIPSTEAD: First, I sincerely extend my personal congratulations to you for the excellent services you are rendering to rural America in your loyal efforts to save the REA.

It would have been a personal favor to meet with you again in your office about the REA as we did 2 years ago. In such a meetIng we could cover matters which cannot be adequately covered in this letter. Further, ' you will please notice that in my association with this group o:f REA projects that I am both on a confidential status and subject to persecution if I reveal publicly the delay, confusion, and bureaucratic control caused by various rules and overrules of regulations. · But irrespective of the circumstances, I trust that this brief letter may contribute toward assisting you in yo'ur good work. I respectfully submit to wit:

1. That the progress of many prospective projects have been retarded and killed because of dictatorial interferences by the representatives of the Department of Agriculture.

2. That the public in many areas have made surveys at considerable expense with expectations that li;nes would eventually be constructed but resulted in loss of both time, inoney, and hope. . 3. That the impractical surveys have been so misleading that progress bas been retarded and the rural areas have been denied electricity.

4. That Department of Agriculture representatlve.s have ordered legally elected trustees of REA projects ousted without respect to law and order.

5. That· legally established REA project trustees and omcers have, virtually under threats or duress and intimidation, been impelled to fall in line with the arbitrary policies of the DJpartment of Agriculture and even then failed to get results.

6. That REA project trustees are evidently expected to be rubber stamps for the Department of Agriculture.

7. That the wishes of the prospective REA consumers are being denied by the veto power of the Department of Agriculture.

8. That the REA under Agriculture and Mr. Wickard threaten to deny electricity to areas where the people want American home rule in selecting centrally located home.office.

9. That REA projects professional per:sonnel are in cases under pressure threatened with dismissal by the Department o! Agriculture's REA dictatorial policies.

10. That aJlocations will be denied to projects is cunningly used as a whip to bring REA project ofiices to obedience of bureaucratic dictatorship irrespective of the wishes of the people to be served with electricity.

11. That the Agricultural Department's supervision over REA under Mr. Wickard was a mismanagement and incompetency and a disgraceful waste of public funds.

-12. That local REA projects better understand their own local conditions and would do better without the costly bureaucratic interference.

13. That the bureaucratic interference with local projects bas caUSE:d dissension and disrupted the public peace and delayed progress of prospective REA lines. ,

14. Public sentiment recognizes that indications are that REA under Mr. Wickard's Department of Agriculture supervision was to surrender REA to the private power interests.

15. That confidence In the present agricultural REA is at such a low ebb that many people feel that the supervision of the REA is under the control of the power interests.

The above facts I can assure you are the sentiments -of the bona fide REA prospective project consumers and most of the consumers. These free-born American people only want fair play and a right to enjoy their God-given right to freedom. Out here we breathe the air of liberty. These rights must not be denied. Therefore we earnestly appreciate your honest support on behalf of rural America. Our appeal is "let there be more light in all rural America by an REA free from the colored shadow of the Department of Agriculture and Mr. Wickard."

Fraternally, _ OSCAR NESVIG,

NoRTHERN ELECTRIC CooPERATIVE INc., Opheim, Mont., June 7, 1945.

Senator ELMER THOMAS,. Chairman, Senate Committee on Agricul

ture, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

At our meeting June 6, 1S45, of the In· 'Corporator members of our REA project, we respectfully went on record favoring the Lucas-Shipstead-Aiken-Wbeeler bill separating the REA from the Department of Agri• culture and consistently therewith we likewise emphatically protest the confirmation of Mr. Wickard as Administrator.

Mrs. JoHN RoGENEs, Secretary-Treasurer.

WoLF PoiNT, MoNT., June 8, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

Senate Office Building, Washi ngton, D. C.

DEAR SIR: Please note below a copy of a telegram sent to Hon. E.LMER THOMAS by the ·board of directors of the Union Service Association Cooperative store of Wolf Point, Mont.

Sincerely, Mrs. ALICE THOMAS, Secretary.

''Jfon. ELMER THOMAS, "Senate Office Building,

"Washington, D . C .: "Oppose confirmation of Wickard appoint- ~

ment on account of his views on progress of REA already developed and in process of development."

SCOBEY, MONT., June 8, 1945. Senator SHIPSTEAD,

United States Senate, washington, D. c.:

We emphatically protest the confirmation of Wickard as Administrator of REA. For reason of antagonism toward REA.

SCOBEY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, RUBEN BROWN,

Acting Secretary.

CHOTEAU, MONT., June 9, 1945. Senator HENJUK SHIPSTEAD,

W.ashington, D. C.: ·Resolved, That we are unalterably opposed

to the appointment ot Claude Wickard as

REA Administrator. We do not believe he has the broad knowledge nor the required sympathy for the REA program to properly administer post of this magnitude. I commend

, you for your splendid interest in REA. BOARD OF DIRECTORS SUN RIVER

ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.

McCoNE COUNTY ELECTRIC CO-OP. INC., Circle, Mont., June 6, 1945.

Senator ELMER THOMAS, , Chairman Senate Committee on Agricul

ture, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

We are anxiously desirous to see our 3-yearold well organized REA completed. Our project can avail itsel! of current from the Federal Fort Peck Dam at Glasgow, Mont. In our earnest appeal for early construction of REA lines in our area. We feel that construction will come sooner if REA is an independent agency and in that connection we believe Mr. Wickard should not be the Administrator.

E. R. MERRIMAN, Secretary-Treasurer, Vida, Mont.

JUNE 5, 1945, Hon. ELMER THOMAS,


Information requested by National Independence Committee for REA regarding power company spite lines built to stop REA construction are as follows-: While red tape and staying within WPB regulations held us up, Montana Power bas built five lines across areas we have memberships for under what is known as our B allotment. Two of these ln the last 90 days and three more staked with construction started. Spite lines about 2 miles apart serve only immediate custom~rs~ others left without service, because Montana Power's added charge for construction of extensions over 1,000 feet are ·prohibitive to farmers. We are opposed to confirmation of anyone as Administrator who is opposed to area coverage by the REA.

CHAS. E . JEWETT, Manager, Park Electric Cooperative, Inc,

HUNTLEY, MoNT., May 24, 1945. Senator HEN'RJK SHIPSTEAD,


Vigorously opposed to appointment of Wickard as REA Administrator.

YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.,

LouiS HEIDE·MA, President.

PA.'tK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC., Livingston, Mont., June 5, 1945.

Hon. Senator SHIPSTEAD, Senate Building, Wash-ington, D. C.

DE!.R SENATOR: Enclosed please find a copy of telegram sent Hon. ELMER THOMAS at Washington, D. C., regarding opposition to confirmation of Administrator.

Very truly yours, CHAS. E. JEWETT,

Manager.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Claude R. Wickard to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration?

Mr. ELLENDER. I suggest the absence of a quorum...

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll, and the following Senators answered to their names: Aiken Bailey Ball Barkley Bilbo Brewster

Briggs Brooks Burton Busbfield Butler Byrd

Capehart Chandler Chavez Donnell Downey Eastland

6466 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE -JUNE 21 Ellender La Follette Overton Fulbright Langer Pepper George Lucas Saltonstall Gerry McCarran Sh ipstead Green McClellan Smith Guffey McFarland Taft Gurney McKellar Taylor Hatch McMahon Thomas, Okla. Hawkes Mead Thomas, Utah Hayden Millikin :;_1i, Tunnell Hill Mitchell ;.,.. Wagner Hoey Morse Walsh Johnson, Colo. Murdock Wherry Johnston, S. C. O'Daniel White Kilgore O'Mahoney ;young

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Sixtythree Senators having answered to their n ames, a quorum is present.

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. Mr. P resident, I will occupy but a few mo-· ments to make reply to the argument made by the Senator from Minnesota against the confirmation of Claude R. Wickard to be ·Director of Rural Electrification Administration.

The nomination was -sent to the Senate, and by the Senate referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry for consideration and report. As soon as the nomination reached the committee a meeting was held, at which time a request was made for hearings. The committee was agreeable to granting the request, and inasmuch as the persons who asked for the hearings lived in western States-! think one in Indiana and one in Missouri-the committee decided to set' a date for the hearings about a week later, and the hearings were begun,

.according to the agreement, on the 11th day of June.

Mr. President, a great many telegrams came to the committee, and a number of letters also came to the committee, as well as to its various members. Some protested the appointment of Mr. Wickard, and others were favorable to confirmation of his nomination.

After listening to the testimony and reading the telegrams and the letters, it was my conviction that the opposition to this nomination is very largely, if not wholly, inspired. I am not prepared to place my finger upon the inftuence or · the group or the individual that inspired this opposition, but I desire to call the attention of the Senate to a letter which was sent out quite generally. On page 62 of the hearings there is recorded a copy of a letter which was sent out from Indiana. May 25, 1945, is the date. It is headed "Daviess-Martin County REMC."

I read: · "If private utilities will do the job of elec

trifying rural America, let's fold up right now. That is what I would like tq say. Let's help them in every way we can to do it." Claude R. Wickard's statement before ·Agricultural and Forestry Committee, April 2, 1945.

If you believe Wickard is not the man for Administrator, have each of your board members wire your Sanators, opposing ·his confirmation. Indicate numbers of members 1n such message. Multiply by four size of each family, Reasons: Bad political administration of REA. REA Act prohibits politics. Wickard released as Secretary because he was poor administrator. Want REA free from Wickard because he is believed to be private u t ility man. State your own reason. Send copy of tel!;!gram to Senator liENRIK SHIP-

sTEAD. Urgent. Confirmation may come up Monday.

It is signed: CoMMITTEE FOR INDEPENDENT REA, . EARL MuRLEY, Vice President.

Mr. President, I do not know who inspired that letter, but the letter was sent out to a great number of cooperatives throughout the country by Earl Murley. That is not the only letter that was sent out requesting REA cooperatives and members to protest the confirmation of Wickard.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahpma. I yield. Mr. SHIPSTEAD. I believe Mr. Mur

ley testified that letter was sent to the REA cooperatives in Indiana only.

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. Yes; and when we asked him about the other· not ices which went out he said that some of the other people were smarter than he was. He said, in effect, that he was so ignorant of these matters that he used the mails. He said the others were smarter ; they used the telephone.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, will the Senator again yield?

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. I yield. Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Will the Senator

give me the date of that letter? Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. The first

letter was dated May 25. The second letter is found on page 77 of the record. It is headed : ·

VINCENNES, IND., June 3, 1945. To all Indiana REA Cooperatives:

On May 25 and 26, we sent each Indiana REA cooperative the following telegram:

" 'If private utilities will do the job of electrifying rural America, let's fold up right now. That is what I would like to see. Let's help them in every way we can to do it.' Claude R. Wickard's statement before Agricultural and Forestry Committee, April 2, 1945. If you believe Wickard is not the man for Administrator have each of your board members wire your Senators opposing his confirmation. Indicate number of members in each message. Multiply by four size of each famij.y. Reasons: bad political administration of REA; REA Act prohibit s politics; Wickard released as Secretary_ because he was poor administrator; want REA free from Wickard because he is believed to be publicutility man. St ate your own reasons. Send copy of telegrams to Senator SHIPSTEAD. Urgent. Confirmation may come up Monday."

Some of these messages were sent from Bicknell, Ind., over the signature of Earl Murley. Others were sent from Vincennes, Ind., over the signature of Ernest B. Miller.

That is from the record shpwing that the cooperatives throughout the country were contacted and urged to send telegrams to the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. SHIPSTEAD], to their own Senators, and to members of the Committe~ on Agriculture and Forestry protesting against the confirmation of Mr. Wickard's nomination.

Mr. President, the two letters just read contain only garbled statements from Mr. Wickard's testimony. Later, when this was called to the attention of the writer, he wrote another letter and apologized.

I wish to place in the RECORD at this point a portion of the testimony of

Claude Wickard before the Lucas subcominittee in connection wit h the hearings on the bill to divorce REA from the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, will tpe Senator yield?

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. I yield. Mr. LUCAS. Will the Sen ator ex

plain briefly to the S~nate Mr. Wickard's position? I think it is important, in view of the distorted position t aken by the writer of the letter with respect to Claude Wickard's attitude concerning public utilit ies.

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. The following is from the record before the Lucas subcommittee. Mr. Wickard appeared before the committee, and inquiry was made as to his ·attitude toward the REA, and toward private ut ility companies. The Senator from Illinois asked Mr. Wickard for a statement of his position. Mr. Wickard made the following statement:

Maybe I want to qualify my answer.

He had been giving some explanations, but this is his real explanation:

If it meaRs-that you are going to have the private utilities go down the main highways and only take out the densely populated areas and then leave the less densely populated areas and-the areas which don't pay in quite so much money, then I think we ought to say to all the people in that territory, "Are you going to permit the private utilities to skim off the cream and let the rest of the territory go unserved because they can't be served economically?" If the private utilities will do the job of electrifying rural America, le11 them do it. That is what I would like to see. If they will go in and take the whole area and gi_ve everybody electricity in that area at a reasonable cost, let's help them in every way we can to do it, because that relieves us of the responsibility and it relieves us of advancing those funds.

That is the statement of Mr. Wickard's position with respect to private utilities.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. I yield. Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Will the Senator

also read the testimony of Mr. Nicholson and ·one other person in REA, who discussed in a friendly way the loan of $400,000 to a private utility?

Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. When the REA was first created the money was so appropriated that the REA could lend to private utility companies, and some moneys were so loaned to private utility companies to make extensions to serve the rural areas. However, that situation lasted only a very short time, and as soon as the REA became an active, going concern loans to private utilities were stopped, and from that point on the cooperatives were organized and secured their funds directly from the fund provided by the Feperal Government.

Mr. President, as I previously stated, in my opinion this opposition was largely inspiored. WJ:'I.en the hearings were held a number ' f persons came to Washington, some from great distances. The basis of the testimony given by the witnesses was that they were fearful that Mr. Wickard would play too much politics. They were tearful that he was not

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~SENATE 6467 imbued with the cooperative program, as he should be. They seemed to be fearful thr.t he would turn the program back to the private utilities and would deprive areas not prese~tly being served of the service which the law provides.

When a vote was taken in the committee after the testimony was concluded, the vote stood 11 for confirmation -and 6 against confirmation. Three members were absent. However, I am advised that if they had been present their votes would have been favorable to confirmation. If the entire committee had been polled, or if all the members had been present and voting, the vote would have stood 14 for confirmation and only 6 against confirmation.

One further element was introduced into the hearings. One witness was very positive that because Mr. Wickard ,was the Secretary of Agriculture, and because the REA was a branch or department of his administration, he must be held for the acts performed by his subordinate, the Director of the REA.

Mr. President, if that principle should be followed, this would be the logical result: M:r. Slattery was the first Director of the REA to be subjected to criticism. Then Mr. Slattery resigned, and Mr. Neal was appointed as Acting Director. Mr.

~ Neal is still Acting Director. If Mr. Wickard is to be held strictly to account for the acts of Mr. Neal and Mr. Slattery, if we are to hold him responsible for all things done and said by both Neal and Slattery, we must go a step further and hold the President of the United States responsible for Mr. Wickard. It is not enough to hold Mr. Wickard responsible for Slattery and Neal. That does not go far enough. The President of the United States is the direct representative of the major party at the time he serves. So we must hold the Democratic Party responsible for the acts of the President. The Democratic Party nominated the President, and the people elected him, so we must hold the majority of the people of the country directly responsible for the President, hold the President directly responsible for the acts of Mr. Wickard, and hold Mr. Wickard responsible for the acts of Slattery and Neal. The majority of the people are the Government, so the criticism gets back to the Government of the United States.

Mr. President, that is the situation as the committee views it. That is all I have to say in reply to the Senator from Minnesota.

The committee recommends that the nomination of Clauqe R. Wickard be confirmed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Claude R. Wickard to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration?

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma has presented the substance of the testimony which was given before our committee in connection with the letters which were sent out by a certain small group of individuals to various cooperatives throughout the country. I am convinced that had those letters stated to the cooperatives all the facts with respect to

Mr. Wickard's position in regard to private utilities, rather than selecting one sentence and using that to lead the members of the cooperatives to believe that Claude Wickard was a private utility man, the Senator from Minnesota and the Senator from Oklahoma would not have received 10 percent of the telegrams which they received from various cooperatives.

The truth of the matter is that this is only a continuation of the long-standing feud which existed between Harry Slattery, Administrator, and the Secretary of Agriculture. It is being continued in connection with the consideration of the nomination of Mr. Wickard to be Administrator of the REA.

Another strange thing is that nearly all the individuals who testified before the committee were employees of the cooperatives, and not a group representing the cooperatives. There seemed to be a group of employees throughout the country-managers of cooperativeswho were carrying on this fight a'gainst Mr. Wickard's confirmation. I presume that is within their rights; but one of the things which we constantly stressed before the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry when the bill which I introduced was proposed, and when the Secretary of Agriculture, Mr. Wickard, Mr. Neal, and Mr. Nicholson were being in- , terrogated, was that under no circumstances should they attempt to tell a cooperative in any State in the Union wli.at it could or could not do. We were all agreed on that. Thus the Democratic and Republican members of the committee agreed that the Government should not interfere with the business of the cooperatives.

But now we have· the reverse; we have employees of cooperatives coming here and practically telling the President of the United States and the Senate what they should do in regard to an appointment to this impo·rtant position. It doe-s not make sense. I dare say that if there were no feud between Slattery and Neal and Wickard, there would not be a single telegram here from any cooperative objecting to confirmation of the nomination. When we examined the managers

· of the cooperatives we found that not one- of them said Claude WickaTd was interfering in any way whatever with the proper management of the cooperatives. The manager of every cooperative testified that it was in good shape and was being carried on efficiently and was receiving the kind of cooperatim1 for postwar planning that was necessary.

The whole matter goes right back to the prejudice and bitterness and rancor which grew out of the fight between Slattery and Wickard and Neal, and it seems to me that the- United States Senate is no place in which to continue that political feud.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me?

Mr. J,.UCAS. I yield. Mr. BARKLEY. The Senator from

Minnesota called attention during his . Iemarks to the attitude of the Ohio cooperatives which were expressing their opinion about Mr. Wickard. I wish to

state that evidently that attitude does not represent the attitude of the cooperatives in the country as a whole. In my State the State-wide cooperative association, which represents approximately 46,000 members of cooperatives in Kentucky, has gone on record endorsing Mr.

· Wickard; _and its secretary who was sent to Washington, testified in behalf of Mr. Wickard before the committee. The Farm Bureau Federation in my State has unanimously endorsed the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard. Certainly, I do not know what actuated the expressions from persons in Ohio or any other State, and I do not think their expressions represent the general feeling.

I agree with the Senator from Illinois that the present situation dates back to the time when in the Department of Agriculture and the Rural Electrification Administration there were differences between Mr. Slattery and the Department, and those differences resulted in the resignation of Mr. Slattery. When Mr. Neal was · appointed Acting Administrator, many of the same cooperatives were in favor of having his appointment made permanent. Others objected. When Aubrey Williams was nominated to be head of the Rural Electrification Administration, objections were made by some, not because of any objections to Mr. Williams but because they wanted Mr. Neal appointed.

Since Mr. Slattery!s resignation, there does not seem to have been very much friction between the Secretary of Agriculture and the acting head of the Rural Electrification Administration in Washington, and the cooperatives apparently have been satisfied sin~e then.

Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Kentucky for his statement.

I wish to emphasize the fact, which was brought out in the· hearings on the bill which I introduced some time ago, that there is not a loaning agency of Government which has been more efficiently operated than has the REA. The truth of the matter is that when we analyze the record we find there was no difference between the operation of the REA as an agency or branch of the Department of Agriculture and the operation of the REA as an independent agency. There is -no proof ,that Mr. Wickard or anyone serving· under him was interfering with the efficiency of the management of any particular cooperative. It is all much ado about nothing.

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me?

Mr. LUCAS. I yield. Mr. CHANDLER. I wish to say that

when the nomination of Aubrey Williams was pending the Kentucky Farm Bureau Federation and the rural cooperatives protested vigorously against the confirmation of his nomination. That was 'one of the reasons why I did not cast my vote for the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Williams to serve in that position.

I am now very much pleased that the President has sent to the Senate the nomination of Claude Wickard. I wish to say, with the permission of j;he Senator from Illinois, that I think Claude

6468 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE JUNE 21 · Wickard is a farmer himself and a firstclass man, who is sincerely interested in the problems of the rural population, i: think he has been a good Secretary of Agriculture, and I think he will devote his entire energies and attention to doing a good job for those whom the REA af- · fects. One of the most important jobs the Government undertakes is the furnishing of electric energy to the rural homes of America.

Mr. Wickard is a man who is not a convert to the REA principle, and he is not trying to organize for his own purposes at all; but he is sincerely interested in those who live in the country, and in such a position as the one to which he has been nominated he wishes to do whatever he can do to help them. I am certain that Mr. Wickard would not step down from a Cabinet office and take a lesser position in the Government if he did not see in it an opportunity to serve his people.

I wish to testify on my own account about my feeling in regard to Claude Wickard. I think he is a fine American citizen and a fine public official, and in the job to which he has been nominated I confidently hope and expect he will do fine work.

Mr. LUCAS. I thank the junior Senator from Kentucky for his contribution.

Mr. President, of course the whole situation stems from Washington, D. C., and a man by the name of Judson King, who interested himself in REA and is one of the persons who is responsible for it all. These men from the field met in Washington. I do not know whether they came voluntarily or otherwise, but a strange combination met here and got out letters to every cooperative in the country.

The point I make, I repeat, is tliat .if they had told the truth to the cooperatives in the letters they sent out, we would not have had all the telegrams coming from the cooperatives in protest against the confirmation of the nomination of Mr. Wickard. They deliberately made it appear that Mr. Wickard is a private utility man. That is the main reason why .all these cooperatives have sent telegrams in protest.

Mr. CHANDLER. Mr. President, if the · Senator will further yield to me, let me say that it is significant that they gave each person an opportunity to assign his own reasons for being against Mr. Wickard.

Mr. LUCAS. Oh, yes; they did that, and they asked them to contact four or five other persons in each community.

Mr. Preside..llt, the propaganda was well organized. We are all familiar with propaganda. It does not mean very much to an independent Senator; we do not

· pay much attention when we receive letters or telegrams of the same type or kind from every branch of an organizat ion which is car rying on such work.

That is about all I have to say, Mr. President. I am satisfied that Claude Wid wxd will mak~ an excellent Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration. Mr. President, he is a member of a cooperative in Indiana; his farm has· electricity which is fw·nished under this program at the present time.

The man who created the most stir, and who came before the committee, one of these pious fellows, Hurley, from Indiana, represented only three or four cooperatives in the whole State where he is best known. The president of the Indiana REA testified before our committee in behaJf of Mr. Wickard. Hurley is just an employee of a cooperative; he is not a director. He and a man by the name of Ansel Moore, from Missourianother manager of a cooperativewere the ones who stirred up most of that trouble.

Mr. President, the employees are attempting to take over, and they wish to tell the President of the United States whom to appoint to this important post. Remember this is a Presidential appointment. There is no challenge to the integrity, the character, or fitness of Mr. Wickard. The opposition is based solely upon a controversy that was settled when Slattery resigned. The Senate should not dignify that personal quarrel by voting against Claude Wickard.

Mr. SHIPSTEAD. Mr. President, it is true that the men to whom reference has been made came to Washington in their representative capacities as employees of the cooperatives. Cooperatives are composed of farmers. The farmers were busy at the time with corn planting. Some of the men who came to Washington came as representatives of · the cooperatives to the same extent that the Members of the ·Senate come here as representatives of their respective States. The mere fact that a man is an em-.. ployee, and has been sent by his employers to someone with a message does not necessarily indicate any wrongdoing on the part of anyone.

My friend the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. THOMAS] stated that if we could hold Wickard responsible · for what took place in the REA it would also be logical to hold responsible the President of the United States. However, the President of the United States was not the Administrator of the REA. The attention of the Administrator of the REA had been directed to what was taking place within that agency. The committee which was composed of various Senators-there were three Democrats and two Republicans-sat as a committee and considered the evidence which was presented. Mr. Wickard could not have been igno-rant of what the committee was doing, Therefore, he must have been responsible for the conditions about which there ·had been- complaints or he would have tried to correct them.

It has been said that the telegrams which were sent by a few small groups must have been sponsored by those groups alone, and that the officers of the cooperatives involved did not know what was being said. I cannot believe that the action of the persons who sent long telegrams and letters giving their personal views could have been unknown to the officers of the cooperatives. They were officers and farmers themselves. They were not dupes of sinister men. A desire was being expressed to take control of the cooperatives from the administration of Wickard, because it was felt that he was surrounded by many

men who should not be a part of his organization.

Mr. President, I do not want to consume any unnecessary time, but I should like to say a few words with reference to the so-called feud between Slattery and Wickard.

I am under no obligation to Slattery. - It has been said that Wickard deprived

Slattery of his authority. i do not know as to that; but I do know that I never asked Mr. Slattery to employ any particular person. I am not and have not been obligated to him in any way. For a great many years I have known him in a personal way. However, all this talk about a feud between Slattery and Wickard was started by Craig, who orgs.nized the National Rural Electrification Association because he wanted to control the REA. He learned his policies from Dougherty, who said he would run the REA either from the inside or from the outside. I think he has run it from the outside.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination .of Claude R: Wickard to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration for a term of 10 years?

Mr. SHIP STEAD. I ask for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. BUTLER <when his name -was called). I have a general pair with the senior Senator from Alabama [Mr. BAN~EAD]. Not knowing how he would vote if present, I withhold my vote.

Mr. WHITE (When Mr. VANDENBERG'S name was called). I announce that the senior Senator from Michigan [Mr. VANDENBERG] has a general pair with the senior Senator from Texas [Mr. CoNNALLY]. I am not able to ·announce how either Senator would vote.

Mr .. WAGNER <when his name was called). I have a pair with the junior Senator from Kansas , [Mr. REED], which I transfer to the junior Senator from Maryland [Mr. RADCLIFFE], Which gives me the right to vote. I vote "yea."

The roll call was concluded. Mr. HILL. I announce that the Sen

ator from Virginia [Mr. GLASS], the Senator from Nevada [Mr. ScRUGHAM], and

, the Senator from Montana [Mr. WHEEELER] are absent because of illness.

The Senator from Florida [Mr. ANDREWS] is necessarily absent. If present and voting he would vote "yea."

The Senator from Alabama [Mr. BANKHEAD] , the Senator from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON], the Senator from Maryland [Mr. RADCLIFFE], and the Senator from Tennesseee [Mr. STEWART] are absent on public business. I am informed that if present and voting these Senators would vote "yea."

The Senator from Texas [Mr. CoNNALLY] is absent on official business as a delegate to the International Conference in San Francisco. He has a general pair with the Senator from Michigan [Mr. VANDENBERG]. .

The Senator from South Carolina [Mr. MAYBANK] and the S~nator from Georgia [Mr. RussELL] are absent in Europe visitin2' battlefields. If present

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 6469 and voting I am informed the Senator from South Carolina would vote "yea."

The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. MYERS] is absent on public business pertaining to his State.

· The Senator from Montana [Mr. MURRAY] and the Senator from Maryland [Mr. TYDINGS] are absent on official business. If present and voting they would

' vote "yea." Mr. WHERRY. The Senator from

Vermont [Mr. AuSTIN] is absent on official business. He is paired on this question with the Senator from Idaho [Mr. THOMAS], If present. the Senator from Vermont would vote "yea" and the Senator from Idaho would vote "nay."

The Senator from Oregon [Mr. CoRDON] is absent on official business of the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

· If present he would vote "nay." The Senator from Iowa [Mr. WILSON]

is absent on official business. If present he would vote "nay."

The Senator from Iowa [Mr. HICKENLOOPER] is absent by consent of the Senate. If present, he would vote "nay."

The Senator from Delaware [Mr. BucK] is necessarily absent.

The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. HART] is absent because of the death of his son.

The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. BRIDGES], the Senators from Kansas '[Mr. ·CAPPER and Mr. REED], the Senator from Michigan [Mr. FERGUSON], the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. MoORE], the Senator fr.om West Virginia [Mr. REVERCO;MB], the Senato?:" from Wyoming [Mr. RoBERTSON], the Senator from· New Hampshire [Mr. TOBEY J, and the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. WILEY] are detained on official business.

The Senator from Indiana [Mr. WILLIS] is absent by consent of the Senate.

The result was announced-yeas 56, nays 6, as follows:

Aiken Bailey Barkley Bilbo Brewster Briggs Brooks Byrd Capehart Chandler Chavez Donnell Downey Eastland Ellender Fulbright George Gerry Green

Ball Burton

YEAS-56 Guffey Millikin Gurney Mitchell Hatch Morse Hawkes Murdock H3.yden O'Daniel Hill O'Mahoney Hoey Overton Johnson, dolo. Pepper Johnston, S.C. Saltonstall Kilgore Smith La Fo1lette Taylor Langer Thomas, Okla. Lucas · Thomas, Utah McCarran Tunnell McClellan Wagner McFarland Walsh McKellar White McMahon Young Mead

NAYS-6 Bushfield Taft Shipstead Wherry

NOT VOTING-34 Andrews Hickenlooper Scrugham Austin Johnson, Calif. Stewart Bankhead Magnuson Thomas, Idaho Bridges Maybank Tobey Buck Moore Tydings Butler Murray Vandenberg Capper Myers Wheeler connally Radcliffe Wiley Cordon Reed Willis Ferguson Revercomb Wilson Glass Robertson Hart Russell

So the nomination of Claude R. Wickard to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration was confirmed.

Mr. BARKLEY. I ask that the President be immediately notified of the confirmation.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the Presid.ent will be notified forthwith.

The clerk will state the next nomination on the calendar.

POSTMASTER

The legislative clerk read the nomination of Elvas V. Shove to be postmaster at Biloxi, 1.\(iss.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the nomination is confirmed, and without objection, the President will he notified forthwith. That

- completes. the caiendar. AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMITTEE ON

FINA,NCE TO FILE REPORTS

· The Senate resumed the consideration of legislative business.

Mr. GEORGE . . Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to make reports during the adjournment of the Senate following today's session.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? Without objection, the committee is so authorized. AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMITTEE ON

COMMERCE TO SUB~llT REPORTS

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent tbat during the adjournment of the Senate following today's session the Committee on Commerce be authorized to file reports on measures which may be pending before it~


LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. Mr. President, it .may be necessary for -me to be absent from the Senate for several days, and I ask unanimous consent that I may be.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without obj~ction, leave of absence is granted .the Senator from Wisconsin. AUTHORIZATION FOR COMMITTEE ON

APPROPRIATIONS TO FILE REPORTS

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair askS unanimous consent of the Senate to be allowed to submit reports of the Committee on Appropriations during the adjournment if any are ready, The Chair hears no objection.

The senior Senator from Nevada [Mr. McCARRANJ was to make the request, but not seeing him in the Chamber, the Chair has made the request himself. The Chair notes that the Senator from Nevada has just entered the Chamber, and informs him that the Senate has consented that reports may be made by the Committee on Appropriations during the adjournment. ·

· Mr. McCARRAN. There is no neces-sity ·ror repeating the request. · ~ECONSTRUCTION OF SENATE AND HOUSE

ROOFS AND SKYLIGHTS

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, during the call of the calendar today I asked that Senate Joint Resolution 31, providing for an investigation in regard to the reconstruction of the roofs and skylights over the Senate and House wings of the Capitol, go over in order that I might obtain some !~formation about the mat·

ter, the chairman of the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds being at the moment absent. I have obtained the necessary information, and I now ask that the joint resolution be considered.

Mr. WHITE. Has the joint resolution anything to do ·with the membership of the Senate?

Mr.- BARKLEY. The joint resolution has nothing to do with the membership of the Senate, but it will have something to do with the ability of Senators to be heard better after the work is completed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the joint resolution?

T'nere being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the joint resolutio~ (S. J. Res. 31) relating to the appropriation for the roofs and skylights over the Senate ahd House wings of the Capitol, and for other purposes, which had been reported from the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds with amendments.

The first amendment of the committee was, on page 1, line 9, after the word "for", to strike out ·~replacement of the skylight over the Senate Chamber with reinforced concrete roof slab" and to insert "the substitution ·of reinforced concrete roof slab for the skylight over the Senate Chamber." · ·

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, .on page 2,

line 15, after the woTd~ ''to be", to strike out "designated" and insert "appointed."

The amendment was agreed to. The next amendment was, on page 2,

line 16, to strike out the words "Yice President" and insert "President of the Senate."

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, I move to amend the amendment of the committee by inserting, after the word "President", the words "pro tempore", so that it will read: "President pro tempore of the Senate."

The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.

The amendment, as amended, was agreed to.

The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, as follows:

Resolved, etc., That the appropriation of $585,000 provided in the Second Deficiency Appropriation Act, approved June 27, 1940, as amended and carried forward by the act of June 8, 1942, for the reconstruction of the roofs and skylights over the Senate and House wings of the United States Capitol, together with such additional amounts as may be provided hereafter for such purpose, shall be available also for the substitution of reinforced concrete roof slab for the sk-ylight over the Senate Chamber, reconstruction of ceiling, redecoration, acoustical treatment, improved lighting, and other alterations, changes, and improvements in such Chamber: Provided further, That there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, to be merged with, and to be available for the same purposes· and for expenditure in the same manner as the appropriation heretofore made, such additional amounts as may be necessary for the additional improvements herein authorized: P1·ovided further,. That the project, insofar as it affects the Senate wing of the Capitol, shall be carried forward by the Architect of the Capitol in accordance with plans to be approved by a committee of five Senators, to be appointed by the President pro

6470 ·coNGRESSIONAL· RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 tempore of the Senate, upon recommendation of the chairman of the Senate Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

ADJOURNMENT TO MONDAY Mr. BARKLEY. I move that the Sen~

ate adjourn until Monday next. The motion was agreed to; and <at 5

o'clock P.m.) the Senate adjourned until Monday, June 25, 1945, at 12 o'clock meridian.

CONFIRMATIONS Executive nominations confirmed by

the Senate June 21, 1945: RURAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION

Claude R. Wickard, to be Administrator of the Rural Electrification Administration for a term of 10 years.

POSTMASTERS

MISSISSIPPI

Elvas V. Shove, Biloxi.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THURSDAY, JuNE 21, 1945

The House met at 11 o'clock a. m. The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera

Montgomery, D. D., offered the following prayer:

0 Thou who art the light of the world, whose glory shines forth in the life of our Saviour,. we would be faithful stewards of Thy bounty. From the evil of ourselves we would be free and by the sacrificial cross prove our discipleship. Grant that our affections and desires may be ennobled and devoted to the living realities of Thy truth that others may come into its joy and freedom.

Thy gentleness and tenderness, blessed Lord, are such that the bruised reed Thou wilt not crush and the smoldering flax Thou wilt not quench. We bless Thee for Him who, beholding the multitudes, had compassion and pointed to the unseen battlements of the heavenly world. Enter Thou the deep recesses of our natures, purify and hallow the elements there, soften all that is harsh and sweeten all that is bitter. Thou who weighest the motives of men, grant that we may be moved by the remembrance of Thy countless mercies and do generous deeds for our country. Through Christ. Amen.

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate, by Mr.

Frazier, its legislative clerk, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment a bill of the House of the foUowing title:

H. R. 3240. An act to extend the authority of the President under section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and for other purposes.

The message also announced that the Senate disagrees to the amendment of the House to the bill <S. 592) entitled "An act for the relief of the estate of James Wilson, deceased," requests a con~ ference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and

appoints Mr. ELLENDER, Mr. TuNNELL, and Mr. WHERRY to be the conferees on the part of the Senate.

The message also announced that the President pro tempore has appointed Mr.. BARKLEY and Mr. BREWSTER members of the · joint select committee on the part of the Senate, as provided for in the act of August 5, 1939, entitled "An act to provide for the disposition of certain records of the United States Government," for the disposition of executive papers in the following departments and agencies:

1. Department of Commerce. 2. Post Office Department. 3. National Archives. 4. National Housing Agency. 5. Office of Civilian Defense. 6. Railroad Retirement Board. 7. United States Maritime Commis

sion. 8. War Manpower ·commission. 9. War Relocation Authority.

COMMITTEE ON THE MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES

Mr. BLAND. Mr. Speaker, I ask ·unanimous consent that during the period of general debate this afternoon the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries may consider legislation.

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

Mr. CHURCH. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I regret very much to be placed in this position. The committee is now in session. Attending that session when I left it a few minutes ago for the floor were every Republican member and not a single Democratic member except the gentleman who is acting as chairman.

Mr. Speaker, on last Tuesday afternoon I, with other members of the committee; had to come to the floor; and during that Tuesday afternoon session of the committee, while the House was in session, things happened in the committee which I think makes the bill under consideration there a monstrosity until it is changed. I believe that in order to report out a good bill-and this is no criticism to our good chairman! must object. Other members of'" the committee, including myself, want to be on the floor this afternoon. It is in an efiort to help our good chairman get out a good bill that I must object.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. OUTLAND. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to include in the remarks I shall make in Committee of the Whole today certain correspondence dealing with price control.

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

There was no objection. Mr. PATTERSON asked and was given

permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD on the subject Opposition to the Sale of Nazi Films by Alien Property Custodian.

Mr. LANE asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD and include an editorial which appeared recently in the Boston Post, Boston, Mass~

Mr. LANE asked and was· given permission to extend his -remarks in the RECORD and include a tribute paid by the majority leader( Hon. JoHN W. McCoRMACK, to Hon. ,JAMES . M. CuRLEY on the annivers.ary of his .birthday in January 1945.

Mr. LARCADE asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD on four different subjects and to include therein newspaper articles in each instance.

Mr. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD and include a statement by the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders and Helpers. This statement, according to an estimate from the Printing Office, will ·run about $416. I think it is of sufficient importance that it be extended in the RECORD notwithstanding the cost.

The SPEAKER. Notwithstanding the cost, without objection, the extension may be made.

There was no objection; Mr. BENNETT of Missouri asked and

was given permission to extend his remarks in the Appendix of the RECORD and include a brief letter. - ·

Mr. STEFAN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Appendix on the OPA and · include therein a letter and a newspaper article. ·

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in twq instances in the Appendix and to include · therein a letter and a radio address.

Mr. DOLLIVER asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD and include therein an editorial from the Freeman Journal, a daily newspaper in Webster City, Iowa. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA APPROPRIATION

BILL, 1946-CONFERENCE REPORT Mr. O'NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I call up

the conference repor·t on the bill <H. R. 3306) making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1946, and for other purposes; and I ask unanimous consent that the statement of the managers on the part of the House may 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 Ken-tucky? - ·

There was no objection. The Clerk began the reading of the

statement. The conference report and statement

are as follows:

CONFERENCE REPORT

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 3306) "making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1946, and for other purposes," having met, after full and free conference, ha v~ agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 4, 15, 18, and 19.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6471 That the House recede from its disagree

ments to the amendments of the Senate numbered 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30, 31, 33, and 34, and agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 1: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 1, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert "$225,400"; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 14: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 14, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: RP__store the matter stricken out by said amendment amended to read as follows: ", but obligations for expenditure to be made during the fiscal year 1946 shall not be incurred for any or all of the foregoing projects which would result in a total obligation in excess of such $2,126,560"; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment nu'mbered 20: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 20, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In· lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment

' insert "$1,788,000"; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 28: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 28, and agree to the same with an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert "$444,000"; and the Senate agree to the same.

The committee of conference report in disagreement amendments numbered 17, 27, 29, and 32.

THOMAS J. O'BRIEN, EMMET O'NEAL BEN F. JENSEN; I VvALt; HORAN,

Managers on the Part of the House. JOSEPH c. O'MAHONEY, JOHN H. OVERTON, ELMER THOMAS, THE~. G. BILBO, HAROLD H. BURTON, JOSEPH H. BAJ;.L,

:Managers 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. 3306), making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1946, and for other purposes, submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon and recommended in the accompanying conference report as to each of such amendments, namely:

No. 1, relating to the Auditor's Office: Appropriates :e225,400, instead of $227,200 as proposed by the Senate and $220,000 as proposed by the liouse. The added amount will provide for the salaries of two additional clerks and for the purchase of a bookkeeping machine.

No. 2, relating j;o the Department of Weights, Measures, and Markets: Reappropriates $6,000 o:f the current year's appropriation for repairs to Eastern Market, as proposed by the Senate.

No. 3. relating to th-e Office of Recorder of Deeds: Appropriates $148,700 as proposed by the Senate, instead o~ $145,300 as proposed by the House.

No. 4, relating to general supervision and instruction, public schools: Eliminates language inserted by the Senate to reappropriate $25,000 of the current year's appropriation for payment to the National Symphony Or-chestra Association. ·

Nos. 5 and 6, relating to general supervision and instruction, public schools:

Amendments clarify provision relating to legally adopted children.

Nos. 7 and 8, relating to construction, public schools: Provides for an additional amount of $60,000 for the construction of an addition to the Kimball School and for the amount of $430,000 for the construction of a school building in the vicinity of Fiftythird and Blaine Streets, NE., as proposed by the senate.

Nos. 9, 10, and 11, relating to construction, public schools: Provides for the preparation of plans and specifications for three elementary schools and appropriates $28,560 for such purpose, as proposed by the Senate.

Nos. 12, 13, and 14, relating to construction, public schools: Corrects total in conformity with added amounts appropriated for construction under preceding amendments, limits the crediting of the appropriation account of the Office of Municipal Architect, as proposed by the Senate, and restores, with modification, the original House provision regarding the limiting of expenditures for construction purposes.

No. 15, relating to the public library: Appropriates $679 ,000 as proposed by the House, inst ea.d of $682,900 as proposed by the Senate.

No. 16, relating to the public library: Appropriates $17,800 for the preparation of plans and specifications for branch library buildings, as proposed by the Senate.

Nos. 18 and 19, relating to Gallinger Municipal Hospital: Eliminates Senate provisions providing for a statutory position of chief steward.

No. 20, relating to Gallinger Municipal Hospital: Appropriates $1,788;000, instead of $1,828,300 as proposed by the Sanate, and $1,750,000 as proposed by the House. The conferees are agreed that the additional positions requested for this institution are not denied by the reduction in conference of the total amount provided by the Senate amendment. The reduction effected is purely a monetary one, based on current and anticipated total expenditures. The conferees are of the opinion that the additional positions proposed by the Senate, especially those needed to staff the kitchen and the psychiatric ward, can be established within the limit of the funds provided.

No. 21, relating to Gallinger Municipal Hospital: Broadens restrict! ve provision to include certain other necessary services, as proposed by the Senate. ·

Nos. 22, 23, and 24, relating to Family Welfare Service: Increases the number of foster homes from four to eight, and, in consequ~nce thereof, appropriates $557,680 as proposed by the Senate, instead of $556,000 as proposed by the House.

No. 25, relating to Juvenile Correctional Service: Appropriates $385,740 as proposed by the Senate, instead of $390,000 as proposed by the House.

No. 26, relating to Department of Inspect ions: Appropriates $346,900 as proposed by the Senate, instead of $340,000 as proposed by the House.

No. 28, relating to Department of Vehicles and Tr.affic: Appropriates ·$!44,000, instead of $465,600 as proposed by the Senate and $396,-200 as proposed by the House. The added amount covers $26,000 for parking meters, $16,000 for pedestrian traffic lights, and $5,• 800 for personal services.

No. 30, relating to National Capital Parks~ Appropriates $948,300 as proposed by the Senate instead of $936,000 as proposed by the :House.'

No. 31, relating to National Zoological Park: Limits the purchase of passengercarrying vehicles to one, as proposed by the Senate.

No. 33, relating to the purchase of automobiles for the government of the District of Columbia: Limits such purchases, with exceptions, to used or Federal surplus motor vehicles.

No. 34: Corrects section number.

AMENDMENTS IN DISAGREEMENT

No. 17, relating to the municipal court~ Provides. for advancements to the clerk of court of sums of money in order to facilitate payment of witness fees. The managers Will move to recede and concur.

No. 27, relating to Dapartment Of Vehicles and Traffic: Ex,empts the expenditure of $20,-000 for traffic safety education from provisions of any other law. The managers will move to recede and concur. ·

No. 29, relating to Dapartment of Vehicles · and Traffic: Clarifies intent of original House provision. The managers will move to recede and concur.

No. 32: Provides for retroactive payments made necessary by reallocation of positions by Civil Service Commission. The managers will move to recede and concur.

THOMAS J. O'BRIEN, EMMET O'NEAL, BEN F. JENSEN, WALT HORAN,

Managers on the Part of the House.

Mr. O'NEAL (interrupting the reading of the statement). Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as there is nothing controversial, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the statement may be dis· pensed with.

Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I was not present during the conference on the bill making appropriations for the District of Columbia because I was in San Francisco on official work in connection with the United Nations Conference.

I am seriously worried regarding the situation that exists in Gallinger Hospi· tal. A new kitchen has been constructed there and additional help is badly needed. The situation in the psychiatric ward or hospital is also serious. The fact of the matter is that the entire health situatio'n in the District of Columbia is facing a crisis due to the fact that many experi· enced and key people are leaving and the officials in charge are having a tremendous task in securing efficient help for the taking care of the ill and suffering in the institutions of the District. The committee has been very sympathetic to the needs of the institutions. The committee is on record as requasting th~ officials to add additional efficient help in the kitchen at Gallinger and securing additional psychiatrists for the psychi .. atric ward. The committee has been told that sufficient funds are on hand for th2 payment of salaries for these additional people, but after several conferences the officials have told me that there is not sufficient money to pay these additional people. They are now, therefore, in the predicament of having to follow the instructions of Congress and employ these additional people, but ma,y have no money with which to pay them.

The information · I received is to the effect that the Civil Service Commission will soon allow a new allocation of salaries for certain nurses and other key people in Gallinger. That may take u;.:> much of the funds provided in the new appropriation for the next fiscal year.

There is an item for the purchase of fuel and other things which I fear will deplete the funds they have or will have on hand.

I am also informed that the officials fear that if they hope for. a deficiency to ,Pay these people which the committee

6472 CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21

insists they employ, they will be up against a ruling of the Comptroller General and the Bureau of the Budget which may preclude them from asking for a deficiency if and when they find no funds on hand with which to pay salaries for these additional employees which Congress now says they must put on the pay roll.

Mr. O'NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I may say to the gentleman, if he will permit an interruption, that the conferees went into that very carefully and are deeply sympathetic with the position that the gentleman from Nebraska takes. They feel there is no change of those positions by this agreement; that there is sufficient money to take care of the positions; and, further, we have had conferences with officials of'the Bureau of the Budget, and they have agreed with the position the conferees have taken.

Mr. STEFAN. Am I to understand the gentleman had a conference with the Bureau of the Budget?

Mr. O'NEAL. There was only a $40,000 reduction under the $1,800,000 appropri-ation. ·

Mr. STEFAN. But practically all that reduction has come from Gallinger Hospital where the situation is so critical that Dr. Ruhland and other health officers are very much worried. · The record today must show that Congress has been put on notice of this serious health situation. But if the gentleman assures me that the Bureau of the Budget indi-

- cates that there are sufficient funds on hand, and if the District institutional officials are assured of sufficient funds if forced to ask for a deficiency, it may clear up this serious problem. I feel that we are now assured of the employment of these additional people at Gallinger Hospital, and also the funds for the payment of their salaries.

Under those assurances I withdraw my reservation of objection.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Kentucky that further reading of the conference report be dispensed with? ·

There was no objection. . Mr. O'NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the conference report.

The previous question was ordered. The SPEAKER. The question is on

the conference report. The conference report was agreed to. Mr. O'NEAL. Mr. Speaker, there is no

question that I know of in the· mind of anyone as to the four Senate amendments, and I therefore ask unanimous .consent that they be considered en bloc.

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

There was no objection. The SPEAKER. The ·Clerk will re ..

port the Senate amendments. The Clerk read as follows: Senate No. 17: Page 27, line 2, insert

": Provided further, That hereafter the disbursing officer of the District of Columbia is authorized to advance to ·~he clerk of the court, upon requisition previously approved by the Auditor of the District of Columbia, sums of money not exceeding $500 at any one time, to be used for the paymei?-t of witness tees:r

./

Senate amendment No. 27: Page 49,line 20, insert "without reference to any other law.'' . Senate amendment No. 29: Page 40, line 17,

after ,the word "shall", insert the word "hereafter." · Senate amendment No. 32 ~ Page 62, line 25, after the word "Columbia", insert ": Provided further, That officers and employees whose positions wez:e reallocated by the Civil Service Commission during the period January 1, 1945, to July 1, 1945, who have not received such reallocation increases shall be entitled to receive them retroactively to the date they would otherwise have been effective except for the provisions of said section 7, but in no case prior to January 1, 1945."

Mr. O'NEAL. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur in the Senate amendments.

The motion was agreed to. A motion to reconsider the vote by

which action was tal~en on the motion was laid on the table.

EXTENDING PRICE CONTROL AND STABILIZATION ACTS

Mr. · SPENCE. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 101) extending the effective period of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, and the Stabilization Act of 1942, as amended.

Th,e motion was agreed to. Accordingly the House resolved itself

into the Committee of the Whole House on the State c.f the Union for the further consideration of House Joint Resolution 101, with Mr. COOPER in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield

15 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. OUTLAND].

Mr. OpTLAND. Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to use this time trying to go into a defense of price control or the need for price control. It seems to me that that is rather generally recognized not only by the Memb~rs of this House but by the American people as a whole. The importance of holding the line against inflation is such an obvious part of the war effort here on the home front that I am very much surprised to see any objection entered to the principle itself. I think that the place where the problems arise is in trying to iron out the undoubted inequities and injustices that have crept into the administration of the act. That t.here have been injustices and that there have been inequities is not open to question. Such are bound to occur in a program of this magnitude. The question is what can we in this House do to help iron out those problems and at the same time hold the line in general.

The Banking and Currency Committee thought that the best thing to do was to pass out a simple renewal of the Price Control Act, believing that it is possible under the act as it now exists to correct the inequities. · One of the most difficult problems that we face is the one dealing with rent control and I have asked for this time today to try to point out some of the problems that have surrounded the rent control phases of the whole price control program. This has been one of the most difficult things to administer.

Millions upon millions of rentals have had to be adjusted . all over the United

States. More than 15,000,000 units have been so affected. It has been very difficult to pass a law and to establish a policy which would apply equally well to the many diverse regions in the country where rent control has had to be instituted. The problems of rent adjustment in New York City and in Ventura, Calif., are not identical by any means. I may say first of all that Federal rent control ~oes not go into a community until congestion in that community is such that prices skyrocket and in order to hold the general inflation line controls must be imposed. · Generally the War · Department or the Navy Department, sometiines both request that such control be established. If efforts at local control prove satisfactory, the Federal Government does not step into the picture. Unfortunately, many such attempts at local control have faiied; they have failed because a small minority of property ownners and landlords have not cooperated in keeping rentals within reasonable bounds. It has been my experience that most landlords are willing and anxious to cooperate; they are as patriotic as other citizens, and most of them realize the importance of price control in relation to the war effort. It is unfortunate indeed that the actions of this small minority has made it essential for controls to be established. · All of us will be very glad to see the . time come when rent control as well as other types of wartime controls can be removed. I will be among the first to advocate such removal at the earliest pos-sible moment. ·

In that connectton I think it is only fair to point out that already some 12 or 15 areas in this country have been removed from rent control. They have been removed because the conditions which originally caused them to be established have been now changed. Unfortunately for those of us who live on the Pacific coast our section will probably be one of the last to have the controls removed. Because of the fact that the war in the Pacific will be .going on for a While yet, it will be necessary that those controls be maintained. · Mr. Chairman, at this point in the record I wish to insert in the RECORD excerpts from a letter to me by the National Price Control Administrator, Mr. Chester Bowles, written June 11, 1945, stating policy in regard to the removal of rent control from areas where it is no longer deemed necessary. I should like to also insert a letter to me from the National Rent Control Director, Mr. Ivan Carson, touching upon this same point, as well as a memorandum from his office to regional, district, and areas directors. I believe that this correspondence and this memorandum will give encouragement to all of us who are anxious that rent control be removed from as many areas as possible and as s_oon as possible:

EZCERPT FROM LETTER OF CHESTER BOWLES

There is another phase of the rent-control program upon which I should like to comment, namely, our policies, plans, and progress to date in the removal of rent control. · W)len the Price Act was renewed last spring, Congress passed an amendment which reads as follows: · "Whenever the Administrator shall find :that, in any defense-rental area or any po!:-..

CONGR-ESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6473 tion thereof spedfied.· by .him, the availability of adequate rental housing accommodations and other relevant factors are such as to make rent control unnecessary for the purpose of eliminating speculative, unwarranted, and abnormal increases in rents and of prevent~ng profiteering and speculative and other disruptive practices resulting from abnormal I_D.arket conditions caused by congestion, the controls imposed uppn rents by authority of this act in such defense-rental area or portion thereof shall be forthwith abolished; but whenever in the judgment of the Admin- . istrator it is necessary or proper, in order to effectuate the purpose of this act, to reestablish the regulation of rents in any such defense-rental area or portion thereof, he may forthwith by regulation or order reestablish maximum rents for housing accommcdations therein in accordance with the standards set forth in this act."

This amendment is really a ·statement of our policy with respect to the· removal of rent control adopted prior to passage of the amendment. In fact, rent control had been :removed from some areas prior to the date of the amendment.

We are watching the situat!on very closely so that rent control can be removed from 'areas as soon as it is shown. that the need for control has passed. In April we fur·nished to the Secretary of war and the Secretary of the Navy a list of some 235 areas where rent control had been instituted as a .result of the location of a camp or training .statiDn or an ordnance plant in the locality. We asked the 2 Secretaries to give us their estimate of the, number of areas where service activities- would be discontinued during the· next year. The reply from the Navy indicated that there would oe no reduction in activities in the areas where rent control had been instituted bec·ause of naval activities. The Army furnished us with a list of the installations which . will not be used by the War Department during the redeployment period of approxi):Ilately the next year. In a number of these areas the Army activity was not the sole cause of the housing shortage leading to rent control and the .discontinuance of the activities have had little .or no effec:t upon the situation. The bal.ance of the list containing approximately 16 installations in. 9 areas is being studied

.to determine whether or not controls· can be removed.

AS of May 31 rent control has been removed from eight areas. In one of these, Malvern, Ark., it was necessary to reestablish rent control on January 1, 1945. The areas which

· have been decontrolled and the date control was removed are as follows:

1. A portion of Stuttgart area, Arkansas, July 1, 1943. ·

2. Malvern area, Arkansas, DeQember 1, 1943; reestablished January 1, 1945.

3. Sault Ste. Marie area, Michigan, June 1, 1944. . -

4. Crab Orchard area, Illinois, June 1, 1944, 5. A portion of the Cheyenne area, Wyo-

ming, March 1, 1945. 6. Leadville area, Colorado, May 1, 1945. 7. Paris, Tenn., area, May 15, 1945. 8. Clarksville area, Arkansas, _May 15, 1945. Rent control has beeri established in ap-

proximately 235 areas primarily and almost wholly as a result of the location of Army or Navy establishments or ordnance plants in the communities. This group of areas represents the best prospect for decontrol during the coming year. I am sure you understand this problem is complicated, however, by the fact that it is necessary for the Army to re-

. activate a number of establishments originally put on a stand-by basis for use as redistribution centers, hospitals, or conval'es

. cent centers or for other purposes. It has not · followed, therefore, that as soon as a camp · is put on a stand-by basis rent control can

be removed. XCI-408

I would like to point out in this connection t.hat the areas included in this group are generally small and do not involve very much personnel. The bulk of our operations from a volume. standpoint is located in larger industrial centers where service activities as such are only a small part of the picture. The removal of rent control from these areas presents a much more complicated problem and is directly connected with the severe housing shortage existant in all of our larger cities. ,

The chances are that in certain areas the housing shortage will remain for a considerable time even after VJ-day. The problem in these cities, is quite different from the smaller communities I · have just discussed. At some point after the war ends Congress will have to determine whether Federal rent control should be discontinued even though pressures continue.

Sincerely, CHESTER BOWLES,

Administrator.

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D. C., May 31, 1945.

The Honorable GEORGE E. OUTLAND, House of Representatives,

. Washington, D. C. DEAR GEORGE: In line with our conversa

tion of this morning, I am enclosing copy of instructions on the removal of rent control, which were s·ent to the field very recently. I am planning a series of "Decontrol" memoranda of which this iE> No. 1.

This memorandum lays down the policy to be followed in accordance with the amendment passed by the Congress last year.· In fact, as I am sure you know, we really followed this policy before the amendment was adopted.

The memorandum contains the results of our review with the Army and Navy of areas where control was put in for service reasons, about 230. in number. I believe I mentioned ·this to you in our talk this morning. Also contained in the memorand-qm is a list of the areas from which control has been removed . This is up to date and contains a list of three areas removed during May.

I am sure I mentioned this morning that we are going out of four areas in Ma,y. The ·number is three, instead of four, Leadville, Colo., Paris, Tenn., and Clarksville, Ark. The

·fourth I had in mind was Greenville, Miss., but just about the time we were ready to

·remove control we got word from the field :that the air base, which caused the control to be put in, had been reactivated. In spite of the fact that rent control stays, I understand that the town is overjoyed. I mention this ·because it illustrates some of the difficulties we are up against. Another similar case recently was Blytheville, Ark.

The memorandum also includes a list of · 31 cities which we have surveyed for decontrol purposes since last July, or are now being surveyed for us by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In some of the p!aces included on

'the list, for example Colorado Springs, recent ·developments have clearly shown that rent control cannot as yet be removed. In Colorado Springs the reason for this was the con

. version of Camp Carson to a hospital. In addition we now have our field people looking at a number of other areas.

We are sincerely trying to ke~p abreast of · the changing picture with respect to removal of rent control and are hoping that things will square around during the year so that we will be able to get out of a goodly number of smaller communities where Army

. camps and air bases have been discontinued. If you have any suggestions as to the

· approach we are taking please pass them on · to me.

With kind personal regards, I am Sincerely yours,

IVAN D. CARSON, · Deputy Administrator.

DECONTROL MEMORANDUM No. 1 MAY 23, 1945.

-To all Regional Rent Executives, Regional Rent Attorneys, District Rent Executives, District Rent Attorneys, Area Rent Directors, Area Rent Attorneys.

From: Ivan D. Carson, Deputy Administrator for Rent.

Subject: Decontrol of defense-rental areas. This is the first of a series of memoranda

which will discuss our policies and procedures with respect to the decontrol of defenserental areas. 1. STANDARDS FOR DECONTROL OF DEFENSE•

RENTAL AREAS The policy of OPA, which was written into

the Emergency Price Control Act by the Stabilization Extension Act of 1944, is to remove rent control as quickly as possible from every defense-rental area in which it is no longer needed. The Office has already removed rent control from eight defense-rental areas or portions of areas (see exhibit A). In the case of one of these eight areas, Malvern, Ark., control had to be reestablished.

The conslderation of an area for poSsible decontrol involves a study of three groups of related factors: (1) The war activities which affect the area, (2) the trend of rents, and (3) housing vacancies. These groups of .factors are studied in order to arrive at a judgment as to (a) the extent to which pres·sures upon the rental housing market of the area have been reduced and (b) the probable future trend of rents if rent control should be removed.

A decline in war activity is the primary indication that an area may be decontrolled. Before control can be removed, however, it should be clear that the decline in war activity is not temporary and that it is not offset by an expansion of other war activities either .within the area or in nearby areas, as a result of revisions of war-production schedules.

In the case of military establishments, there is a great deal of shifting of troops and change in the use of establishments going on at the present time. A number of Army ·camps have been converted into hospitals .and ·recuperation and redistribution centers. Frequently this conversion is preceded by a short period of inactive status for the estab·Hshment. Sufficient time should be allowed to elapse after the establishment has been

· declared inactive for the War Department to consider the possible uses which might lead to reactivation. It must be recognized that the War Department's plans are necessarily fiuid and are modified from day to day to meet changing war ne.eds, that information on plans to reactivate certain establishments may not become available until after some areas have been decontrolled, and that in

. some cases reactivation may necessitate the reestablishment of rent control.

The extent to which a decline in war activity has reduced the pressures upon the rental housing market of an area will be reflected in the trend of rents and housing vacancies.

. These two factors will also serve as a basis for judging the probable future trend of rents if an area were to be decontrolled. It is not possible to specify a vacancy ra,te which would indicate the existence of a normal housing market for every area. The vacancy rate required to give tenants enough choice to prevent a substantial rise in rents will vary from city to city depending on the population and economic character of the area, the nature of the area's housing, the extent of home ownership, the frequency with which tenants

. move, 2.nd other similar factors. The cur

. rent vacancy rate must also be considered against the background of the prewar vacancy 1·ate and the trend of vacancies since the be-

. ginning of the war. In judging the future trend of rents, certain types of vacancies must be discounted because they can exercise little or no restraining influence on an upsurge of . 1·ents. Among these types are vacancies iu

6474 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 dwellings in very poor condition, vacancies in temporary public war housing scheduled for removal from the area, and dwelling units in public war housing being held vacant to make possible extensive recruiting of labor for criti· cal war production.

2. PROCEDURE FOR DECONTROL OF DEFENSERENTAL AREAS

Indications that an area has had a decline in war activity wilich may make decontrol possible are obtained from a number of sources. Among these are the reports, both published and unpublished, of the War and Navy Departments, the War Production Board, and other Government agencies; the recommendations of local organizations and officials; and the reports of regional, district, and area rent officials. As soon as a report of a decline in war activity is received, a preliminary study of the area is made. This preliminary study, which will in most in· stances involve a. r€port from the field,t may reveal that the activity which has declined or has been discontinued constitutes only a minor portion of the war activity of the area. Obviously, where this is true control cannot be removed. On the other hand, the preliminary study may indicate that all war activity has ceased in the area or has declined to such an extent that rent control is no longer necessary. In such a case, the rent regulations will immediately be revoked. In most instances we believe that a special survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics will be required before a · decision can be reached. These surveys will provide data on housing vacancies, rental trends, and other information on the effect of the. decline in war activity on the rental housing market. Arrangements have already been made for the streamlining of these surveys so· that wherever possible decontrol action may be taken expeditiously. We shall always keep in close touch With field on decontrol studies. No areas or portions of areas will be decontrolled before the proposed action has been cleared With the field through the regional rent executive.

The War Department distinguishes sev. eral different types of inactive command installations .(Circular No. 89, March 20, 1945). A "command installation is any unit of real estate under the administration and control of the War Department primarily used or useful for activities of the Army other than the production of materiel, munitions, or supplies." According to the War Department, "an inactive installation is one in which all military operations have ceased and the classification may be applied to that portion of an active installation in which all military operations have ceased." "A surplus· installation is one which has been determined to be no longer necessary to fulfill the requirements of the War Department." Furthermore, the "using service under the direc· tion of the commanding general of a major force • .;. • may place an active installation temporarily in an inactive status and remove it from such temporary status without approval by higher authority where a future need is still contemplated." It is important to distinguish "temporarily

inactive," "inactive," and "surplus" estab· lishments because facilities in the first two categories e,re frequently reactivated after short periods of inactivity. Whenever a mill· tary establishment· which constitutes the principal war activity in an area beeomes temporarily inactive, inactive, or surplus, a preliminary study of the area will · be made immediately. If the establishment is surplus and the preliminary study and field reports are not conclusive but indicate that decontrol may be possible, the Bureau of Labor Statistics will be requested to con-

1 The next decontrol memorandum, which will be issued in the near future, will discuss the types of information to be included in these fields reports.

duct a decontrol survey. In the case of temporarily inactive and inactive establishments, however, further action will be de-' layed until 60 days have elapsed after the establishment was declared inactive. If at the end of the 60-day waiting period, the War Department reports that there are no current plans for reactivation, the survey will be ordered or the area will be decontrolled, depending upon the circumstances.

3. PROSPECTS F-QR DECONTROL

It is exceedingly difficult at this time to estimate the number of areas which may be · decontrolled before the end of the war. It is clear that many war activities will continue through VJ-day. These-include, to mention only a few, the work of navy yards and ship repair facilities, particularly on the Pacific coast; railroad activity, particularly in western railroad centers; oil and coal production; Army, Navy, and Veterans' Administration hospitals, and recuperation and rehabilita. tion centers; and certain types of basic war production. Current war plans are reported to call for a smaller cut-back in war production between VE-day and VJ-day than was previously anticipated. One major fac'OOr which will determine the number of areas which can be decontrolled is the -exact nature of these cut-backs. Regardless of the amount of the cut-back in total war production, it is clear that the number of areas which can be -decontrolled depends less upon the over-all percentage than upon the dis· tribution of the cut among individual areas and plants. A given over-all cutback may be made in such a way that almost all war plants close down in 25 areas. Or the same cut-back may mean that a single war plant closes down in each of 100 large industrial centers. In the former case, it may be possible to decontrol 25 areas. In the· iatter_ case, the housing pressure may be eased slightly in 100 areas, but it may not be possible to decontrol a single area.

The possibilities for decontrol during the next 6 months appear to be greatest for those areas in which the primary reason for rent control is the existence of Army or Navy facilities. A list of 230 such areas was sub· mitted to the War and Navy Departments with a request for information on the ex· tent to which the deactivation or discon· tinuance of military and naval facilities during .the year after VE-day might make possible the removal of rent control from these areas. The reply received from the Navy Department indicated that there is little likeli· hood of the removal of rent control during the year after VE-day from areas affected primarily by naval facilities. The War De· partment reported that no industrial installations (such as ordnance plants) in the 230 areas would be closed or discontinued according to present plans for post VE-day operations. The War Department also furnished this Office with a list of 137 .surplus command installations which comprise all the installations which will not be used by the War Department during the redeployment period of approximately the next year.

Of the total of 137 installations to be surplus during the redeployment period, 38 are in areas not under rent control at the present time, 80 constitute only a minor portion of the war activities in their respective areas, and 3 are in two areas from which rent control has already been removed. The re· maining 16 installations are in nine areas from which it may be possible to remove rent control, and studies are now being made of these areas to determine whether they can be decontrolled.

This Office has requested the Bureau of Labor Statistics to conduct decontrol surveys in 31 cities in 13 areas since July 1, 1944 (see exhibit B). Two areas have already been decontrolled as a result of thepe surveys.

In addition to the decontrol of areas affected by military establishments, it may be

possible to remove rent control from some of the smaller industrial areas as cut-backs are put into effect.

EXHmiT A EIGHT DEFENSE RENTAL AREAS OR PORTIONS OF

AREAS FROM WHICH RENT CON'IROL HAS •BEEN REMOVED -

1. Sault Ste. Marie area, Michigan (Chippewa County), was decontrolled on June 1, 1944. Two Army airfields in the area were declared inactive in March 1944 and Fort Brady was declared surplus in April 1944. A survey made in November 1944 indicated that rents had risen somewhat since rent control was removed, but the increases did not warrant the reestablishment of control. The area had 2,341 occupied rental dwellings and a popu· lation of 27,807 in 1940.

2. Crab Orchard area, Illinois (Jackson and Williamson Counties), was decontrolled on June 1, 1944. A sharp decline in employment at the Illinois ordnance plant was reflected in a drop in rents below the maximum ren~ date level in the four principal cities in _the area. Rents have risen since control was removed, but are still below the maximum

· rent level. The area had 8,706 occupied rental dwellings and a . population of 89,344 in 1940.

3. A portion of the Stuttgart area, Arkansas, consisting of the northern district of Prairie County, was decontrolled on July 1, 1943. Control was removed because it was found that this portion of the area was not seriously affected by war activities. The decontrolled portion of the area had 359 occupied rental dwellings and a population o! 7,124 in 1940.

4. Malvern area, Arkansas (Hot Spring.s County), was decontrolled on December 1, 1943. Easing of the pressure on the housing market was shown by a decline in the rent level by October 1943 below the level on the maximum rent date. A survey in June 1944 indicated that rents had skyrocketed after control was removed. Between October 1943 and June 1944 about one out of every four rented homes in Malvern had rent increases and the general level of rents rose more than 7 percent, to a level higher than it was when rent control was first established. Rent control was reesta}jlished in the area on January 1, 1945. The area ·had 1,411 occupied rental dwellings and a population of 18,916 in 1940.

5. A portion of the Cheyenne area, Wyoming, consisting of the portion of Laramie County outside the city of Cheyenne and its immediate vicinity, was decontrolled on March 1, 1945. Control was removed because it was found that this portion of the area was not seriously affected by war activities. The decontrolled portion of the area had approximately 400 occupied rental dwellings and a population of about. 11,000' in 1940.

6. Leadville area, Colorado (Eagle, Lake, and Summit Counties), was decontrolled on May 1, 1945. The major war activity affecting the area was Camp Hale, at Pando, 20 miles from Leadville. Camp Hale was declared surplus in September 1944. A survey conducted in February 1945 indicated that the level of rents had declined to approximately the level

· on the maximum rent date, March 1, 1942, The gross vacancy rate in February 1945 was found to be 15.8 percent, as compared with a rate of 12.2 percent in April 194.0. The area had 1,819 occupied rental dwellings and a population of 13,998 in 194.0.

7. Paris area, Tennessee (Henry County). was decontrolled on May 15, 1945. The major war activity in the area was Camp Tyson, a barrage balloon training center. Camp Tyson was declared surplus in August 1944. A survey conducted in February 1945 indicated that the gross vacancy rate in Paris was 6.2 percent, the general rent level was 1.4 percent below that of March 1, 1942, and 27 percent of the rental dwellings registered with the area rent office were renting for less than

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6475 their maximum rents. The area had 1,954 occupied rental dwellings and a population of 25,87-7 in 1940.·

8. Clarl{sville area, Arka~sas (Johnson County). was decontrolled on May 15, 1945. T'ne major war activity in the area was a naval radar training school at the College of the Ozarks. The Navy began moving its personnel out of Clarksville on ·April1, 1945, and on April 20, 1945, the training program was. officially discontinued. Decontrol was recommended by the mayor ot' Clarksville, a representative of the College of the Ozarks, the acting area rent director, the district director, the district rent executive, anCI the regional rent executive. The area had 1,305 occupied rental dwellings and a population ()f 18,795 in 1940.

EXHIB:r;t' B LIST OF 31 CITIES IN 13 DEFENSE-RENTAL

AREAS FOR WHICH BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS DECONTROL SURVEYS HAVE BEEN ORDERED SINCE JULY 1, 1944

DEFENSE-RENTAL AREA AND CITY TO BE SURVEYED Newport-Walnut Ridge, Ark.: Batesville,

Newport, Walnut Ridge. Colorado Springs·, Colo.: Colorado Springs. Leadville-Salida, Colo.1 : Leadville, Glen-

wood Springs, Salida, Rifle. Americus, Ga.: Americus. Toccoa, Ga.: Toccoa. Grenada, Miss.: Grenada; Carrollton and

Vaiden, comb.; Greenwood; Winona; Bruce and Calhoun, comb.; water Valley.

Fairbury-York, Nebr.: Exeter Village, Geneva, and Fairmont, comb.; Fairbury; Bruning, Hebron, and Deshler, comb.; York.

Corvallis, Oreg.: Corvallis, Albany. Medford, Oreg. : Medford. ' Clarksville, Tenn.2 : Paris. Tullahoma, Tenn.: Shelbyville, Tullahoma,

· Winchester, Fayetteville,' Lynchburg. Sherman-Denispn, Tex.: Bonham. Salt Lake City, Utah.: Tooele.

One of the points that I think should be emphasized is the need for absolute fairness and absolute impartiality in the administration of all types- of wartime controls. Rent control is especially important in this connection. The Administrator is in certain respects in the position of being an umpire. His decisions are not going to meet with uniform satisfaction from all -of those that are affected. If he has to make a decision which affects a landlord adversely, there is going to be criticism from that source. If he has to make a decision that affects a tenant adversely, there is bound to be a certain amount of dissatisfaction there. I would like to say this, however: That in the administration of this very .diffisult part of the Price Control Act I think, in all fairness, it should be stated· that Mr. Carson, the Rent Control Adminis-. trator, has done an excellent job. I have found that his office is always available when I want to go there and take up par..; ticular cases. He has shown himself to be fair-minded in the adjustment ·of complaints that have come up. Some-

1 On May 1, 1945 the Leadville-Salida area was divided into the following three areas: (1) Leadville area consisting of Eagle, Lake, and Summit Counties; (2) Salida area consisting of Chaffee County; and (3) Glenwood Springs area consisting of Garfield County. Rent control was removed on the same date from the Leadville area.

2 on May 14, 1945, Henry County was :·emoved from the Clarksville, Tenn., area and established as a separate Paris, Tenn., area. Rent control was removed from the Paris_, Tenn., area O'll May 15, 194~.

times ·in. regional or area offices the same attitude, unfortunately, has not been· found. Wherever a biased attitude is discovered it should and must be eliminated from the program.

Looking at the picture over the entire United States, I think we can say that a good job has been done in holding the line on rent. Part of that is due to the fact that last year this House made certain amendments to the Price Control Act which affected the rental picture. We tried to add language at that time which would clarify the situation. We made provision for peculiar circumstances which sometimes come into the relationship between landlord, and tenant. We made certain provisions for types of hardship cases which had undoubtedly arisen in many parts of the United States.

The people who testified before the House Committee on Banking and Curr'ency pointed out that the amendllfents which we added last year have definitely been helpful in correcting many of these injustices. Mr. Eugene P. Conser, who most ably represents the National Apartment Owners Association, stated on June 11 that "an amendment adopted last year providing for adjustment of rents which had been affected by 'pecu-. liar circumstances' has proven most useful in adjusting many inequities, and we sincerely appreciate your action in adopting it."

Those witnesses, including Mr. Conser, also pointed out, however, that there were some problems which still exist and where additional corrections in administration should be made. I am anxious that wherever possible these adjustments should be made. As I mentioned earlier, the committee thought it best not to malce amendments to the act but to try to take care of those conditions by language in the report which accompanies the act. Through this report the intent of Congress is specifically stated and should be so interpreted.

On page 10 of the report is a section dealing with rent control, and it is my opinion that the statements made here are going to help iron out an additional number of injustices in the future. I may say that I personally submitted to the committee definite recommendations in this connection, some of which form the basis for these statements. Certain ones, however, were not included, and these I shall comment upon later in my remarks. I would like to comment very briefly on some of the particular problems that are being faced in the general field of rent control.

The first problem has to do with the overall community picture, and especially with the date when rentals are frozen, the so-called freeze date. If a community has been in a depressed economic condition at that time the freezing may work an injustice on large groups throughout the community. I have seen areas in the United States where I think this probably occurred, and the necessity then arises for the Administrator to review the community picture on rents as a whole rather than to take them up case by case. If you will turn to the language on page 10 of the committee report, the second paragraph, I think you will find

that the conunittee has made excellent suggestions in this connection:

The Administrator's practice of making surveys of rental property should be broad- . ened and extended. The Administrator should be increasingly vigilant to determine areas and localities in which rising costs have affected the earning position of rental properties. In any areas in which such surveys indicate that cost increases have resulted in rental ceilings which are no longer generally fair and equitable under present administrative standards, the Administrator should take prompt action to grant appropriate relief.

It seems to me that in that language the committee is very definitely stating its position to the Administrator in regard to granting relief on a community• wide basis. Knowing the Administrator as I do, I have little doubt but that he will be open to suggestions which Members of this House wish to make regarding the particular communities that may be applicable under this point in- the report. I repeat, I have always found Mr. Carson eager for constructive suggestions, and anxious to improve the administering of this most complex part of the price-control law.

Before leaving this part of my discussion I might mention that my own· recommendations on this point differed slightly with that finally included in the report. It was my thought that some statement such as the following might accomplish the most good: "It is consistel)t with the purposes of the act that the Administrator investigate periodically the income and expenses of operation of housing properties. If then~ is evidence that housing properties generally in any defense rental area are not earning a fair and equitable rent, the Administrator is authorized to take such steps as will bring about this condition." I believe, however, that the intent of the committee as finally expressed in the language in the report already cited ts

· clear indication to the Administratol' that Congress expects direct action when surveys show that rent ceilings in any community are no longer fair and equitable. I intend to call to his attention certain cases where I think such surveys should be made. I hope the other Members of the House likewise will take advantage of that situation and point out to him communities where they believe rents may not be generally fair and equitable. It is only through such cooperation that community rental problems can be alleviated. That, however, is only one of the problems that arise in the whole field of rent control.

As I mentioned a moment ago, we added last year certain clarifying language dealing with adjustments for hardships and adjustments where classes of cases could be listed as peculiar circumstances. I should like to discuss this just briefly.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. OUTLAND. Yes; briefly, I do not have very much time. There are some other points I want to go into, but I yield ·to the gentleman.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. I was interested in the gentleman's statement on rent control which I think is a very good

:;.

6476. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 -statement. Would the gentleman advocate extending rent control to every community and every little town and hamlet in the United States?

Mr. OUTLAND. Certainly not. I would advocate extending rent control only to those communities which are so congested because of war conditions that rental prices have risen out of all reason. I certainly would not advocate extending it to every town and hamlet in the United States. On the contrary, I would like to state to the gentleman from Nebraska that I would advocate taking away rent control wherever it proved possible and feasible to do so. I think we want to get rid of it but I am afraid the time has not yet come to remove such control in many congested areas in this country.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. I might state to the gentleman that in Nebraska they are extending rent control ,t~ areas which are not congested but only because one or two people have complained to the OPA. Many 'small towns and hamlets far removed and hundreds of miles from areas of congestion are now being brought under rent control simply for the sake of control.

Mr. OUTLAND. In response to that statement, I would like to say two things. In the first place, I have tried to study

· this problem rather carefully. It has been my conclusion that rent control has not been extended to communities except where congestion does exist. Secondly, I would suggest that the gentleman call those particular cases to the attention of the Rent Control Administrator and I can almost assure him myself they will not only receive serious consideration but that in all probability a survey of those conditions will be made. ·

It seems to me the whole problem of adjustment for individual hardship oases and adjustment for cases involving peculiar circumstances ought to be gone into very thoroughly. One of the points tha·~ has been raised has been that the classes of cases involving peculiar circumstances should be listed in the regulations themselves. I have had some correspondence with the Rent Control Di· rector on that point and I have asked permission to include in my remarks correspondence as to the point of view of his office on that score.

My own thought on this matter was summarized in the following language which I submitted to the committee:

Adjustment for hardship: If the net oper• e.ting income o! any property has been re· duced by more than 5 percent in c<;~mparison with the net operating income on the freeze date, then a substantial hardship exists which should be subject to adjustment, provided that that decline in net income is due to a substantial and unavoidable increase in property taxes or operating costs.

Peculiar circumstances: The cJasses of cases of peculiar circumstances which are-such as to justify an amendment should be included 1n the regulations themselves. The Admin· 1strator has been prompt and his action praiseworthy in following out the mandate of Congress in connection with this amendment of last year, but the inclusion of these classes of cases in the regulations themselves would have a wholesome effect. Moreover, it is recommended that as much dlscreti<m as is possible consistent with the purposes of

the act should be given to the regional and area directors in providing for additional classes of cases coming under this provision.

I have discussed this matter at consid· erable length with the Administrator; I include here as part of my remarks a letter from him written June 15, 1945, as · well as copies of memoranda sent out to regional and area offices outlining. policy on this part of the program. I feel confident that the National Administrator, in this as well as in other particulars, will do everything possible to make such adjustments as will reduce inequities and improve the over-all administration of the program.

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION 1

Washington, D. C., June 15, 1945. The Honorable GEORGE E. OUTLAND,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR GEORGE: During the hearings before the House Banking and Currency Commit· tee on the renewal of the· Price Control Act witnesses representing the real-estate industry criticized the rent department for not inclUding in the peculiar circumstance amendment all of the classes of cases which have been included in official interpretations issued to our field offices and to the public.

To date we have set up several classes of cases where circumstances are such as to justify an adjustment under the peculiar circumstance amendment providing the rent is substantially lower than comparable rents. These have not been included in the regulations because to do so would make the amendment very unwieldy and would require new amendments every time additional classes of caszs were established. This method obviously brings to the regulations a much higher degree of flexibility than would be the case if they were subscribed· to a definite list of cases.

I am sure that the method we are following is more ·in the interest of landlords gen-' erally. Particularly is this , true since we have instructed our field offices that adjustments need not be limited to types of cases listed in the-- interpretations issued. For example, in November after the ·amendment had been in effect about 4 months we issued to our field offices a memorandum of instructions pointing up this fact. This memorandum was written after we had reviewed a large number of petitions filed under the new amendment. Our review embraced petitions_which had been _granted as well as those whick had been denied. The following is quoted from this memorandum:

"On the whole the decisions have been in accordance with the general principles stated by the national office. However, there has been a tendency in some offices to construe 'peculiar circumstances' more strictly than we intend. We note, for example, some tendency to deny adjustment in cases which seem meritorious, apparently because they do not fall within one of the general categories described in Rent .Memorandum 5 (a) (11)-I. (Issued July 15, 1944 prior to the effective date of the amendment.) As is stated in that memorandum, these groups of cases were not intended to be definitive. We fully expected that additional types of cases would be brought to the attention of the area offices in which adjustments would be proper. ~ • • It is not possible or appropriate for us td attempt to fumish an answer to every problem which may arise. Considerable dis· cretion rests in the area office, to be exercised in accordance with the general standards which we have outlined."

Our original instructions to the field also embodied this principle. · The following is

quoted from the original instructions issued July 15, 1944: '

"This interpretation is not intended to be ' defin.itive. ;rt is based_ upon cases which have come to our attention and which apparently are not uncommon. No doubt there will be oth~r cases, not coming within the general categories described in the Interpretation, in which adjustments properly may be made."

In the instructions issued to our field offlees last November the following comment was made in consideration of cases submitted under the peculiar circumstance amendment in relation to the extent of the variation of the rent from comparable rents: ~

"The extent of the variation from comparability is significant evidence, both on the issue of peculiar circumstances and on the question whether the peculiar circumstances caused the low rent. It is quite proper to require less evidence on these issues where . the rent is extremely low than is required where the variation is less extreme. It must be recognized that there are real difficulties of proof under section 5 (a) ( 11) , since in most instances we are attempting to ascertain facts on and prior to maximum rent date, a period. usu~lly some distance in the past. Where an extremely low rent appears, this in itself is a fairly strong indication that it was the result of unusual circumstances. In other words, the extent and extremity . of the variation from comparable rents may be indicative that the rent· was _ established under 'peculiar circumstances' and an adjustment under 5 (a) (11) would· be proper." ·

We shall continue to review cases submitted under the peculiar circumstance amendment and additional classes of cases will be added to 'the ofilci(;tl interpretations issued as they present themselves. This is a very flexible method of treatment and places discretionary authority in the handg of local area rent directors to approve adjustments under the amendment even though tbe circumstances of the particular cases do not fall Within the classes of cases included in the official illterpretations.

With my best regards, I am Sincerely yours,

IVAN D. CARSON,. De1iuty Administrator for Rent.

P. B.-Enclosed are copies of the rent memorandum and interpretations issued in connection with the peculiar circumstance amendment. The portions I have quoted above are taken from this material.

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, washington, D. c.

MEMORANDUM . To: All regional rent executives, regional rent

attorneys, area rent directors, and area rent attorneys.

From: Eugene Swigart, Associate General Counsel for Rent.

Subject: Interpretation 5 (a) (11)-l. Ad· justments for peculiar circumstances.

By amendment to the rent regulations effective · July 17, 1944, adjustments are provided under section 5 (a) ( 11) of the housing regulation in cases where the rent on the date determining the maximum rent "was materially affected by peculiar circum- _ stances." An adjustment will be made only where, because of these circu'tnstances, the rent was substantially lower than the rent generally prevailing in the defense-rental area for comparable housing accommodations on the maxlmum rent date. A similar provision was added to the hotel regulation as section 5 (a) (8).

The rent regulations fix maximum rent~J upon the basis o! the rent bargaj.ned for on the maximum rent date, a date on which the housing marltet was relatively unaffected by

1945 · CONGRESSIO.NAL RECORD-HOUSE 6477 war activities.1 Prior · to the amendment which added section 5 (a) (11), the rent regulations contained a number of grounds for adjustment in cla~?ses of cases in which the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was not the .result of the normal process of economic bargaining. One of the principal purposes of the ground for adjustment contained in section 5 (a) (11) is to give relief in additional types of cases in which factors not present in the normal rental transaction materially influenced· the amount of rent received by the landlord, resulting in the fixing of a rent substantially below the rents generally prevailing for comparable units.

There are three prerequisites to an adjustment under section 5 (a) (11). First, the rent on the date determining the maximum rent must have been substanti~lly below the rent generally prevailing in the area for comparable accommodations on the maximum rent date. Second, it must appear that there were •·peculiar circumstances" in connection with the renting. Third, it must appear that the low rent actually was caused by these peculiar circumstances.

. ILLUSTRATIONS

A. Renting under unusual pressure or · necessity

1. X learned that her husband, who had been overseas in military service, had returned to this country and was at least temporarily stationed in another city. She immediately made plans to join her husband and rented her home for $50 a month. The rent generally prevailing in the defenserental area for comparable houses on the maximum rent date was $75 a· month. X was inexperienced in business matters and handled the renting of the house personally rather than through an agent. The rental transaction was entered into hurriedly and under circumstances indicating that insuffl.

. cient consideration was given by X to obt>ining a proper rent. The renting o_ccurred after the effective date of the regulat10n and the maximum rent, therefore, is $50 a month under section 4 (e) of · the housing regulation.

2. Two months prior to the maximum rent date the owner of a house received notice from his employer of his transfer to a South American branch" office and had only 3 days to settle his personal affairs· before sailing. In order to ·dispose of his home, he rented -it to the first applicant for an amount very substantially below the prevailing rent for comparable accommodations in the area and the house was so rented on the maximum rent date. ,

In the above cases, an adjustment may be made on petition of the la~dlord on the ground that the rent was materially affected by peculiar circumstances.

B. Factors with respect. to management 1. On the maximum rent date a house was

owned and managed by a landlord who was mentally incompetent. Being incapable of normal busineso judgment he rented the accommodations on the maximum rent date for an amount very. substantially below the prJvailing level of rent for· comparable houses. • 2. For more than 4 years prior to the.maximum rent date, an elderly owner of a twofamily dwelling had been bedridden. Althought not mentally incompetent, her age and physical condition prevented her from

1 As the Emergency Court of Appeals has said rents are frozen under this method "at leveis which landlords and tenants had worked out for themselves by free bargaining

. in a competitive m arket, prior to the time when defense activities had injected into the market an abnormal factor resulting, or threatening to result, in rent increases inconsistent with the purposes . of the act." Ghatlos v. Brown, OPA Service, 612: 1, 5.

exercising normal business judgment. During this period rental values increased and on maximum rent date, the rent for subject property was substantially lower than that for comparable accommodations in the area. Subsequent to the maximum rent date the property changed hands and the new owner petitions for an adjustment under this section.

3. Approximately 1 year prior to maximum rent date the owner of a house which was then rented for $40 a · month died and a dispute arose concerning title to the house. This dispute was not settled until after maximum rent date, and during the intervening period the tenant continued to occupy the house paying $40 a month. This rent was substantially below the rent generally prevailing in the area for comparable accommodations on maximum rent date. How:ever, because of the title dispute, no one assumed responsibility for the active management of the property and the rent was not raised. Shortly after the maximum rent date the title dispute was settled and the house sold. The new purchaser promptly raised the rent to $60 a month, that being the rent generally prevailing in the area on maximum rent date for comparable accommodations.

4. For 7 years prior to December 1, ·1941, a house was rented for $35 per month. X, the owner, began an extended business trip on that date and asked his daughter to collect the rent and to take care of the property while he was away. On January 31, 1942, the tenant moved and the landlord's daughter rented the house to a friend of hers for $25 per month. This was the rent on March 1, 1942, the maximum rent ·date. The 'rent is substantially lower than prevailing rents for comparable accommodations.

5. Six months prior to maximum rent d~c.te, a house had been forfeited to the city for nonpayment of taxes. Under local law, a temporary tax receiver was appointed to collect rents and pay taxes until the property was either redeemed or sold. The property was rented by the tax receiver on the maximum rent date for an amount-very ·substantially below the prevailing rent for com.parable accommodations in the area. Subsequently the premises were sold, and . the new owner petitions for an adjustment under section 5 (a) (11).

6. A nonresident landlord entirely unfamiliar · with local conditions inherited a house prior to the maximum rent date. She arranged with a local bank to act as her agent and supposed that the bank was acting in the capacity of a management agent, whereas the bank construed its function as tperely an agent for collection of rentals under the existing rental agreement. As a consequence of this misunder15tanding there was a total absence of management resulting in a freeze date rent 25 percent below prevailing rents for comp~rable accommodations in the area.

In the cases cited in the above paragraphs adjustments may be granted under section 5 (a) ( 11) . In these instances the peculiar circumstances which substantially affected the rent on the maximum rent date consisted of factors which related to the management of the property. In all six cases there ·-,as either an absence of proper management or abnormally indifferent management. · These cases should be differentiated from

those involving simple mismanagement or poor business judgment on the part of either the landlord or the landlord's agent. Nor- . mally under the rules of agency, the acts of the agent within the scope of his authority are the acts of the principal and the latter may not base his claim for .relief on the ground that the agent made a poor bargain. However, in extreme cases, as where the agent has been guilty of actual dishonesty in renting at a low rent, adjustments may be proper.

C. Renting for temporary occupancy 1. Prior to maximum-rent date a suit was

brought by a city to condemn a house owned by L in order to obtain a right-of-way for a street. The tenant then occupying the premises vacated and L rented the house to another tenant. Due to the uncertainy of the period of occupancy L rented the house to the new tenant for a rent lower than he previously had been receiving and substantially lower than the rent generally prevailing in the area for comparable accommodations. After maximum-rent date the condemnation proceeding was abandoned.

2. On maximum-rent date L was operating an apartment · house containing some three-" and some four-room units. The standard rent maintained by· L for the three-room units was $50 a month and for the fourroom units was $65 a month. Shortly before the maximum-rent date T sought to rent from La three-room unit but none was then available. However, L expected to have such a unit available within 2 months. An agreement was reached between LandT whereby T was to occupy one of the four-room units for this 2-month period until a three-room unit became available. As a consequence, T paid $50 a month for the four-room unit on the maximum-rent date although the remainder of such units were rented for $65 a month. The maximum rent for that unit, therefore,' was fixed at $50 a month under section 4 (a) of the regulation.

3. The owner of .a house located in a Northern State customarily spent hi~ . winters in the South. For the period of his absence in the winter of 1941-42, which included the maximum-rent date, he rented his home·fully furnished at $75 per month, with the explicit agreement that the tenant's occupancy was to be limited to a term of 3 months, at the end of which time he intended to return and reoccupy the house himself. The prevailing rent for similar accommodations in the area on the maximum-rent date was $150 per month.

Adjustments are proper in cases illustrated by examples 1 to 3 under section 5 (a) ( 11) • In each of these cases the rent on the date determining the .maximum rent was substantially below prevailing rents because the landlord contemplated occupancy for a very short period. Obviously, where the landlord customarily rented for short terms, as for example in a resort area or where he normally rented to tenants temporarily in the area, no adjustment would be granted.

D. Mistake After the effective date of the regulation,

L moved to another city and authorized an agent to rent the house in which he had been living. He instructed the agent in writing to rent the house for not less than $100 a month but, through a mistake which occurred in the office of the agent, it was rented for $80 a month. The rent generally prevailing in the defense-rental area for comparable accommodations on maximum rent· date was $100 a month. The error was not disclosed to the owner until several months after the rental.

The maximum rent is $80 a month, the first rent obtained for th~ house, but an adjustment may be made under section 5 (a) (11) on petition of the landlord. In such case, however, it should appear that the landlord took immediate steps to correct the error when he discovered it. It should not appear that the mistake of the agent was later ratified by the landlord. E. Bad reputation of property on date deter

mining maximum rent 1 F'or over 2 years prior to the maximum

rent date L had been unable to secure a tenant for a rent:.1l house owned by him due to the fact t hat, the former t enant committee\ suicide and the house had acquired the repu tation of being h aunted. Shortly prior to the ma~'imum rent date L secured a tenant

•

6478 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 at a rent well beiow those of comparable houses.

2. Prior · to the maximum-rent date an apartment building was notorious in the community as a criminal hang-out. All of the apartments were rented to persons of questionable character, and building was frequently the scene of police raids. Four months before the maximum-rent date the property was sold and the neW' owner evicted all of the occupants, replacing them with desirable tenants. Because of its bad reputation, he had difficulty in renting the apartments and leased them for rents substantially below the rents for comparable apartments in the area.

In illustrations 1 end 2 adjustments may be granted under section 5 (a) (11) because the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was materially 'affected by the fact . that the particular units had acquired a bad reputation in the community in which they were located.

F. Prepayment of rent For some time before the maximum-rent

date L had been renting a house toT under a month-to-month lease for $40 per month. Shortly prior to that date a principal payment of $360 on the mortgage on the premises became due, and the mortgage holder threatened foreclosure. Being without funds and unable to bon-ow this amount, L approached T and offered to accept $360 as payment in full for the next year's rent. As a consequence, the maximum rent was established at $30 per month, which was substantially below the generally prevailing rent for comparable houses in the area. An adjustment is appropriate.under section 5 (a) (11). The mere fact that rent was paid in advance for a period of months on the maximum-rent date will not, however, of itself constitute a peculiar circumstance.

G. Rent increases delayed until after maximum rent date

1. The maximum rent date is March 1, 1942. January 15, 1942 T, who was paying $35 a month rent, gave L written notice terminating the ·~enancy on February 15, 1942. Relying on this, L rented the house to X for $45 per month commencing February 15, 1942.

On February 10, 1942, T notified L that circumstances beyond his control prevented him from moving before March 5, 1942, and that if L insisted on his remoVJll before that date he would contest an eviction action in the local courts. In order to avoid expense and po~sible further delay L and X agreed to allow T to remain in possession until that time paying rent on a pro-rata basis, based upon $35 per month rental. T moved March 5, 1942, and X took possession of the apartment and paid $45 per month until the effective date, when L was obliged to revert to

· the $35 per month rent. This rent is substantially below comparability. An adjustm:mt would be proper under Section 5 (a) (11).

2. The maximum rent date is March 1, 1942. On February 1, 19~2. L gave T a notice that his rent would be increased from $3!> to $40 per month, e~ective April 1, 1942. On April 1, 1942, and thereafter T paid the rent as increased. The maximum legal rent is $35 and L has no ground for adjustment under Section 5 · (a) (11) even if the rent is substantially below compa1·ability. The low rent was not caused by peculiar circumstances existing on the date determining the maximum rent.

H. Intermittent occupancy On the maximum rent date L rented a room

fn his residence to T, a commercial traveler for $3 a week. T traveled all week, only occupying the room on Saturday and Sun-

• day nights, and the room was rented to him on such understanding. T has now vacated and L has rented the room to X and his wife for full-time occupancy. The gener-

ally prevailing rent for comparable rooms on the maximum rent date was $7.50 per week. An adjustment may be- made under section 5 (a) (11).

I . Miscellaneous cases 1. T was a professional singer and annoyed

other tenants with her constant practicing. L moved T to a more secluded but more expensive apartment for the balance of her lease but permitted her to continue to pay $75 per month which was the rent for the apartment she formerly occupied. The move was necessary to keep other tenal'lts from vacating. The rent paid by T for superior apartment on the maximum rent date was substantially below comparability. An adjustment would be proper under section 5 (a) (11).

2. L purchased an apartment house after the maximum rent date but before the effective date of the regulation. The rent had been raised shortly after the maximum rent rate · but oefore the effective date on half of the apartments. L seeks an adjustment in the rent on these apartments alleging that the purchase price was based upon the rentals as increased. L's petition for adjustment under section 5 (a) ( 11) would be denied , even though these rentals were below comparability. The alleged peculiar circumstances arose subsequent to the date determining the maximum rent and did not affect the rents on that date. .....

3. The tenant on maximum rent date had - been in possession for many years. Although

tl:re prevailing rent for comparable accommodations in the area on maximum rent date was $30 per month, the landlord had not raised the tenant's rent of $25 per month because he was a tenant of long standing. No adjustment is authorized under section 5 .(a) (11) simply because the occupant on ·maximum rent date was an old and desirable tenant. ,

(Issued July 5, 1944; revised ·August 11, 1944; revised May 15, 1945.)

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, Washington 25, D. C.

MEMORANDUM

To: All region 1 rent executives, regional rent attorneys, area rent directors, and area rent attorneys. -

From: Ivan D. Carson, Deputy Administrator; George E. Palmer, Associate General Counsel for Rent.

Subject: Rent ·memorandum · 5 (a) (11)-I. Adjustments for peculiar 'Circumstancescomments on interpretation 5 (a) (11)-I. Amendment 29 to the housing regulation

adds a new ground for adjustment, as Section 5 (a) (11); where "the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was materially affected by peculiar circumstances and as a result was substantially lower than the rent generally prevailing in the defenserental area for comparable housing accommodations on the maximum rent date."

A similar change is made in the hotel regulations by amendment 25.

These amendments a:e made in conformity wit!'.. that portion of the amendment to section 2 -(c) of the Emergency Price Control Act, made by the Stabilization Extension Act of 1944, which provides as follows:

"Under regulations to be prescribed by the administrator, he shall provide for the making of individual adjustments in those claf:ses of cases where the rent on the maximum rent date for any housing accommodations is, due to peculiar circumstances, substantially higher or lower than the rents · generally prevailing in the defense-rental area for comparable housing accommodations."

In interpretation 5 (a) (11)-I we have set out certain types of cases in which adjustments may be made based upon "peculiar circumstances.'' This interpretation is not

intended to be definitive. It is based upon cases which have come to our attention and which apparently are not uncommon. No doubt there will be other cases, not coming within the general categories described in the interpretation, in which adjustments properly may be made. In making decisions in those cases the general approach should rest upon the principles inherent in the maximum rent date method · of controlling rents.

As the Emergency Court of Appeals has said, rents are frozen under this method "at levels which landlords and tenants had worked out for themselves by free bargaining in a competitive market, prior to the time when defense activities had injected into the market an abnormal factor resulting, or threatening to result, in rent increases inconsistent with the purposes of the act." Chatlos v. Brown, OPA Service 612:1,, 5. In determining whether there are peculiar circumstances, consideration usually should be directed to whether the circumstances relied upon by the landlord are abnormal that is, not usually present in the normal' bargain. If there is some abnormal variation which actually caused the setting of a rent substantially below comparability, an adjustment may be made. Most of the examples given in the interpretation fall within thi~ general category.

There are three prerequisites to an adjustment under section 5 (a) (11). First, the rent on the date determining the maximum rent must have been substantially below the rent generally prevailing in the area for comparable accommodations on maxi.:. mum rent date . . Second, it must · appear that there were "peculiar circustances" in connection with the renting. Third, it must appear that the low rent a~tually was caused by these peculiar circumstances. This is similar to the approach already well .established under section 5 (a) ( 4) .

1. Renting under unusual pressure or necessity: Paragraph 1 of interpretation 5 (a) (11)-I illustrates a group of cases in which the landlord rented for a figure ubstantially below comparability. because of unusual pressure or necessity or under other circumstances which clearly indicate that he did not make an ordinary business bargain. In the particular case treated in paragraph 1, the . low rent was in part the resUlt of unusual pressure. Somewhat similar cases' have been brought to our attention in which the renting occurred under unusual emotional stress, as where the husband died and the wife, in order to get her . affatrs settled immediately and move to another city, rented for a low figure at a time when she was in no· state of mind to make a fair bargain. An adjustment properly could be made in such a case. Similarly, an adjustment would be proper where the transaction was the result of extreme economic necessity. In one case presented to an area office the landlord alleged that, shortly before maximum rent date, he rented at an admittedly low rent in order to obtain sufficient money to buy food for his family. Granted such facts, an adjustment would be appropriate.

In the case discussed in paragraph 1 of the interpretation the renting occurred after effective date and the maximum rent there: fore was established on the basis of the "first rent." As a consequence, the landlord had no opportunity to remedy the situation by subsequently increasing the rent. But where such a renting occurs before the effective date, particularly before the maximum rent date in a section 4 (a) case~ it will be pertient to ascertain whether the landlord subsequently remedied the initial situation by raising the rent. If the renting in the case described in paragraph 1 of the interpretation had occurred 6 months before maximum rent date, and the landlord had failed to raise the rent by maximum rent date, this would be an indication, though not decisive, that the low rent was not caused (i. e., "mate-

•

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE .6479 rially affected" by the abnormal circum

. stances surrounding the renting. The District of Columbia Emergency Rent

Act provides for adjustment where a maximum rent "is, due to peculiar circumstances affecting such housing accommodations, substantially higher or lower than the rent generally prevailing for comparable housing accommodations." In Read v. Gerstenjeld, decided on April 13, 1944 by the Municipal Court of the District of Columbia, the court had before it the meaning of this adjustment pr~"Vision. On May 18, 1938, the owner of the house, Mrs. Read, rented it for a short term ending in September 1938 at $250 a month, after her husband, an officer in the United States Navy, was ordered to sea duty. In September 1938 the owner rented the house to a new tenant, Gerstenfeld, for a 1-year term at the same rent, that is, $250 a month. Thereafter this lease was renewed in 1939, 1940, and 1941 at the same figure. The maximum rent date in the District of Columbia is January 1, 1941, and on that <;late the house was rented for $250 a month. The landlord alleged that this rent was substantially below comparable rents and sought an adjustment based upon peculiar circumstances. The court held that the case did not involve "peculiar circumstances" within the meaning of the District of Columbia Act. It discussed the theory underlying the maximum rent date method _ of rent control as enunciated by the Emergency Court of Appeals and concluded that the phrase "peculiar circumstances" means "unusual or special circumstances which keep the landlord and tenant from bargaining freely." It emphasized the fact that successive leases had been made at the rent originally fixed by the landlord.

We would reach the same conclusion under section 5 (a) (11). Possibly the originar renting was influenced by peculiar circumstances, but in any event it seems clear that these circumstanceS had ceased to operate on maximum rent date. The bargain in effect on that date was an ordinary business bargain.

It might be noted also that the court placed some emphasis upon the fact that the original renting was made "upon the basis of a recommendation or the landlord's own experienced real-estate agent, who, naturally, would obtain the highest rental possible." This fact would be significant in a case such as that set out in paragraph 1 of the interpretation. In most of the cases similar to the case there discussed which have come to our attention, and in which

·an adjustment appears to be warranted, the rental transaction was made by the wife personally. In such cases it may be fair to conclude that the transaction was influenced by the unusual necessity or emotional stress or other factor to which the wife was subjected.

2. Factors with respect to management: The cases discussed in paragraph 2 of interpretation 5 (a) (11)-I are illustrative of a

·group of cases in which the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was materially affected by unusual circumstances connected with the management of the property.

Paragraph 2 (a) of the interpretation represents a rather extreme case of absence of proper management. Other cases involving this same factor will be less clear-cut but, nonetheless, may sometimes present a basis for adjustment. Instances occur in which the low rent was the result' of abnormally indifferent management; for example, where the .accommodations ·were owned on maximum rent date by an elderly person who, because of his age, did not take sufficient

' interest in the property to ·obtain a reasonable- rent, Adjustments will be proper in such cases if the facts are clearly established.

A related group of cases involves mismanagement by an agent or other fiduciary, rather

than mismanagement resulting from the peculiarities of the owner. Considerable care must be used in making adjustments in this class of cases. Certainly it wlll be unwise to open the door to claims that the agent did not follow proper management policies. Care must be taken not to give relief merely because the agent made a poor bargain for his principal. However, in extreme cases, as where the agent has been guilty of actual dishonesty in renting at a low rent, adjustments may be proper.

The cases discussed in paragraph 2 (c) of the interpretation appears to represent one of the largest groups of cases which has come to our attention involving what we consider to be peculiar circumstances. A number of cases have been presented where, on the date determining the maximum rent, th~ property was in the hands of a mortgagee, receiver, or trustee who rented it for an amount substantially below comparable rents. To some extent this may have resulted from the fact that the fiudciary was unable to assure any extended period of occupancy; hence these cases overlap those discussed in

. paragraph 3 of the interpretation. In the main, however, the low rent received by the fiduciary appears to result from the fact that he was concerned primarily with keeping the property occupied until certain matters were settled or until sale of the property could be made. In general, where it appears that the low rent occurred because the landlord's primary purpose was to obtain occupancy so as to prevent vandalism and other deterioration of the property, an adjustment

. may be made. A similar situation is where a State or other

governing body has taken _ over property on tax foreclosure. Again it appears to be common for the State to rent ' the property for an amount substantially below comparability. ·The State is not engaged in the business of renting property but presumably is concerned primarily with selling the property so that it may be returned to the tax rolls. In all probability the officials concerned are under a legal duty to sell the property; this would be frequently true also where property is held by a trustee, receiver, or other fiduciary. ·

Tu some extent the tax foreclosure cases ·are covered by other adjustment provisions of the regulation. We have held that where the State rents the property to the former owner there may be a special relationship warranting an adjustment under section 5 (a) (4). Where the State rents the property'to a third person, the case may be covered by.section 5 (a) (9) since the property presumably wil be tax exempt while title is in the State. Regardless of the adjustment provision used, it is liltely that in most of these cases involving tax foreclosure an adjustment may be made if the State actually was renting the property · on the date det~rmining the maximum rent for an amount substantially below comparability.

3. Temporary occupancy: The cases discussed in paragraph 3 of the interpretation are illustrative of a group of cases in. which a rent substantially below comparability is received because of the temporary character of the renting. Another example, not set 'out in the interpretation, is as follows:

Two ~onths prior to the maximum rent date L rented for a 3-rp.onth period the house in which he was living. L was leaving the city for 3 months, and the house was rented with an express understanding that the tenant would vacate upon L's return. The house was rented for $75 a month, whereas the rent generally prevailing in the area for comparable accommodations was $125 a month. · Under the rental conditions then prevailing in the community, such a transaction was unusual and normally would not have enabled the landlord to collect as high a rent as he could in a typical renting.

An adjustment may be made in this case under section 5 (a) (11). We do not propose to malce adjustments 13imply because the renting was u.nder one type of rental agreement rather· than another; for example, under a 1-year lease rather than on a monthto-month basis. However, where the lease or other rental agreement was for an unusually short period of occupancy, and it il-l clear that this fact resulted in a rent substantially below comparability, an adjustment is proper. The significant fact is not so much the term of the lease as that it was clearly understood that this was to be ·the maximum period of occupancy. While a renting on a month-to-month basis might legally constitute a renting for a single month, it is clear that there is no basis for adjustment because of that fact.

Nor is the ~;J.bove example intended to authorize adjustments simply because the landlord may be renting to tenants for a short period of occupancy. In many areas housing accommodations are rented for periods as short as 6 weeks because of the fact that persons in military service are in training in the community for that period . Such a renting is in the regular course of the landlord's · business and affords no basis for adjustment. A fact essential to adjustment in the above example is that the particular transaction constituted a material variation from the normal type of renting; if it did not, for reasons such as those just described, no adjustment should be made.

Many short-term arrangements will involve subletting. For example, L leases a house to T, unfurnished, for $100 a month under a 1-year lease. Three months before expiration of the lease T sublets the house to S, furnished, for the balance of the term at $100 a manti\. This subletting comes within the provisions of section 4 ( j) , and therefore the maximum rent on a furnished basis is the same as that on an unfurnished basis. If the maximum rent on a furnished basis is substantially below comparability-and the fact that the house rented for $100 a month unfurnished furnishes some evidence that it is-a clear case for adjustment is presented. In these cases there is likely to be another factor in addition to the short term which bears upon "peculiar circumstances." Cases presented to us indicate that the tenant, in subletting, may be concerned primarily with obtaining sufficient rent to cover what he is obligated to pay the owner. If this additional circumstance appears, an adjustment may be· warranted where the term of the subletting is longer than would be considered a "peculiar circumstance" in a case involving no subletting.

4. Mistake: Paragraph 4 of the interpretation illustrates a group of cases in which a rent substantially below comparable rents re·sulted from a clear mistake. Probably there will be relatively few cases in which adjustment will be warranted on this ground. Nonetheless, if a mistake in connection with the maldng of the rental agreement is clearly proved, an adjustment may be appropriate.

5. Nuisance and similar conditions: The case in paragraph 5 of the interpretation is representative of a group which may roughly be described as "nuisance" cases, although it should be understood that the work is not being used in its legal sense. A relatively clear case for adjustment is presented, since the actual reduction in rents because of the temporary nuisance demonstrates that the rents on maximum rent date were affected by the nuisance. Under some circumstances an actual reduction in the rents need not appear as indicated by the following illustration:

Illustration 1: Prior to maximum-rent date L began construction of a housing project containing 500 units. The mortgage on the project was insured by Federal Housing Administration, which approved a schedule of rents for the units (in the project). (The accommodations w~re not built ~ith priorities

6480 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 and do not come under section 4 (f) of the housing regulation.) Some units were completed and rented on maximum-rent date, while others were still under construction. Thereafter, as units were completed they were rented while construction continued on other parts of the project. This construction subjected the tenants to considerable annoyance and inconvenience. Because of this, L rented the units for amounts substantially lower than the scheduled rents, expecting to raise the rents upon completion of the proJect. There initial rents were substantially below comparability. The units were rented on a month-to-month basis, and when the project was completed, prior to the etrectlve date of the regulation, L raised the rents on all units which had been rented during the course of construction. The maximum rents, of course, are the rents for the units on maximum-rent date, or, where units were not rented· until after that date, the first .rents thereafter.

An adjustment is authorized under section 5 (a) (11). This situation diliets from the case set out in paragraph 5 of the interpretation in that the units were first rented . while the temporary nuisance was present, whereas, in parag~:aph 5 of the interpretation, the units had been rented before the nuisance commenced, and the rents actually were reduced during its continuance. The reduction is convincing evidence that the nuisance materially aJiected the rents on maximum rent date. Where, a.s in illustration 1, no such evidence is available, extreme care should be used in determining whether the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was atlected materially by the temporary nuisance. No adjustment should be made in illustration 1 if it appears that the rents- actually were fixed on the basis of the completed project. .

Illustration 1, above, and paragraph 5 of the interpretation represent a rather limited group of cases in which the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was mate-

. rially atlected by conditions of a temporary character. In deterlilining whether the maximum rent is below comparability the temporary condition, since removed, should be disregarded.

There is an analogous group of cases in which adjustments, if any, shoulct be made under section 5 (a) (3) rather than 5 (a) (11). These are cases in which a condition of relatively long standing materially atrected the rent on the maximum rent date. The removal of this condition after maximum rent date may furnish a basis for adjustment under section 5 (a) (3). as indi· cated by the following illustrations:

Illustration 2: On maximum rent date L was renting a second-floor apartment located immediately above premises which were usEd . as a night club and had been so used for some years past. The night club caused considerable noise and confusion which was disturbing to the tenant of the second~fl.oor apartment. Since the maximum rent date the night club has been removed and the space is now used for dwelling purposes. The elimination of the noise and disturbance caused by the night club has materially increased the rental value of the second-floor apartment. L petitions for an adjustment under section 5 (a) (3).

An adjustment is authorized based upon an increase in services. It should be made i:q such a case only where the facts indicate that the change in question is relatively permanent. In the present case the space formerly used as a night club now is being used for dwelling purposes, and it is a fair inference that the new use has some degree of permanence. On the other hand, 1! the use as a night club has ceased and the space has not been put to any other use, an adjustment generally would not be proper. There is no assurance that the hmdlord may not immediately use the space in some manner as

· objectionable as the former use.

It may be that the space is now being used tn another business rather than as housing accommodations. An adjustment should be made only if it is clear that there has been a material increase in rental value by reason of the elimination of the disturbances cpnnected with the night club. In many instances the change from one busine,ss use · to another may have little etlect on rental value, even though the former disturbances have been eliminated. Nonetheless, it will be proper to give an adjustment in clear cases where the landlord has eliminated really objectionable conditions such as noise.

Illustration S: On maximum rent date a house was located in a low place and water accumulated on the lot after every rain. After that date the county authorities built a short drainage ditch which thereafter eliminated the accumulations of water on the property in question and a small group of properties in the vicinity. By reason of this change the rental value of the house was materially increased. The drainage ditch was built out Qf county funds with no special assessment against 1;he property in question or other properties benefited thereby. ·L petitions for an adjustment under section 5 (a) (3). An adjustment is authorized based upon an increase. in services.

lllustration 4: On maximum rent date L was renting a house which was located close to a slum area. Since maximum rent date properties. in this slum area have been razed and replaced by a public-housing project. As a result the character of the neighborhood has improved and the rental value of L's house has increased. L petitions for adjustment under section 5 (a) (3). Under these circumstances an adjustment should not be made.

In illustrations 2 and 3 an adjustmentshould be made under section 5 (a) (3) rather than 5 (a) (11). Section 5 (a) (11) is scarcely appropriate (to these cases) since it authorizes an adjustment only where the rent on the date determining the maximum rent is substantially below comparable rents, and any determination of comparability properly should take into account the actual condition of the property on that date However, we do consider section 5 (a) (a) appropriate; that is, we regard the subsequent removal of the condition which atlected rental value as constituting an increase in services.

Illustrations. 2 and 3 differ from the case stated in paragraph 5 of the interp1·etation in that the condition which existed on maximum rent date was of long standing rather than temporary. Under such circumstances it cannot reasonably be required that the lar\,(:Uord show that he has actually reduced the rent because of this condition. No precise line, in terms of time, can be drawn b-etween conditions which were temporary and those which were not. In the last analysis the decision turns on whether the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was in fact substantially atlected by the condition since removed, or whether the condition was of such temporary character that it had not atrected that rent. For example, in illustration 2, if the night club had been installed shortly before maximum rent date, and the rent for th~ second-floor apartment had not been reduced because of its presence, no adjustment should be made on th~s account even thgugh the second-floor rent was substantially below comparability.

Apart from the requirement that the rent was materially atrected by the factors which have since been eliminated, great caution should be used in granting adjustments in the group of cases discussed in illustrations 2 and 3. To a large extent, the question is one for the good judgment of the Rent Director, although there are certain general considerations which are important.

Adjustments generally should not be made because of changes which affect a great many propert1e3, and which have no special sig-

nificance for the particular property involved. An important group of cases falling in this category is where there have been changes in the general character of the neighborhood, of which the case discussed in illustration 4 is an example. There will be many neighbor:hood. changes which ultimately might materially increase the rental value of housing accommodations but for which an adjustment nonetheless should not be made. An example would be the construction of new industries resulting in an increase in rental value of neighboring houses because of their proximity to such industries. Closely related are changes made in various types of public services. For example, a city improves fu·e protection for properties i.n the city or a certain section of the city. An adjustment should not be made because certain groups of housing accommodations are benefited by this change. Similarly, an adjustment should not be made because the city installs or extends bus or streetcar service, even though that may increase the rental value of particular groups of houses.

The distinction between the examples just given and the case discussed in illustration 3 lies partly in. the fact that the overflow of water, in the latter case, was an unusual condition which in a real sense depressed rental value on maximum rent date, whereas the absence of adequate fire protection or bus service for a certain group of housing accommodations is not abnormaJ. and the improvament of fire protection. or bus service is part of the normal development of a commtinity. In addition, fire protection and bus service is given to properties generally, whereas the building of the drainage ditch had special significance for a small group of properties. Had the drainage ditch been part of a floodcontrol project which benefited all or most of the properties in the community, no adjustments should be made unless part or all of the cost of this project was borne by special

·assessment against the properties. While it undoubtedly is true that many

neighborhood changes ultimately will result in an increase in rental value, this will be a gradual process, and we do not believe that this type of change should be taken into account. In. illustration 4, for example, involving the removal of a slum area, it is not likely that the effect on rental value of surrounding accommodations would be immediate. Ultimately, of course, the removal of the slum area might well result in a substantial change in the general character of the neighborhood and a corresponding increase in rental value. This type of natural development of a community is clearly a factor which it is not feasible to consider. in the administration of the rent. program. It should be noted also that in many instances it w.ould not be clear what sort of effect a neighborhood change would have on rental value. The construction of a new plant doubtless would make neighboring accommodations less attractive to some tenants and more attractive to others. The etlects on rental value, therefore, could not be determined immediately but only after a relatively long period. Much the same considerations apply to more parti~ular conditions of long standing such as those described in 1llustration 3. Whether the removal of such conditions would have an immediate effect on' rental value would depend upon the extent to which the general character of the neighborhood had been affected by those conditions. The effect might have been ·such that the removal of the condition would make no appreciable ditlerence in +:he rental value of the accommodations until long after the "blight" had disappeared. Under such circumstances, no adjustment should be made.

6. Comparibility: The requirement of section 5 (a) (11) limiting adjustments to those cases where the rent is substantially below companability is the same as that contained in section 5 (a) ( 4) and the general approach

•

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-I-IOUSE . 6481 heretofore developed on the question of compa.-ability usually should be applied. However, there will be some situations in which it will be proper to make an adjustment even though the rent on the date determining the maximum rent was not below the range of comparable rents. Assume, for example, that in the case described in paragraph 5 of the interpretation, the rents for the apartment units had been $60 a month and were reduced to $55 a month during the continug,nce of the temporary nuisance. An adjustment would be proper even though the $55 rents were not below the range of comparability•

This more precise application of the comparability standard · is proper in those cases where the effect of the particular circumstances upon the' rent can be clearly demonstrated by reference to another rent for the unit. In the usual case, a substantial variation is required under sections 5 (a) ( 4) and 5 (a) (11) as a means of establishing that the rent actually was affected by the special relationship or· peculiar circumstances. Such a test is unnecessary m the case stated in paragraph 5 of the interpretation and an adjustment therefore is warranted on the basis of a smaller variation.

The mistake cases sometimes will furnish illustrations of the same principle For example, a shelter rent of $40 a month was approved for a house under section 4 (f) and an additional amount of $2.50 was approved for certain services. Through a mistake of someone in >the office of the managing agent, the house was first rented for $40 a month including services in the belief that this was required by the priorities approval. In these circumstances an adjustm~nt would be proper even though the $40 rent is not below the range of comparability.

(Issued July 15, 1944.)

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, Washington 25, D. C.

MEMORANDUM

To: All rf'.gional rent executives, regional rent atto.rneys, area rent directors, and area rent attorneys.

From: Ivan D. Carson, Deputy Administrator; George E. Palmer, Associate General Counsel for Rent.

Subject: Rent Memorandum 5 (a) (11)-II. Adjustments for Peculiar Circumstances .

This memorandum elaborates on the problem of "peculiar circumstances" based upon the operating experience which we have been able to gather from reports to us by the regional offices. On the whole the decisions have been in accordance with the general principles stated by the national office. However, there has been a tendency in some . offices to construe "peculiar circumstances" more strictly than we intend. We note, for example, some tendency to deny adjustment in cases which seem meritorious, apparently because they do not fall within one of the general categories described in Rent Memorandum 5 (a) (11) -I. As is stated in that memorandum, these groups of cases were not intended to be definitive. We fully expected that additional types of cases would be brought to the attention of the area offices in which adjustments would be proper. This has in fact occurred, and the present memorandum describes some of these additional groups of cases. Again, however, it is clear that they are not exhaustive.

The main purpose of the memoranda from this office is to furnish the area and regional offices with general standards to be used in the administration of section 5 (a) (11). It is not possible or appropriate for us to attempt to furnish an answer to every prob-

_lem which may arise. Considerable discretion rests in the area office, to be exercised in accordance with the general standards which

·we have outlined.

; The discussion which follows is based upon cases which have been reported to us by the regional offices. Our comments are general, and although they. sometimes indicate disagreement with the field offices on the approach taken to the case,s, we do not necessarily intend to suggest that the decisions were incorrect. In many instances the facts reported to us are not sufficient to warrant any definite conclusion. In ot hers the decision may have been correct because the rent was not substantially below comparability; nonetheless, we are commenting on the case in the belief that our views on the peculiar circumstance issue may be helpful.

I. GENERAL COMMENTS

1. Substantiality of the variation from comparability; The extent of the variation from comparability is significant evidence, both on the issue of peculiar circumstances and on the question whether the peculiar circumstances caused the low rent. It is quite proper to require less evidence on theE>e issues where the rent is extremely low than is required whe11e the variation is less extreme. I t must be recognized that there are real difficulties of proof under section 5 (a) (11), since in most instances we are attempting to ascertain facts on and prior to maximum-rent date, a period usually some distance in the past. Where an extremely low rent appears, this in itself is a fairly strong indication that it was the result of unusual circumstances. In other words, the extent and extremity of the variation from comparable rents may be indicative that the rent was established under "peculiar circumstances'' and an adJqstment under 5 (a) (11) will be proper.

2. Causation: On the issue of causation, that is, whether the low rent was caused by the peculiar circumstances, a distinction needs to be drawn between cases in which the landlord actually reduced the rent because of the peculiar circumstances and those in which he alleges ·that he failed. to i:aise the rent because of those circumstances. Obviously, the former situation presents a clea:r;er case for adjustment. The actual rent reduction is significant evidence that the peculiar circumstances affected the rent. Stronger evidence , will be needed where the claim is based on a failure to raise the rent. In the last analysis, the .Rent Director must determine whether in all probability the rent would have been raised except for the unusual circumstances. Evidence bearing on whether the situation · is one in which the landlord normally would have raised the rent is pertinent. For example, if the subject unit is in a multiple-unit structure and prior to maximum-rent date the landlord raised the rents on all units in the structure except the subject unit, this tends to indi- . cate that peculiar circumstances connected with that unit, if there were such, were the cause of the failure to raise the rent.

3·. Comparability range: Some ·of the reports indicate that meritorious petitions probably are · being denied because of the use of too wide a comparability range. As an example, in one case it was reported that the range was $18 to $30 and an adjustment was denied solely on the ground that the maximum rent was within the range. We feel that the range of comparability must be much narrower than this in order to avoid unjust results. It is obvious that if there is a peculiar circumstance present the grant

. or denial of the petition may depend upon ·how wide a range is used. The comparability range should be kept within reason

. able limits in order to avoid results which -are clearly undesirable.

4. Processing 5 (a) (11) petitions on another ground: The reports indicate that in some regions petitions under section 5 (a) ( 11) are being denied even though a case

.1s presented und~r section 5 (a) (4). One

regional report described a case in which an adjustment was made by the area office under section 5 (a) ( 11) . The regional office found no peculiar circumstances, and instructed the area office to revoke the orr;ter. However, it noted that there may have been a special relationship and suggested that the case should be investigated further on that ground. This is much too technical a procedure to follow. Frequently if the petition under 5 (a) (11) states or strongly suggests a case for adjustment on some other 5 (a) ground, the case should be processed on that ground without requiring the filing of a new petition. we recognize that there must be discretion in the area office in this regard, particularly where the ground for adjustment indicated by the landlord's petition is wholly dissimilar to section 5 (a) ( 11) . In those instances it may be more expeditious for the landlord to file a new petition setting out the full facts appropriate to the other ground. This is true ·certainly where the 5 (a) (11) petitions suggest the possibility of an adjustment under 5 (a) (12). However, where a ground for adjustment is indicated under section 5 (a) (4), the 5 (a) (11) petition, almost without exception, should be processetl without requiring the filing of a new petition. Certainly where an order has been entered by the area office it should not be revoked simply because it was entered on the wrong ground if the landlord is entitled to an adjustment on some other ground. II. CASES WITHIN THE GENERAL CATEGORIES OUT•

LINED IN RENT MEMORANDUM 5 (A) ( lll -I

1. Renting under unusual pressure or similar circumstances: (a) The landlord made the following claim:

"Called into service and moved on short notice <1ue to pregnancy in family and accepted amount of rent now paid to tenants without children and immediate occupancy. House is new and below rental standards of surrounding property. We were unable to remain longer to re.nt property because of circumstances • • • The house was rented originally also because it was winter and we did not want it empty."

The regional office report stated simply that the petition was denied. It is of course impossible for us to say whether this action was proper since there is insufficient evidence on the question of comparability. Apart from that issue, the quoted statemen suggests a case for adjustment. The facts indicate rather strongly that the house was rented under circumstances which did not enable the landlord to make an ordinary business bargain. However, more specific facts should be obtained, particularly concerning the length of time that the landlord had in which to settle his affairs and rent the house .

(b) The owner became insane prior to ma~imum rent date and was taken to an asylum. The owner's wife left town huniedly and in renting the property told the tenant "to pay enough to take care of the notes at bank which were $18.81 per month." An adjustment was properly given in this case.

In addition to the factor of unusual pressure in connection with the renting, the rent apparently was fixed primar~ly in order to meet certain obligations of the owner. This factor is significant and when added to the unusual pressure, presents a strong case for giving relief. Emphasis is placed upon .the same factor in paragraph 3 of Rent Memorandum 5 (a) (11)-I in connection with subletting. We pointed out the significance of the fact that the tenant who is renting to .a subtenant may be concerned primarily with obtaining sufficient rent to cover what he is obligated to pay the owner. In general, peculiar circumstances are apt to be present where it appears that in fixing the rent the ·landlord was motivated primarily by some reason other than obtaining the market rent for the property.

6482 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 2. Factors with respect to · management:

Some of the offices appear to be using standards which are too strict in connection with this group of cases.

(a} In a. case presented to one regional office it appeared that the landlord recently bad been declared mentally incompetent. The report from the region 1s scant but indicates that too much emphasis may have been placed upon the fact that the declaration of incompetence occurred sometime after the freeze date renting. Despite this, it might still be true that the landlord was legally incompetent on the maximum rent date. Moreover, there inay well be ground for adjustment under 5 (a) (11) although the landlord was not legally incompetent at the time of the freeze date renting. If the landlord's state of mind at that time was such that he did not possess normal bargaining ability, a peculiar circumstance might be found, even though he was not legally incompetent.

Another case from the same region indicates the same tendency to require an actual showing of incompetence as of maximum rent date. The present owner claimed that the property was owned and rented by her mother on maximum rent date and that she was "old and unable to make a contract." The adjustment was denied and the regional office commented that there was "nothing to show her incapacity to make the lease." In Rent Memorandum 5 (a) '(11)-I it is pointed out that the adjustments may be made not only on a showing of incompetence but also on a showing of "abnormally indifferent management," one example being where the accommodations were rented by an elderly person who might not have been able to make the usual business bargain.

The same approach appears in the report of a case from another region in which the present owner alleged that the property was owned and managed on maximum rent date by his father, then 96 years old. A doctor's statement was submitted that "for the last 8 or 10 years be did 'not think that the prior landlord was able to successfully transact his own business due to his advanced age and senility." The regional office recognized that there might be a case for adjustment but indicated that it believed the landlord bad failed to establish a case. This seems too strict an application of section 5 (a) (11). In view of the difficulties of proof which occur in this type of case, we do not believe that the area. office should reasonably require more evidence than was submitted here, unless there are other facts which show the need of additional evidence to support the landlord's case. Of course, it must appear also that the rent was substantially below comparability.

(b) In some cases it has been claimed that the low freeze date rent was a result of the landlord's illness which prevented him from giving normal C?-re to the property. The problem is almost wholly one of fact. If it is established that the illness was the cause of the low rent, an adjustment should be made. While it is difficult to tell from the reports which have been given to us, it appears that some offices may be following a contrary policy. For example, in one case it api)eared that an estate presumably including the subject property was in process of administration for a 4-year period overlapping maximum rent date. It was stated that the low rent was "due to illness of the executrix." The regional office commented that there were "no peculiar circumstances." We recognize that the decision may have been correct, since the report does not contain sutncient facts bearing on the nature and length of the illness and its effect upon the rent. However, such a claim should not be disposed of in this manner without further investigation of the facts.

3. -Temporary occupancy. In one case an adjustment was properly given under the fol-

lowing. circumstances: An apartment was rented a few weeks prior to maximum rent date on a temporary basis for an amount substantially below comparable rents. The tenant was a widow whose husband had just been lost in service and the landlord rented to her for a short period until she could find cheaper accommodations.

The same region, however, approved denial of an adjustment in a case where the owner had furnished a house for his parents to live in and, pending the arrival of the par- t

ents, rented to a Navy officer who agreed to vacate when the parents arrived. The petition was properly d~nied because the rent was not below comparability; however, we are doubtful whether the regional office was correct in its conclusion that "no peculiar circumstances were shown. The facts are not sufficient to warrant a categorical answer, but if it appears that at the time of the renting the parties expected the arrival of the parents within a short time, so that the renting was intended to be for a relatively short period, we would consider that the case involves peculiar circumstances.

A case presenting a problem which is the converse of temporary occupancy is as follows: L acquired title in 1935, part of the consideration for the conveyance being the grant of a life interest toT. T agreed to pay for the use of the property at the rate of $200 a year, payable in equal monthly installments. This agreement was in effect on maximum rent date, but since that date T bas vacated and the property is rented to another tenant. The rent on maximum rent date was substantially below comparability. We approve the action of the area office in granting an adjustment. The transaction const.ituted an extreme variation from the normal rental transaction and in our opinion presents a case of peculiar circumstance. Ill. ADDITIONAL TYPES OF CASZS UNDER SECTION

5 A (11)

1. Bad reputation of property on date de· termining maximum rent: Several cases have arisen in which it appeared that the

· rent was substantially below comparability because of a bad reputation the property bad acquired prior to maximum rent date which landlord had been unable to eliminate by that date.

(a) Prior to maximum rent date, the accommodations were owned by a physician who carried on a doubtful practice, and the accommodations "acquired a reputation connected with malpractice, q·lminal practice, and abortions." The present owner acquired the propert~· 6 months before maximum rent date and converted it into a multiple .apartment structure. In offering the units for rent prior to maximum rent date, the landlord discovered that prospective tenants refused to rent them because of their forD;ler reputation and consequently be was forced to accept low rents.

In this situation adjustments should be made provided the rents are substantially below comparability.

(b) In a somewhat similar situation a building containing a substantial number of units had, over a period of years, acquired a bad reputation because it was occupied largely by prostitutes. The present landlord purchased the property approximately a year prior "to maximum rent date and apparently attempted to correct these conditions by elimination of the undesirable tenants. However, he asserted that, due to the reputation of the property, he could get desirable tenants only by renting below comparability. At the present time the condition is corrected and the report of the regional office states that the property has acquired a good name. While the petitions apparently were properly denied because the rents were not substantially below comparability, we do not agree W:ith the comment of the regional office

that no peculiar circumstances were involved. In our opinion an adjustment should be made on these facts if the comparability test is met.

(c) Two cases have been presented in Which the occupant of the property had committed suicide prior to maximum rent date. In one of these cases the property was vacant for 4 months thereafter, following which the landlord rented it at a reduced rent in order to obtain a tenant. An adjustment n:light be proper in such a case. Of course, it must appear that the suicide mateJ'ially affected the rent. This would generally be true only if the suicide were well known and did in fact influence prospective tenants.

While the foregoing cases somewhat par· allel the "nuisance" cases discussed in rent memorandum 5 (a) (3)-ll, the factors which influenced rental value on the date determining the maximum rent were of an intangible cha:racter and it would be difficult to measure the difference in rental. value resulting from the disappearance of these intangible factors. In our opinion section 5 (a) (11), with the use or the comparability test, is a more appropriate ground for adjustment.

2. Prepayment of rent: Adjustments may be made where a rent substantially bzlow comparability is fixed because of a substantial prepayment of rent by the freeze date tenant. If, for example, a year's rent is paid in advance, it is not unlikely that the landlord has accepted a lower rent than be would have obtained under the usual method of 1·ent payment.

However, it also must appear that this method of rent payment was unusual. If it was the landlord's practice to collect rent in advance there would be no basis for adjustment. The cases warranting adjustment usually will present some other unusual circumstances, such as a need on the part' of the l.andlord for cash. An adjustment would be proper, as an example, in the following case reported to us: "Jones was in both marital

. and martial difficulties and just before joining the Army sold his furniture and rented to the tenant at an allegedly low rent, beca·use the tenant would pay 6 months' rent in advance • • • ."

Where an adjustment is made in a situation of this sort, we suggest that the order fL'C two maximum rents with the freeze date rent applicable should the landlord again rent under the same prepayment arrangement.

3. Rent increases delayed until after maximum rent date: Under some circumstance;; it will be proper to grant an adjustment where a rent increase was made shortly after maximum rent date which, but for unusual cir• cumstances, would have b~come effective prior to that date.

(a) The maximum rent date is March 1; 1942. In January 1942 T gave L written notice terminating the tenancy on February 10, 1941. Relying on this, L rented the house to X for $45 per month commencing February 15, 1942. On February 1, 1942 T notified L that circumstances beyond his control prevented him moving before March 5, 1942. It was agreeable to L and X that T remain in possession until that time, which he did, paying rent on a prorata basis, based upon a $35 per month rental. L moved on March 5, 1942 and · X took possession of the apartment and paid $45 per montl1 until the effective date when L was obliged to revert to the $35 per month rent. This rent is substantially below comparability.

In our opinion an adjustment should be made in this case. But for ·unusual circumstances the higher rent Which L obtained immediately after maximum rent date would have been in effect on that date.

(b) Numerous adjustments have been sought on the ground that a notice was given prior to maximum rent date which was effective to raise the rent shortly after that date. For example, in an area with a March 1, 1942 maximum rent date, a · 30-day notice .w.as given in Februar~ 1942 which was ef-

1945 CONG~ESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6483 fective to raise the rent on.April 1, 1942. We see ~o basis for adjustment in such a case.

IV. SPECIAL RELATIONSHIP A study of the cases reported by the re

gional offices indicates that many of the problems presented by petitions under section 5 (a) (11) raise questions of special relation;. ship. While it is difficult to reach any definite conclusion because of the frequent inadequacy of the facts presented, there is some indication that petitions are being denied which probably should be granted under section 5 (a) (4).

{a) There ha\-e been several cases in which the landlord alleged that a low rent was given because the freeze-date tenant was a good friend. Apparently there is some tendency to overlook the fact that section 5 (a) {4) applies to instances of "personal relationship." If in fact a rent substantially below comparability has been given because of a friendship between landlord and tenant, an adjustment should be made.

(b) In a number of cases the landlord claimed that he gave a low rent out of consideration for a tenant who was in bad financial circumstances; for example, the tenant was unemployed on maximum rent date. Some offices apparently are not considering these cases under section 5 (a) ( 4) . If a land lord has in fact rented substantially below comparability out of consideration for a tenant who is having financial difficulties, an adjustment should be made under section 5 (a) ( 4) .

(c) In a few cases landlords have alleged that low rents were given because of special factors applying to a particular class of tenants. For example, a landlord stated that accommodations were rented substantially below comparability to needy persons because of the landlord's "close .affiliation to a charitable organization {the Salvation Army)." In a somewhat similar case the landlord stated that, in view of the low pay of Army privates, he gave a lower rent to those who wished to have their fam~lies with them. We consider section 5 (a) (4) appropriate for these cases.

V. MISCELLANEOUS CASES In the following cases which have been

brought to our attention we consider that an adjustment may be appropriate under section 5 (a) (11):

1. The tenant on maximum-rent date was the sunervisor of the landlord's brother at his place of employment. Both the landlord and his brother contributed to the support of the mother and the landlord therefore felt that he had a special interest in his brother's work. The landlord stated that he did not raise the rent although it was substantially below comparability because he "did not wish to do anything which might cause unpleasant relations between his brother and his superior." While a case of this character probably calls for more than the usual care, an adjustment is in order if the facts are established.

2. On maximum rent date the tenant was subletting a substantial portion of the accommodations without the knowledge of the landlord. The landlord was seriously ill on that date, and for this reason was not paying, close attention to the property and was unaware of the subletting. The rent was substantially lower than comparability for accommodations being similarly used. The subletting is presently being continued by the tenant. There is no ground for adjustment under section 5 (a) (8) since the present subletting is no different than on maximum-rent date. However, the case may fall under section 5 (a) (11) since the unusual circumstances present on maximum-rent date resulted in the landlord's · failure to know of the subletting. Adjustments should be confined to instances in which the subletting is so extensive that it is reasonably

clear the landlord would have raised the rent had he known of it.

In the following cases we approve the denial of an adjustment under section 5 (a) (11):

3. After maximum rent date, but prior to effective date, a landlord purchased a bouse on which the rent bad been ·increased shortly after maximutn rent date. The landlord seeks adjustment on the ground that he bought in reliance upon the higher rent. We are unable to see that this is a case involving peculiar circumstances within the meaning of section 5 (a) (11). A contrary result would mean, in effect, that adjustments would be given where rent increases were made after maximum rent date, solely by reason of the fact that there had been a purchase of the property at a time when the higher rent was being collected.

In a somewhat analogous case, the landlord claimed that he purchased after effective date in reliance upon statements by both the tenant and the agent of the seller that the maximum rent was $30 a month. In fact, the maximum rent was $20 a month and the property had not been registered. Again we believe there is no ground for adjustment under section 5 (a) (11).

4. Some landlords have sought adjustment because they did not raise rents due to the persuasion of a fair rent committee which was functioning in the area on maximum rent date. In our opinion an adjustment should. not be made. We realize that in areas where fair rent committees were functioning some landlords did not raise rents because of the pleas of the committee, while others ignored such pleas. We feel compelled to conclude that this cannot be differentiated from one of the normal results of the freeze date method; that is, the advantage which is gained under the rent regulation by landlords who raised rents at the earliest opportuntiy as defense activities appeared in the area. This is one of the consequences of the freeze date method of controlling rents which we feel cannot be eliminated by upward adjustments under section 5 (a) (11). In general, to the extent that there is any inequity, the inequity could only be eliminated consistently with the objectives of rent control by reducing those rents which had been raised as a result of early pressures in the area. The opposite course would be likely to result in a fairly general increase in the rent level in a number of areas.

(Issued November 25, 1944.)

There is one further thought that should be mentioned in the class of cases of peculiar circumstances, however, and that is that in my judgment there should be additional authority granted to the local area director to determine additional cases of peculiar circumstances. On that ·point I have di~cussed the matter with the National Dlrector and he is sympathetic to the need for additional authority in the local area office in order to determine additional types of cases of that nature.

Another rental problem which has caused considerable difficulty has been that involving retroactivity. By retroactivity I mean those cases where the landlord and tenant have mutually agreed that additional services or additional equipment should be furnished. Now, because of the tremendo~us volume that is entailed in processing these petitions, and because of the fact that has been a shortage of manpower which has been manifest in the OPA offices as well as elsewhere in the country, there has been a considerable lag . in adjusting such petitions. It has been my conten-

tion that when a petition is ·agreed to by the Office of Price Administration, any adjustments, either upward or down;. ward, should be made. retroactive to the time that the additional equipment or additional services were furnished. I think that is only fair.

On that point too I have had corres-· pondence with the Administrator asking that he clarify that. He has done so again in language which I shall include in my remarks:

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D. C., June 9, 1945.

The .Honorable GEORGE E. OUTLAND, . House of Representatives,

Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. OUTLAND: Various industry

groups have suggested that orders entered on landlord petitions increasing maximum allowable rents because of an increase of services provided th~ tenant should be retroactive to the date of the filing of the petition. Such orders presently only authorize the receipt of the higher rent allowed from the date of the order. While most of our areas are reasonably current in processing petitions, and the great majority of rent increases are granted in a period of less than 1 month from the date on which the petition is filed, there have been occasional instances of delay which · have deprived landlords of the opportunity of collecting a higher rent for a period of several months.

The pressure of work in area offices during the initial stages of the program, and the rather tight personnel situation, preventedthis office from establishing procedures for separate handling of landlord petitions based on increases in services, furniture, furnishings and equipment. We believe the time has come, however, when such petitions can be segregated and given special handling. Specifically, we propose that if a petition is filed involving an increase in services, furniture, furnishings, and equipment, the increased rental value of which is easily ascertainable, and the petition is acc,ompanied by a letter from the tenant acknowledging that the particular item has been provided, a fi~~l order will be entered immediately granting the increase, after a cursory check supplementing the facts stated in the petition where necessary. Under these circumstances, retroactivity to the date of the filing of the petition will be unnecessary since the order will be entered within a day or two of the filing of the petition and prior to the next rent-payment period. For example, if a garage is furnished with a particular rental unit, which was not previously provided it should be easy for the Rent Director to determine the rental value of the garage from the facts stated in the petition. Similarly, if a mechanical refrigerator is provided, no difficulty should be experienced in granting an immediate adjustment. We believe that these procedures will obviate in the future any justifiable complaints that landlords

· have been deprived of the increas~d rental value attributed to additional items of services or equipment during the period presently required to process _landlord petitions.

We expect to follow the practical workings of these procedures carefully and if they do not accomplish the results we expect, we will be glad to give consideration to making Rent Director's orders on petitions based on an increase in service, furnishings, or equipment retroactive to the date of the filing of the petition. It should be recognized that even under the proposed procedures there will be a minority of cases in which the facts will be in dispute or involving more than a cursory investigation in which ·summary handling will not be possible.

There are two vital reasons why, in general, the Administrator has given prospective e!fect to orders entered in rent proceedings.

6484 .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-H.OUSE JUNE 21 One is the necessity, in a program of the ·size and complexity of rent control of having at all times a fixed and ascertainable maximum rent not subject to retroactive change, on which both landlord and tenant can rely. The other, and even more import ant reason, is the obvious difficulty inherent in enforcing rent ceilings and prosecuting overcharges if all rents are subject to retroactive change either by the area rent office itself or at one of the review levels established by the act .and the procedural regulations. These objections apply with somewhat less force to making orders entered on petitions based on increased services, furniture, furnishings, and equipment retroactive to the date of the filing of the petition, if restricted to the area level. They are nonetheless present and we would consequently prefer taking all administrative steps possible to cure the objections raised before changing our present position on orders of this character.

With best regards, I am Sincerely yours,

IvAN D. CARSON, Deputy Administrator for Rent.

I might point out further in regard to retroactivity that the committee recognized that point and attempted to cover it in the language of the report on page 11. Again I should like to quote from the report:

Complaints have been received, which appear to the committee justifiable, that in some instances delays in processing petitions for adjustment based on increased services, furniture, furnishing, and equipmen:t, supplied at the tenant's request, have deprived landlords of revenue to which they are entitled. The committee feels that the Administrator should at once take steps to permit landlords to receive immediate compensation for increases in services, furniture, furnishings, and equipment supplied at the request of the tenant.

I think I can assure the membership of the House that such steps are being taken. I hope..that very soon the mass of petitions involving retroactivity which have been accumulating will be ironed out. I -already have evidence that in certain communities that is now taking · place. I personally have c;:tlled to the attention of the Administrator several examples of problems involving delayed action on petitions, and his office has requested of the regional office that immediate action be taken. Prompt and efficient action on petitions of retroactivity will be .concrete proof to landlord and tenant alike that those administering the rent control program are anxious to be fair, impartial, and efficient in ·that administration. I expect to ask the Administrator to check whenever requests of this riature are called to my attention, and I suggest to the other members of this House that they take similar action. This is extremely important, and undue delays in area or regional offices . cause just complaint.

It is my opinion that the National Administrator will take every step .to carry out the intent of Congress in this con ... nection, as that intent is outlined .in the report.

There has been another problem in connection with rent control which we have found to be especially acute on the Pacific coast. That· is in the matter of allowing additional rent where addi ... tiona! people are occupying the apart--

ment or the house. In other words, the problem of increased occupancy.

The CHAIRMAN. The time gf the gentleman from California has expired.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. ·Chairman, I yield the gentleman five additional minutes.

Mr. OUTLAND. In sections like the Pacific coast and other areas where, due to the influx of war workers, there is a high degree of congestion, it is very important that every possible housing accommodation be taken advantage of. It is also advisable that both to stimulate the use of that additional housing space and to provide for fair income to the person who is renting it, that additional rental be made available for such in:. creased occupancy.

I had hoped there might be included in the committee report a statement cov~ering that problem. I may say in view ·of the fact it is not, it is another point which I have been trying to iron out with the Administrator. He is writing me in connection with that, and I am hoping that· a statement ·of ·policy will soon be

I would like to conclude by repeating a point I tried to make· in the beginning. That is, that all divisions of the OPA have a definite responsibility ,to be fair to aU parties ·concerned. The Rent Division is not just for the tenant. It is not just for the landlord. It is there to try to hold the line, and iri holding that line to do justice and to do equity to the greatest extent possible to all parties concerned. I think the National Administrator and members of his staff have attempted to do that. I have found certain instances ·in area offices where there may seem t'o be some bias. Where such bias has been indicated, corrective action is necessary and· that action should be taken either by properly instructing the persons who do not have a fair attitude or by seeing that they are removed and other persons put- in. That, too, is a deft• nite responsibility which falls on the -shoulders of the Administrator.

I join with the Members of the House who have criticized this act in hoping that .at the earliest possible moment we can remove not only the rent-control forthcoming·. -

I suggested originally the following language which I think is very fair:

It is consistent with the purposes of the act that -the Administrator provide for the granting of additional rent for additional occupants in excess of the number occupying the property on the date determining the maximum rent, in such amounts as will fully compensate for the services and facilities and provide an incentive for the maximum uee of available housing facilities. Such provision does not appply to children born to tenants in possession.

" provisions but others which have proven so difficult during these wartime years. 1

I will say, and this affects very definitely the section of the country from which I come, that· many of the Gontrols will have to be continued not only for the duration of the war but for a period thereafter.

There are two other points which I will have to touch upon lightly because I do not have time to go into them in detail. I should like to emphasize again the need for additional authority in both the interpretation and in policy making on the local level. It is next to impossible to pass a law in this Congress on such a complex subject as rents which will apply with equal justice to New York City and to the small communities · in Nebraska which the gentleman mentioned a moment ago. Because of that difficulty it is important that the regional ·and area directors have authority to take care of situations as they arise. On this point the committee tried to include language in the report which would indicate the intent of Congress as to the need for more authority on the local level. The third paragraph ·on page 11 of the report concerns this problem.

· There is another point that should be mentioned. That is that the OPA has not been able in all cases to meet 'these problems as speedily as it could wish, because of the lack of adequate finances to secure competent personnel: I think it is the responsibility of the Members of this House to study this problem very carefully, and rather than to simply criticize OP A without getting the facts, to find out the reasons why certain charges are made. I feel quite certain that there is need, especially in the rent control division, for additional funds for enforcement, for processing petitions and for carrying out all of the various functions of that division. I hope the membership of the House will consider . that particular point carefully.

r

I repeat, that in my judgment, rent control has been pretty successful in holding the line against inflation in its own. particular field. I repeat also that in a program of this scope inequities and injustices have occurred. For my part I shall continue to fight to hold the line; I shall also continue to fight to iron out every single injustice and ·inequity that is called to my attention by either tenant or landlord. We are all Americans; engaged together in this fight on the home front. We have landlords and we have tenants who have been unfair, unscrupulous, and unwise; fortunately these have been in the minority. The great mass of the American people, including the great majority of both tenants and' landlords want to play fair. It is up to us in this Congress to help; even more so, I believe, it is a solemn responsibility upon those who administer this act to help. We can pass the law; they must carry it through. The· job is not an easy one, but with a maximum of patience, cooperation and mutual understanding, and a minmium of selfishness, ignorance, and friction I believe it can be done.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from California has again expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield. such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. SPRINGER].

Mr. SPRINGER. Mr. Chairman, at the very outset of my remarks I desire

. to say that in my humble opinion the -pending Resolution lOl .is of outstanding ·importance to the people of this coun-try. Too much emphasis ·cannot be placed upon the importance of this resolution, because it strikes at the very heart of every kind and type of business and it strikes at the very heart of the home of every American citizen. The Price Control and Stabilization Acts were

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6485 passed for the express purpose of preventing increased prices during the present war, and to prevent the vast increases that were experienced during and following World War I. Many people have a vivid recollection of those days-and it was the intent of Congress to prevent a recurrence of those days of extremely high prices in many of the essential commodities used and consumed by the general public. That act has, in some respects, accomplished the purpose for which it was intended. There have been many abuses, however , and these have . arisen by and through the administration of the law. That is a tragic commentary, may I say, because the people of this Nation have made a contribution unequaled in history to the winning of this war-they have given so much, they have worked, they have produced and they have given-they have had but one goal, and that was the goal of victory.

Mr. Chairman, when I speak of the people who have thus made the outstanding contribution to our victory, I speak of our farmers, and their families, and of manufacturers, and every employee in every factory, mill and plant, and every worlcer everywhere, and I speak of the merchant, the small-town and country store, and the small crossroads merchants throughout the length and breadth of our country. I speak of the average American citizen, who is trying to work and earn a living, and who is trying to save in order that bonds may be purchased, and that contributions may be made to every agency which promotes our war effort, and is aiding our soldiers and sailors. in every possible way during their titanic struggle for victory. We are making progress, but we may have a long way to go before that happy day comes when ultimate victory will be ours.

When the Price Control Act was passed, i.t was the hope of all that the legislation would be so administered, in fairness to all, that the true intent and purpose of that law would be accomplished, and that prices would be controlled in an equitable manner so that all groups of our people would profit thereby. That was the hope of the people throughout our country. The people hoped that prices would be controlled, and that a fair margin would be recognized between the cost of production and the price fixed by the ceil- . ing so that losses would not be sustained by the ceilings established. It is impossible for us to positively fix the blame, in that huge agency, for the inequitable ceilings established-because with the thousands and thousands of employees, in that agency, no one will admit that any error was made by him-each one defends himself and herself-but those errors have been made, they are still being made, and they will be made as long as this agency is in existence. By reason of many of the ceilings established, by the OPA, black markets have sprung up, and I am very confident that the OPA is entirely, and alone, responsible for these black markets and their continuance. That is the result of the bungling and maladministration of this very law, by those in charge of the administration of it. ·

Mr. Chairman, the present shortage of beef and ·pork, and other essential com-

modities, which affects every home in our country, may be traced, in large part, to the OP A. The ceilings established bear directly upon every produc.er in the country, and it is an impossibility to expect the people to produce when they must do so at a loss. The OPA should have recognized the problem of the producer, as well as that of the consumer, when the many and various price ceilings were fixed and established. But the net result has been, after the producer was forced to operate at a loss, he was soon driven out of business and he was forced to cease to operate. Untold thousands of our people, in every manner and kind of business, have been forced to discontinue their businesses by the inequitable price ceilings established by the OPA. That is a very sad indictment in time of war, when the complete cooperation of every class of business, and the people, is so essential for victory.

Mr. Chairman, I have in mind certain cases which have developed in the dis-

' trict which I have the honor to represent, in Indiana, wherein the general attitude of the snoopers, or investigators, of the OPA have demonstrated their general attitude toward the people of our country. They want to get a case against the people, so the people may be penalized, it appears. One case to which I refer was that of a poor-man, who had a very small repair shop for automobiles; he ·was trying to .earn a living for himself and family; a young man who owned an Austin automobile was involved in a wreck, and he sold the wrecked car to this repairman. Before the repairman would place the car in repair, he first sought advice from the chief clerk of the OPA, in his own county, and that chief clerk advised this repairman that he could repair the Austin car, and sell it, and there was no ceiling price upon such a car. That in such a sale there would be no violation of ceiling prices, because there were no ceiling prices upon a secondhand Austin car. This poor man made the repairs, putting $70 of new parts upon it, and acting upon the advice of the chief clerk of OPA, he sold the Austin car for $180, and the parts placed upon the car for $70, making a total sum of $250. He did just as the chief clerk of the OPA advised him.

Very soon after this sale an OP A investigator came and placed a charge against this repairman, and the result was that this man was penalized in the sum of $210 because he made that sale, which the chief clerk had advised the seller to make, and which sale he was instructed would not violate any rule, regulation, or order of the OPA. I have attempted to secure redress from the OPA on 'this unjust pen·alty imposed, but that agency has refused to readjust this miscarriage of justice. This poor repairman did just what the OPA advised him to do, and then the OPA penalized him $210 for doing just as they advised him to do. That is just one of the untold thousands of cases recorded against this agency wherein a great injustice has been imposed. I can cite many others, but time prevents. Yet, that agency holds the whip hand, and the people have to obey its mandates or suffer severe punishment. Many of the cases in

which the OPA has imposed penalties amount to very large sums of money and in those cases great injustices have been done. What the people want is fair play. They want justice-and when the people speak upon this subject they will spea.k with authority.

Mr. Chairman, some of those engaged in the work of the OPA give but very little consideration to the people or to their maintenance of their businesses. Recently a businessman from Indian.a interviewed one of the agents rather high in authority in the OPA regarding the question of ceilings in selling prices, the increased cost of labor and materials in production, and of the certainty of losses being sustained in the event the business should be continued, and he was very frankly told by that OPA official "that it really made no difference whether that plant had to close up or not." This same official further stated "they realize that their pricing policies would cause some 'marginal' manufacturers in every industry to operate at a loss and possibly close their doors." Yet the OPA continues its policy, and that policy has wrecked so many businesses, and it will continue to wreck businesses as long as that unjust and inequitable policy is followed. .

Mr. Chairman, it is my considered judgment that that some stabilization of prices are necessary. We do not want an unrestrained inflation in this coun- · try. That must be prevented, and restrained. However, this agency can, should and must reform its lines in order that the people in this Nation may go forward and operate at some profit in their businesses. They cannot continue to operate at a ioss. Bankruptcy faces many of them now-and that phase of the law will be resorted to in many instances if the administration of OP A is continued along the lines now followed.

May I say that the people of this country want food, and they want meats; . they want the essential things which are necessary in order tq work and make progress. Our laboring people who are producing the implements of war need meat, and if they are undernourished they can!lot produce. The OPA can and should help, with the assistance of the War Food Administrator, and other agencies; the necessary food can be distributed so that our people will have what they need-and they do not want more than their bodies require. This bunglin~:. and improper handling of food, and other essentials, must be stopped. The people demand it, and our victory in this last phase of this war requires it. The OPA must · meet the exigencies of the situation equitably, in the interest of all of the people of this Nation. The plan of scarcity~which appears to be the policy of the OPA, and other agencies-must be liberalized in the interest of the people at home. Those civilians in foreign lands have no first claim upon the food which our own people need. We want our soldiers to have everything they need and desir~, but when those agencies of our Government give precedence to the civilian population of foreign countries, and some of which have not been involved in this wart

6486 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 over our own people-of every classthen it is time for complaint.

It is my hope that this agency may be entirely abolished at the very earliest opportunity. For the sake of reducing the confusion existing in our country, fo:· the elimination of the so-called black markets, and for the extension of opportunity to the people to go forward again and to aid in the war effort as they desire, the abolition of tllis agency should be accomplished at the very earliest moment.

Mr. Chairman, it was recently disclosed that in the unsuccessful scramble in the OPA to control the meat shortage, which was, in my opinion, largely caused by the OPA and the War Food Administration, the OPA issued 75 over-all regulations, which were very confusing, and that agency thereafter sought to amend those regulations and 1,300 amendments were incorporated therein, which required some 400,000 words. I wonder how any merchant handling meats can read and interpret those major regulations, with the 1,300 amendments, and conduct his business? Of course, if the merchant does not follow those regulations he is subject to prosecution and penalty, and the army of investigators roaming over the country are ceJ:tain to discover any trivial error which may have been committed in .extreme good faith, yet the citizen is subject to the penalty clauses provided. This agency has been bungled and mishandled from the very outset, and that condition continues to exist. The people are sick and tired of this program, and the utter lack of business judgment exercised in the administration of this agency.

I am certain amendments will be offered to this pending measure, and while it will doubtless be impossible to abolish this agency at this time, I will support every worth-while amendment offered, and I call upon those in charge of the administration of this agency to i·esort to approved business methods hereafter, in the interest of the people of this country, and to .continue the operation of this agency, if it is to be continued for a short time, in fairness to the people · of thiS country. All to the end that our own people will have the opportunity to go forward in the future as Americans, unhampered and unfettered by confusing rules and regulations, and unafraid of investigators who seek to prosec\lte and penalize our good Ameri-

. can citizens for harmless matters, all of which hamper and strangle those who attempt to make some progress in our country.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. KILBURN].

Mr. KILBURN. Mr. Chairman, I believe in price-control legislation. We have to have it in this country until after the surrender of the Japanese and probably for some months after that. All Congress can do is pass a general Price Control Act. We, as Congress, cannot fix prices-cannot administer the act.

I realize that the administration of price control in this country is terribly. diftlcult and regardless of how competent the administrators are it is .bound to result in a great many criticisms.

Nevertheless, I feel that the-administration of the Price Control Act so far has been badly done. I gathered this from my country district up in northern New York where we have goo'd American citizens trying to help control prices. We have good honest, · straight men up there on the ration boards trying to do the best they can, but they find that Albany tells them everything to do so that they are in effect rubber stamps and cannot exercise their judgment as to the individual cases effecting our community.

l do not believe that price control · should be run by either party. I do not think it is a party measure. It is an . American measure and I believe that the local boards, composed of good, decent, upstanding Americans should say what should happen in individual cases in their community.

It is almost impossible for Congress to write a Price Cont:t;"ol Act, which will guarantee good and fair administration. Realizing that and }lecause I feel so strongly that price control is necessary in this country, I am in favor of this bill, but I did want to register my protest on parts of its administraiton.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [.Mr. ARENDS]. .

Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Chairman, each day it becomes more and more evident that our people are undergoing severe food shortages. While our Nation certainly wants to do its best in providing as much food as possible for the suffering and hungry nations of the world, nevertheless it appears to me that unless better administration and more careful handling of our present food supplies is had we will find America facing such pronounced food shortages as to cause a decline in national health.

To emphasize how severe this whole matter is, let me read to you a letter I have just received from one of my acquaintances and constituents. This sets , forth rather boldly just how difficult it already is for people to secure necessary foods in order to maintain a suitable diet:

This is an S 0 S. I have never been so near to starving as now. I am not joking. We h ave had one soup bone, all the red meat we've had in about 6 weeks. All our canned stuff is gone, and I'm told we can•t buy potatoes. I have about 2 pounds in store. I suspect all the supplies for the Army have been left in Europe and the new Army, bound for the Pacific, is being supplied from here. If the food in Europe is being given away to the people who brought on this war, I think you, our protectors, are uninformed. We can't can fruit enough on account of sugar-but, of course, whisky must be ma de. People must have liquors, but we can get along witliout food. I'm plain mad.

While any reasonable person can understand the huge task that confronts the OPA and WFA in handling the questions that come before them, it does seem that too many mistakes have been and are ~resently being made. In other words, there should be some housecleaning in these agencies and more competent and efficient personnel used in order to obtain as much relief as possible from the chaotic and disturbing dilemma in which we find ourselves a.t the present time.

It seems necessary that the life of OPA must be extended, but I stand for as short an extension as possible in order to make OPA come before the Congress

. at short intervals and lay their cards on the table, not only to defend the rules and regulations they put into effect but also to make a declaration as to future policy. The people of this country are getting sick and tired of some of the needless messes in which we become involved. Let us have these matters properly attended. . Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10-minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. FOLGER].

Mr. FOLGER. Mr. Chairman, this is the time of year when we indulge in what has now become a habit, a custom every year since it became necessary in the almost unanimous opinion of the Congre~s to establish emergency price control and enact a stabilization law.

Mr. Chairman, I do not believe we will find many Members of the Congress, either in the House or in the Senate, who do not agree that these acts ought to be and must be-even putting it that strong-must be maintained. The only trouble we find is one of various sorts of agitation, that people get impatient with some of the regulatory habits, one might say, or instances rather where people become impatient and a little bit peeved and they write to their Congressm·an and the Congressman, concerned with trying

. to see what he could do about it himself sometimes gets out of humor. But I am sure that with all these observations, with all these harassing things that must take place in an agencY. that is chargeable with such manifold responsibilities as the Price Administration a great degree of concession will be yielded and given to these men as human beings who do not conceive themselves to be-and we must not expect any man to be-perfect in all the manner in which they perform the duties of their several positions constituting this very important and very large organization.

I am sure there would not be a Member of the House, and if I may be privileged to refer to the Senate, not a Member of the Senate who would, because he had become agitated, had become impatient and felt that he or a constituent had · suffered some inconvenience that was unnecessary or even a hardship that should not have been visited upon him, permit anything of that kind to control or alter his vote upon the very important proposition of continuing price control until it shall be found to be no longer necessary.

Mr. Chairman, I heard the colloquy a minute ago between two gentlemen of the House with respect to rent control. There must be some misunderstanding as to rent control · obtaining in any area here, yonder, or just anywhere, because the act itself says:

Whenever in the judgment of the Administrator such action is necessary or proper in order to effectuate the purposes. of this act, he shall issue a declaration sett ing forth the necessity for and recommendations with reference tc the stabilization or reduction of rents for any· defense area.

It must have been -declared a defense area by the President under authority

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-I-IOUSE 6487 given him before the Price Administrator or any other agency can inaugurate rent control. This is a. defense area proposition and this cannot be made applicable to any community, village or town until there has been such declaration.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOLGER. I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. May I say to the gentleman that Chadron, Nebr., is not a defense area, there was no authority setting it up as a defense area, yet the Rent Control Director came in and set up ·offices there without the folks i'n Washington knowing about it. I think it is merely a matter of .extending their control and regimentation over an area for which there was no justification at .all. ·

Mr. FOLGER. May I ask the gentleman if he made inquiry at the Office of Price Control about the matter?

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Yes, and they did not even know about it. The office in the State of Nebraska took it upon itself to set up an office in that area without any authority from anyone else, to create more jobs for the bureaucrats . out there.

Mr. FOLGER. There was probably a mistake of some kind made that should have been corrected by the authorities here. . .

. Mr. Chairman, there was a proposal and probably some thought of extending the Price Administration or Emergency Control Act together with the Stabilization Act for a period of 6 months. I confess to you, after consideration of the matter, after hearing the evidence 'and

·all there was to be sai.d about it, that I myself, if I may be . pardoned for referring to my .own ~pinion, came to the conclusion that it would be exceedingly

·dangerous to limit to 6 months the life .of this agency, not only on account of the disruption it would cause in administration and in the personnel of the

·Price Control Act, men scattering· here, yonder, and everywhere, 'to get back home or to get some other kind of work, but also on account of the danger of getting it out over the country generally

. ·that price control was on its way out. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the

gentleman yield? ·Mr. FOLGER. I yield to the gentle-

man· from Pennsylvania. · Mr. GROSS. Since the gentleman

thinks that is a dangerous thing, and that it will disturb them, how much lias it disturbed the personnel to know that on the 1st of July they may go out? How many of the 46,000 employees have left and gone to defense plants or elsewhere? I am interested to know how many have left.

Mr. FOLGER. I think I can answer · the gentleman both as to the personnel and as to the country generally. They had confidence in the Congress and believed there was no reasonable doubt, legalistically speaking, but what the Congress would extend the price control law together with the Emergency Price Control Act for 12 months; so that the people of the country were not uneasy and the people in the offices. were not under any doubt as to whether they.

would remain. But if you had changed it to 6 months, the people in the country and the people in the offices might conclude that we are getting ready to push it out of the door.

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Would the gentleman agree with me that the economic situation of the country is changing rapidly now from day to day and that perhaps a short extension might be wise in order for them to justify the things they are doing because the economic situation is changing rapidly from day to day? ·

Mr. FOLGER. I cannot agree with that thought at all. I disagree with the gentleman very definitely about that. In the Senate report it is provided that every 90 days an investigation will be made and the picture will be lool{ed at. Substantially the same thing appears in the House report. However, much that might be desired it would be, to my mind, a great disaster to keep it less than 12 months, but I do not think it ought to go 18 months.

Mr. MILLER of · Nebraska. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, does the gentleman think there is any one in the Office of Price Administration. that ever intends to cut off the administration of that department?

Mr. FOLGER. Why, I think it is the definite purpose and must be known to them and everybody else that as soon as it will be allowable in the judgment of the Congress of the United States ·there will not be a price control nor any such sort of claimed regimentation.

Mr. HOOK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FOLGER. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. HOOK. Does not the gentleman feel that because of the changing and unstable economic situation in the country that we should have price control for at least 1 year?

Mr. FOLGER. I think we are bound to have~ it during the war and probably 6 months thereafter and maybe even longer.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. ELLSWORTH].

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Chairman, I ·feel · that this OPA law is essentially a good law and quite obviously must be continued. I feel that the Congress in passing this law and in revising it from time to time has put together a very good statute, and that if it were administered properly and had been administered properly, with the proper motive behind

· it, we would not have the deluge of complaints, honest complaints, that we are getting from the people of the country today.

Just this morning I received a letter · from a small merchant in my district, and I want to read you some of his com

. ments because I believe they are typical · of situations all over the United States. l'his man says:

I cannot see how merchants are going to be able, or want to remain in business, when they are in constant fear of being closed up "Some morning because of an unintentional mistake in pricing an item or items. Also, if OPA is permitted to make one error after another, the merchant should be entitled to a

small margin, whereas today, they are getting absolutely none.

The district office in Portland made three errors in making out their notice to revoke my license if another violation turned up in the future. They spelled my name incorrectly, wrong initials and wrong store name. When the first notice came for a violation, I was unintentionally wrong on butter. They had a violation on eggs, which was incorrect on their part, as I rechecked carefully and the inspector stated our egg price was 0. K. and to finish it off, the notice was directed to Negley's Market. My notice to appear before the board was incorrect on their part, inas~uch as the violation was for a quart of Purex and they had it on .the notice as Clorax.

Then he goes on to say at another point:

Frankly I feel the OP A is a wonderful operation, but today it is fast losing the confidence of the general public. Many of our finest people will go out of their way to black market and break OPA rules because of the bungling OPA has done. OPA is a big thing and should be operated on a mqre sound and respectable basis.

Then here is the real essence of the thing:

We had one small store close because of OP A rulings and I understand one of the larger ones would sell out because of OPA. If it is lack of cooperation on the merchants part, he should be punished, but, OPA should be considerate if a merchant does try to cooperate, however, tpey are not.

This war can turn to victory for us all if we work in greater harmony. The merchant would prefer ·to see the OPA assist as a helper rather than an annoyer.

That is the end of the quotation from this man's letter. May I say in conclusion that what the OPA is doing is attempting to 'drive honest and patriotic people to that, people engaged in the war effort in which they are successfully participating. This OPA governmental or'ganization is operating under the philosophy of driving and forcing, and it is therefore not succeeding in achieving the cooperation of the people of this country. I think it is a fair statement to say that you can lead the people of America to do anything. The people of this country are 100 percent patriotic. l'hey can be led to cooperate with OPA, with the Price Control Act, or any other act passed by this Congress, but I submit to you, Mr. Chairman, that the people of America cannot successfully be driven into doing anything.

Mr. CANFIELD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ELLSWORTH. I yield. Mr. CANFIELD. I agree substantially

with what the gentleman has said and with the statement which his constituent directed to him. It is . my feeling that the great fault with OPA lies in its administration. I think that many of the administrators downtown today are punch-drunk.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. I agree with the gentleman .

Mr. CANFIELD. They do not care what happens. -

Mr. ELLSWORTH. I agree with the gentleman. As the gentleman from New Jersey well knows, this Congress cannot possibly write administrative detail into the law of the land. That is impossible. And yet there is no help for the situation unless the administrative policy

6488 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 downtown changes. We can pass a good act. But it still is not good if it is administered poorly.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Oregon has expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. MILLER].

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair· man, in looking over the RECO.RD of yes- · terday we find that the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. SPENCE], the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. BRoWN], and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. PATMAN] spoke in excellent defense of the OPA. They need someone to defend them. I notice in their remarks that they go into much detail as to what happened after the last World War. They call attention to the number of businesses that failed and what happened to prices. I am wondering whether those same gentlemen would dare to hazard a guess as to what will happen after this war, even with the OPA in operation. I would suggest that the collapse following the last war may seem like a dew compared with the cloudburst after this war if the OPA continues with their present line of administering price and rationing controls. It is an unfair comparison to state what happened after the last. war and try to compare it with what is happening at the present time. I believe an economic explosion is in the making because of the maladministration in the OPA. Too much price control over a long period of time will destroy business. The Ameri~ can people are getting tired of regula:. tions and red tape. When this war ends, if regulations continue, there will either be a complete disregard of the regulations or a ·revolt.

Congress must direct OPA and correct its many present abuses. I submit that the Office of Price Administration is fouling the spark plugs of ·recovery. They are making every businessman who wants to go back into manufacturing, if he needs higher prices than he had before he reconverted, come to Washington and stand with hat in hand begging for a price which insures a profit. ' · There are thousands of manufacturing plants trying to get a price so that they may go back to making things that people need. John Q. Public has $120,-000,000,00.0 iri his pockets which he wants to spend. The· Office of Price Administration is stymieing and holding up the reconversion of industry in this country. I submit to the members of this committee that if the Office of Price Administration is not more lenient in permitting business to go back to work, many factories which are open and have the material and the manpower will not be able to operate because they cannot get a price reflecting a profit.

Let me cite you an example of a broom plant at Deshler, Nebr. It is the largest broom factory in the United State~. They have supplied brooms to the military. Their war contract was canceled. They want to reconvert and make brooms for the civilian population. At what price? At the 1941 level. For 4 montbs they have been trying to get a price from OPA which reflects a reasonable profit. The price of straw, wire, wood, and labol,"

have so advanced that they cannot make the brooms and· bring them to market and sell. them at the OPA price. But the OPA lets brooms in from Mexico which are. inferior in quality and . they are selling to the people of this country at a much higher price than the indus-

. try in Nebraska has' been trying to get from the OPA. Similar cases could be submitted by the thousand. Continued actions of that type will certainly fou~ the spark plug of recovery in this coun..: try.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman: will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. I yield. . Mr. CRAWFORD. I am informed by a broom manufacturer in Colorado of conditions which they have to contend with. The gentleman has spoken of the particular company which he has made reference to. This company has informed me of a proposed order for pricing brooms now under consideration by the OPA. This order, which will be issued in spite o.f. objections registered by the OPA's own Industrial Advisory ·committee on broom prices, classifies and grades brooms in accordance with standards not known or used previously by the industry. The result of the order, ,according to the industry, will: ·

First. Result in the upgrading of' many low-quality brooms, primarily those imported from foreign countries, and thereby increase production of foreign brooms for the Un1ted States market; and · Second. Cause the abandonment by many manufacturers of the production of .better quality brooms, · with ·the cons_e-quent ·nonuse of domestically produced -broom corn. · · · ·

That illustrates how the present poli'cies move in the direction of destroying American business. · Mr.-MILLER oi Nebraska. The gen:'tleman is absolutely right. If the OPA continues their present policies of preventing these Sll}.alJ busines~es from re .. converting . and going back to making civili~n goods at a profit, many 6~ them are going to close their factories ·and go

·fishing. , · Mr. BROWN of .Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I Yield 10 minutes to the gentleman

. from South Carolina [Mr. ij.ILEYl. · Mr. RILEY. Mr. Chairman, when ,I

think of the OPA I think ·of the old colored woman who walked into the office of the rationing board down in my town and made this request; "I want one of them books that you can't get nothing

-without." She revealed in her rather vividly worded request a new chapter in American economy, ~he lirnitin..g ,both as to the use and the cost of food, clothing, and shelter-the ne.cessities of. life; com-

. modities and services · heretofore restricted only by the ability to purchase or the ability to obtain credit, thus ereat

. ing a condition th~t touches every living soul in this Nation. Not only was it witb-

. out precedent, · but. Americans, accustomed to breathing the free air of liberty, did not like it, except for the other fellow. It was c·onsidered a 'trespass upon individual rights and liberties from its very beginning, and it was reluctantly accepted onlY because it was an emet-

gency measure designed to aid in the prosecution of the Great War. · Those who have been entrusted with the administration of this new ecqnomy had to blaze a new trail, had to mal{e experiments, had to do things for which there was no precedent. Naturally they committed errors. Any other human beings under like circumstances wolud .bave made either similar mistakes or the sam'e mistakes. · I can think of and say just as many ·critical things about OPA as anyone in this Chamber. There are many irritating problems connected with .it; but they :are individual problems, small problems. .I could say some nasty things about some of the personnel, if I wished. I might say that some of them are arbitrary and 'indifferent and even discourteous at times. But the~ vast_ majority of them .are conscientious and sincere in their efforts to render our country a great and needed service in one of her most critical hours.

I have come to the conclusion that I would like to see a different attitude adopted toward OPA. I have an idea that tf we .could !wlP create a more comfortable atmosphere for them their dispositions would be better and their thinking would be clearer. I just wonder if conditions .would not improve if the various organizations that come betore th~t _o:tpce, instead_ of jockeying for preferred positions, would try, instea'd, to make as many concessions as possible until this emergency is cleared up. I wonder if we could not get a majority-of ·the folks to start thinking of OPA not ·as a restrfcti~e orgaruzati~n. but as an "Opportunity for P~ople to _Assist" in ·keeping the home front. . · I remember when -I had · the privilege .of serving for a short time in the armed ,forc.es d:ur!ng tpe last World War. I re-ceived my discharge just in ti~e to get ·out and be deflated. It took me many ·years to.get over that experience, if I ever !have .. I can t,hink .of ' nO' greater pun'ishment, ~o greater disillusionment to ·our boys, than to b1ing them home in a ·period of in!l.ation and· then prick the ·bubble. · · · - As the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. .Bn·owN] so ably brought out yesterday, ·the-value of·our E bonds, the type that most individuals. buy~ is fixed. The .cash

·value 'tor each·is p:rinted on the face of the bond. If prices generally go up the 'purchasing r power of those bonds must, of necessity, decline. - If that should

·happen, I could not, with clear con-science, say that we had kept the faith

·with those to whom we are most obli·gated, the boys who are returning.home. : It has been .stated frequently here by ·our friends · across the aisle·· that they

- know price control is. ne·cessary, but they . are willing to extend it for only 6 months. · All of my life I have hea:rd businessmen squawk about legislatures and the Con

. gress changing ·the laws so frequently · that they could not niake proper plans. One· of the chief criticisms that I have

· heard of the Price Administration is that it has gotten out too nia'ny directives,

: always changing something, never giv, ing a person a chance to map out his i program;·· and . riow we have a proposal

to . add" to that· confusioll" by renewing

•

1945 CONGRESSiONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6489 this legislation for only 6 months. Here is a proposal to end the present pricecontrol regulations right after Christmas, the strongest buying period in the whole year-a period when goods are scarce, even in normal times. If that is not inviting trouble, I should like to know what it is. About the only consolation I can find in this 6 months' proposal is that if it passes-and. I do not believe it will-it will probably cause the manufacturers to start withholding their products until after the expiration of the act so that very little goods, if any, would be available for Christmas. If that is done, the responsibility for the tragedy will be definitely fixed upon those proposing this measure.

I admit that numerous individual ad-.justments need to be made, but they are administrative in character. In the let·ter from Mr. Hoover that was read yesterday by the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. JENKINS], even Mr. Hoover considers the trouble administrative. Personally, I~ believe more authority should be given to the regional and district

·boards; that more attention should be . paid to their advice and counsel. I also feel, however, that the administration is making necessary adjustments to meet this ever-changing problem. The law that was passed last year provides that the Administrator shall render a report every 90 days. That provision makes it possible for the 6 months' advocates to check up on the proposition twice every 6 months instead of once. If the report is not satisfactory, then Congress can do whatever is necessary to correct the .situation. The pro~edure as now set up is more flexible, more direct, and provides for quicker action than would be possible by extending the bill every .6 months. Unde,r the law as it is written, we are able to meet the ever-changing picture of business as various problems arise.

In the meantime, the over-all picture shows, according to Judge Vinson, Director of War Mobilization and Reconversion-and he should be in a position to know-that business earnings before taxes are the hfghest in the history of this country, that business failures are at an all-time low, with a high level of

· wages and a good price for farm crops. The Ame~can dollar is the soundest and most-desired exchange in the world. I think it is a v~ry good picture.

I now yield to the gentleman from Nebraska;

Mr. BUFFETT. I wanted to ask the gentleman if · the OPA is stopping infiation.

Mr. RILEY. Infiation is a whole lot less than it was during the last war; and I speak from experience, not statistics.

Mr. BUFFETT. The Chairman of the Board of the Federal Reserve System, who should be the highest economic authority. in the administration, says that inflation is caused from appropriations beyond tax collections. Price rises are simply an effect of earlier deficit spending.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from South Carolina has ex-pired. ·

XCI--409

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield three additional minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina.

Mr. RILEY. Is the gentleman from Nebraska making an observation or asking a question?

Mr. BUFFETT. I am making an ob. servation.

Mr. KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RILEY. I yield. Mr. KEEFE. I have been interested

in the gentleman's statement. He makes the same statement that has been re

. iterated time and time again, that busi-'ness failures are at an all-time low and that profits are up.

Mr. RILEY. Over-all profits. Mr. KEEFE. Over-all profits are up.

But the gentleman does not say anything about the number of people who have been forced ·out of business to the number of some 300,000 who have been forced to suspend business; where they have not been actually forced by bankruptcy

·to suspend business they have been forced to go out of business. Would the gentleman care to discuss that feature at all?

· Mr. RILEY. I do not know where the gentleman got his figures. It is quite possible . th~t some of those people have retired after having made considerable profits.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, will gentleman yield?

. Mr. RILEY. I yield. Mr. PATMAN. Is it not a fact that a

large number of businesses closed up because their owners and employees could go into nearby war plants and defense plants and make a lot more money? I do not know of any business that has been squeezed out. Even the small grocery man, the one-man grocery store in many cities are making $8,000 . and $10,000 a year. They have small overhead, they do not have to spend much money -to get the business, they sell every commodity at maximum price, and they are making a lot more than they ever did before. They ar~ making more money than they ever made before and I do not know of anybody who has been squeezed out.

Mr. KEEFE. The gentleman from Texas is chairman of the Small Business Committee and should know about this matter. Does the gentleman mean to say he has no knowledge whatever of any small business that has been forced to cease operations except on account of a desire to enter a war plant or because they have made a lot of money and want to retire?

Mr. PATMAN. I do not know of ~ single business that has been forced out because of the regulations of OPA or WPB. If the gentleman knows of any, he should put the names in the RECORD.

Mr. KEEFE. I have plenty of them. I have on my deask any nu;mber of them today that have stopped operations, including retail meat stores in my district that have gone out of business and small processing plants that have actually gone out of business 'because of the situation that has arisen in the meat business. That is a, ridiculous statement for the

·gentleman to make because it is not in accord with the facts.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from South Carolina has expired.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. TALLE].

Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Chair-· man, I make the point of order a quorum is not present.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will count. [After counting.] Seventy-one Members are present, not a quorum. The Clerk will call the roll.

The Clerk called the roll, and the following Members failed to answer to their names:

[Roll No. 116] Anderson, Elsaesser Merrow

N.Mex. Fellows Murray, Tenn. Baldwin, N.Y. Gardner Murray, Wis. Barrett, Wyo. Gathings O'Brien, Mich. Barry Gavin Peterson, Ga. Bell Gearhart Pfeifer Bennet, N.Y. Geelan Ploeser Blackney Gifford Price, Til. Bioom Gorski Rains Boren Grant, Ala. Reece, Tenn. Bradley, Mich. Grant, Ind. Rich Buckley Halleck Rodgers, Pa • cannon, Fla. Hancock Roe, N.Y. Clark Hart Rowan Clason Havenner Sabath Clements Hays Sasscer Coffee Hebert Sharp cooley Heffernan Sheppard Corbett Hobbs Sheridan Cravens Holifield Short Crosser Jarman Sikes Curley Johnson, Calif. Simpson, Pa. Daughton, Va. Johnson, Ind. Smith , Va. Davis Kee Starkey Dawson Kelley, Pa. Torrens Delaney, Keogh Vinson

John J. King Weaver Dickstein LeCompte White Domengeaux Ludlow Whitten Dondero Lynch Winter Durham Mansfield, Tex. Wood Earthman Martin, Iowa Worley Eaton May

Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. CooPER, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that Committee, having had under consideration House Joint Resolution 101, and finding it·self without a quorum, he had directed the roll to be called, when 334 Members responded to their names, a quorum, and he submitted herewith the names of the absentees to be spread upon the JolJ.rnal.

The Committee resumed its sitting. Mr CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I

yield ·30 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. TALLE].

Mr. TALLE. Mr. Chairman, from where I stand I can see one of the two clocks that do service in this Chamber. If the clock before me had been set to run on the eve when Christ w'as born and had been ticking off time from then until the dawn of this century, it would not have ticked ofi quite 1,000,000,000 minutes. Figure it out. Nineteen hundred years, multiplied by 365, then by 24, then by 60, and you have a result that is less than 1,000,000,000 minutes.

The Treasury report I saw yesterday showed that our Federal debt is hovering around $245,000,000,000. Remember that our means of payment grow out of our Federal debt and when you look at the debt figure on the Treasury statement you have a pretty accurate index

•

•

6490 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR'D-HOUSE 'JUNE 21 of the potential inflation which threatens our country. This being so, I think it is proper to pay a little attention to what happened in Germany within the memory of most of the Members of -this House.

I have before me some figures presented by Philip G. Wright in his book entitled "Inflation and After,'' published in 1934 with speciF.J reference to Germany. In August 1922 the circulating medium in .Germany was 252 billion marks. Six months later it was 2 trillion marks and 8 months still later it was 28 quadrillion marks. By the end of 1923, 4 months later, it was 497 quintillion marks, or M497,000,000,000,000,000,000 when expressed in the form of figures.

What were the effects in Germany? Mr. Wright says:

The German savings banks lost 99.9 percent of their deposits as a result of inflation. Depositors (who left their money in the bank) lost virtually 100 percent of their savings. • • • As infia tion progressed it became necessary to readjust all paper money wages periodically. The adjustments were first made every month, then every week; lat er, some companies changed the rates of pay every day, and finally twice a day. At the zenith of the inflationary period of few establi!hments (which had resorted to paying their employees twice a day) allowed them extra time off at noon in order that they might spend their money before it depreciated further.

You may say, "Well, that was Germany. It cannot happen here." I say to you in all solemnity that it has happened here. Let me quote briefly what James Truslow Adams says in his book America's Tragedy concerning inflation in the Confederate States, 1863-65:

Scarcity and impossible prices were wear• 1ng down not the courage but the will of the South. Moreover, as prices had risen the government had found it necessary, even in the preceding· year (1863), to pass laws impressing property from farmers and others, setting the Government's own price on what it took. This had aroused a storm of opposition and created a new host of enemies and ot disaffection on the score of States' rights. In the last months of the war, however, prices became so high and the government so impoverished that it could ~ot even give Confederate money for the lower prices at which it impressed goods but merely receipts and promises to pay, until at the end it owed those from whom it had taken property •coo,ooo.ooo.

Let me give you some of the prices that were charged in 1864-65, as noted by Mrs. Jefferson Davis in her Memoir concerning her husband, the President of the Confederacy:

In February, 1863: Bacon, $6 per pound; ham, $7 per pound; turkeys, $60 each; lighting gas, $6 per thousand feet; firewood, $35 per cord; board for a hors·e at the Richmond livery stable, $300 per month, $15 per day, $5 per single feed. In March, flour was $300 per barrel; fish, $5 per pound. April 1, 1864, beans sold at $75 per bushel; tea, $22 per pound; coffee, $12; brown sugar, $10; milk, $4 per quart. During March and April, 1865, the acme was reached. Hair cut and shave, $10; an ordinary suit of clothes, $2,700; pair of cavalry boots, $450; 6 yards of linen, $1 ,200; 1 ounce of quinine, $1,700; a penknife, $125; one cake of bl'own Windsor soap, $50.

Here is an interesting extract from a Rebel's Recollections <1875), written by George Cary Eggleston:

The prices which obtained (1863-64) were almost fabulous, and singularly enough there seemed to be no sort of ratio existing between the values of different articles. I bought coffee at $40 and tea at $30 a pound on the same day.

My dinner at a hotel cost me $20, while $5 gained me a seat in the dress circle of t he theater. I paid $1 the next morning for a copy of the Examiner, but I might h~ve got the Whig, Dispatch, Enquirer, or Sentinel for half that sum. For some wretched tallow candles I paid $10 a pound.

I believe the highest price, relatively, I ever saw paid was for a pair of boots. A cavalry officer entering a lit tle country store found there one pair of boots which fit ted him. He inquired the price. "Two hundred dollars," said the merchant. A $500 bill was offered, but the merchant, having no smaller bills, could not change it "Never mind,'' said the cavalier, ''I'll take the boots anyhow. Keep the change; I never let a little matter of $300 stand in the way of a trade."

That was on the day before Lee's surrender, but it would not have been an impossible occurrence at any time during the preceding year. The money was of so little value that we parted with it gladly whenever it would purchase anything at all desirable. l cheerfully paid $5 for a little salt at· Petersburg in August 1864, and being thirsty, drank my last $2 in a half pint of cider.

How could this fantastic condition come to pass, do you say? Here is the answer: As President of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis had other things to do in wartime than to write his name on pieces of paper designed to serve as money. So, high school girls were hired to sit in Richmond and write Jefferson Davis, Jefferson Davis all day long on pieces of paper which served as means of payment. As these means of payment increased in aniount, prices rose; as prices rose, the demand grew for more means of payment, an endless chain that sent prices spiraling upward until in some places a barrel of flour cost more than $1,500 and any paper money in denominations of less than $5 was considered as small change.

Well, what has all of this to do with us? Let us see. I talked with Governor Eccles of the Federal Reserve Board late yesterday afternoon and asked for some figures. I found that the quantity of our circulating medium now stands at something over $25,000,000,000. That is five times as much as we used on an average during the 20 years prior to 1940, when we began our large military expenditures. I found that demand deposits stand at $132,000,000,000. Then I found that Government securities which may be readily cashed and used as means of payment amount to $91,200,000,000. By Government securities I mean those held by individuals, noninco:rporated businesses, and corporations, but excluding those held by commercial banks, mutual savings banks, trust companies, and building and loan associations on the ass1,1mption that they will be held as income-producinr. investments. When you add the $25,000,000,000, the $132,000,000,000, and the $91,200,000,000, you get a grand total of $248,000,000,000 plus. That is about the amount of our Federal debt today.

Up to 1940, when our military expenditures became large, the total of these same items was $77,100,000,000. In other words, since 1940 our potential inflation has increased by something more than 300 percent. That is why I said at the outset that this is a very solemn and dismal subject indeed.

What are we going to do about it? Certainly the way out is not to deal with the effect alone. That is what we are doing in the bill before us. We are dealing with the effect only. We have put a lot of prices in a big kettle. We have built a hot fire under that kettle. Everytime we appropriate the billions of dollars which pass so easily in this chamber we add more firewood and fan the fiames under that kettle. We put the OPA on top of that kettle to keep the lid down. The prices inside the kettle are seething now. Is it any wonder that -there are some puffs of steam ~ere and there in the form of black markets. Is not this the time to consider whether the lid may be blown off unless we deal with the cause, not the effect only?

Once more I say the bill before us deals with effect and not with cause. My plea is that very quickly, in fact immediately, the most searching and intelligent attention be given to the cause of this serious problem.

The answer is increased production of civilian goods-increased production spelled with capital letters-so much production of civilian goods that the supply of those goods will make ceiling prices unnecessary.

Hand in hand with that, if we want to dampen the heat of the fire that is burning under the price kettle, it is high time that we begin to think about cutting down expenditures. To repeat: We must increase production Jtnd decrease expenditures. Those methods, if properly pursued, will deal with the cause of our trouble. When the cause of the trouble is removed, the effect will disappear.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. TALLE. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. CRAWFORD. In support of what the gentleman just said, I want to read from a. press release dated June 15, issued by Fred Vinson, Director of the Office of War Mobilization !lild Reconversion. This is his statement before our committee on this subject. He said:

The expenditures which will be required before we have finished the job in the Pacific are staggeringly large. But I venture to say that at no stage of our war in the Pacific will the annual expeditures fall below $60,000,-000,000, and that is twice what we spent to fight the whole of World War I, as you know. In particular fields the needs of the armed forces are biting more deeply into our supplies than at any time during the past 4 years. And I would be less than frank if I did not say that the situation will, in many areas, get worse before it gets better.

Beyond the actual requirements ·for war, we must not lose sight of the enormous needs of our Allies throughout the world. They are desperately in need of food and clothing, as well as raw materials, machinery, and transportation equipment. Many of them have very substantial balances in this coun-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~HOUSE try with which to pay for the things that they need.

So the gentleman is entirely correct when he says more production is the only answer to this. That is the reason we take the position against OPA for interfering with production on any line. _

Mr. TALLE. I thank the gentleman from Michigan~ whose keen mind is a most valuable asset to the Committee on Banking and Currency and to the Congress.

Mr. Chairman, it is my belief that our country needs price control now more than at any other time in its history. But price control cannot be effective unless it is administered with common sense. I will leave it to the judgment of the American people whether common sense has been exercised.

The OPA is called an emergency, a temporary Government agency. An agency of this sort is unique in that it expires if it does its job well. However discouraging that fact may be to the OPA hierarchy, certainly the acclaim of a grateful people should be a considerable incentive to doing a good job.

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I want to say that the American people are willing to be led, but not to be driven. They are patriotic, industrious, and reasonable. The price-control law enacted by the Congress could not have been enforced for 5 minutes had it not been for the fact that our people are ready and willing to do what is right and reasonable.

My final plea is that \l.'hich I made at the close of our hearings on the current bill: That price controls be administered with a view to getting maximum production, and that these controls be removed as soon as increased supplies of civilian goods and services make removal feasible. By all means, such controls must not be permitted to remain so long that the American people give up hope. If there is any one thing that has won the war for us down to now, it is the spirit of the American soldier and sailor; and if there is any one thing that has brought arms and equipment to that . soldier and sailor, it is the spirit of American enterprise. I do not want the OPA or any other Government agency to destroy that spirit, for that is the soul of America.

Mr. Chairman, I . yield, back the remainder of my time.

The CHAffiMAN. The gentleman .Yields back 9 minutes.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. FOGARTY] such time as he may desire.

Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Chairman, no one would advocate inflation as a cure to the problems which beset our domestic economy, yet restricting the operation of the Office of Price Administration wouid most certainly be a very dangerous step in that direction.

I have heard most of the criticisms which have been directed at OPA, and, to be perfectly honest, I have to admit I have agreed at least in part with some of those criticisms. However, the continuance of OPA is more vital now than

its existence was at the time this legis· lation first came before the House.

Everyone knows there is not enough of anything to satisfy the civilian de?land. To take the_ controls off now, I am convinced, would be disastrous. To permit crippling amendments to the Price Control Act to become law would be opening the door for all sorts of abuses of price control and would be but the first step in a spiral we would find ourselves powerless to control.

Because we have borne the strain of restriction's that were imposed when we became involved in war, it is only natural to grow impatient and long for the removal of all these regulations. \Ve grow tired and impatient and restless under the coutrols which we all acknowledge are a necessary part of the battle for complete victory · over our -ene·mies. ·

It is not possible for any of us to say when the war in the Pacific will be over. We pray God it might be tomorrow, but until ·that war is at an end and we have successfully put our civilian economy on a sound footing, some of these restrictions will be necessary. More vital than . all the rest is price control.

The Office of Price Administration must be continued in operation, and it is folly to think we can restrict its life to a period of 6 months. This agency of the Government reaches into the homes of all the people of the country. It must be given the authority to carry on its job, and it should be given whatever additional authority is necessary to stamp out the illegal operations which are today sucking the life out of the unity of effort which has up to now characterized our war effort.

Black-market operators are today a curse that is threatening the home front to as great a degree as the Jap once threatened in the Pacific. With Germany destroyed and our brave fighting men driving the Japs down into oblivfon the worst afiliction we suffer from at home-the greatest danger we face-is the sneaky, thieving operators of the black market.

They should be stamped out and the campaign against them should be waged with relentless vigor. Whatever authority the OPA needs to accomplish this purpose should be given that agencyand OPA should be held strictly accountable for success. If you do not give the authority-then you cannot complain if they do not do the job.

In my State there is an acute shortage of foqd. People have put up with many diillculties and they have not complained about the absence of meat and other substantial items as long as they could g~t substitutes. Now the substitutes are disappearing and the wives and mothers of servicemen who have children to feed are growing angry at shortages they are convinced could have been avoided.

OPA has been guilty of some blunders, I am convinced. Their orders which restricted the production of pork are in great measure responsible for the present scarcity. Those responsible in OPA should be cleaned out before they have an opportunity to cause more damage.

I am today inserting in the RECORD three letters to the editor which have been published in the Providence Evening Bulletin. I have no doubt this newspaper has received many such letters. I have received a great many-some of these letters are violent in tone. Others drive me to the verge of distraction because I know they come from moth.ers of servicemen who are struggling to keep a family fed. They come from the wives of soldiers and sailors and marines-wives who are trying valiantly to hold a home together and feed little children on the pitifully small amount of pigs ears and tails that find their way to the market.

We all know the meat situation is deplorable. I am not speaking for myself, though Heaven knows I would give almost anything to get a look at a wellstocked meat counter again.

I have hesitated before bringing this matter up because I did not want it to appear that I was sniping at those who are honestly trying to solve the problem. However, the time has come for action. Something must be done and done fast.

Anyone can see from the tone of these letters I have inserted in the RECORD, that all our efforts at international cooperation are seriously threatened. There is a growing bitterness-and I say this advisedly-among the people I hav~ talked to at home. The bitterness is directed in large part at the shipment of food abroad, while our own people go without. Let me tell you thisthe newspaper which published these letters from its subscribers was one of · the first papers in the country to champion our entry into the war to save Britain-. The Journal and Bulletin were all out for aid to England long before that became the Nation's policy. Yet this newspaper now asks why we must ship food to England while· Canada wallows in an over~abundance of food which we cannot get. To me the present attitude of these newspapers is the best possible evidence that our program of international cooperation is threatened by tbe failure of those responsible to produce and distribute sufficient food for our own people.

I can understand the natural desire to prevent starvation abroad. I can understand the idea behind the policy of providing food to the peoples of Europe in order to win them over to our way of life and to guarantee the success of democratic governments. I agree we should be willing to make sacrifices in order to accomplish such a laudable purpose. However, there is one fact that seems to be generally overlooked. We cannot have any spirit · of good will toward our stricken brethren in Europe unless that good will actually lives and breathes in the breast of the ordinary man and woman in America.

Our effort to keep the war machinery rolling is constant. Day in and day out we keep our minds on the job of keeping the industrial machinery of the country under a full head of steam. We

·worry about reconversion so that .there will not be a slump in our economic life. But all that machinery, all the industrial strength we possess cannot function

:6492 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 without the human element and the men and women who have to make it tick are entitled to a little consideration-once in a while. Men cannot worry about food for their families and still have enough enthusiasm left, or energy leftto do a good day's work at a machine ~hat is grinding out the tools that w111 destroy Japan.

These people-the American peoplethe decent people who do not patronize the black market need some attention. Their lives need a little overhauling.

If it is necessary ·to call a temporary halt in the shipment of food to European people, then a halt must be made. The shipments can be resumed when distribution at home has returned to something like enough to provide our own people with enough to eat.

I am not trying to arouse passioris that are best left sleeping. I am not trying to infer that we are going hungry, I am saying-positively-the people at home, our own people, are entitled to some attention and they are demanding that they get it.

In spite of all the shortages there are the people in my State who still demonstrate their strong support of the war effort. Rhode Island was the first State to go over the top in the seventh war loan drive. But these patriotic people are not getting enough to eat.

I have thought this thing over a long time. I am fed up and I can be still no longer. Under normal operations you know as well as I do that we cannot expect any improvement in the present situation for many months. It will..rbe winter before there is even a trickle to show. That -is why I insist on some unusual measures now-it will have to be done and done soon. We cannot afford to wait until winter. (From the Providence (R. I.) Evening Bul

letin of June 11, 1945] ON SHARING OUR FOOD

EDITOR: I have been quite interested in reading the views expressed in your column regarding the scarcity of · meat in these New England States-and there is, no doubt, the same condition existing all throughout our country, according to the newspapers. Some few sections near the meat packing and slaughtering vicinities may be able to secure a. source of meat supply and, if so, they are fortunate, but we have no doubt that they are being deprived of other supplies even as we.

I have the greatest difficulty in securing ;meat for my table, and, in fact, have been unable to place fresh meat before my family for weeks at a time, I am somewhat· handicapped in shopping for when supplies are available during the day I am employed and cannot get to the market, but I am informed that the meat platters are just as bare during the early part of the day as later on.

I would not gripe about going without meat or any other food and using substitutes, if we could get them, were I assured that our supplies were going to the men and women in the services, but I writhe knowing it is being sent to countries having a source of supply, or to the people of countries who have warred against us and slaughtered our men. If we must feed them, give them the substitutes an(i let us have the food to which we are accustomed and entitled.

Would you offer the bounty of your home to a person who entered it with intent to rob and kill? I would not, and I doubt if any normal person would. Then why should

we deprive ourselves to give these individuals who have committed the atrocities of this war-be they the gun handlers of the families back of the gun handlers? I believe in t~e charity of Christianity and I realize we must give aid to these people, but not to the extent of taking awa. from those who have

-given their men, their money and their happiness to break up that tribe of murderers and their breeders. I say, give them the food substitutes and not the cream of our bounty.

We have butter lines, meat lines, egg lines, coal lines, and before many m.onths are past we shall have more lines. Is America to be the land of food lines after the years of labor spent to make it a prosperous and proud country? This was America, the land of plenty. Now we are America, the land of plenty for foreigners . Our Government should bear in mind that charity begins at home and not among the trouble-makers of Europe.

NORWOOD. H . . M.

EDITOR: Judging from the letter in the issue of May 31 signed Frank T. Hancock, seaman, first class. I think that F. T. H. has missed the point entirely.

I believe that I speak for the majority of the people here in the North when I say that we are not indifferent to the needs of the people in the war-torn countries of Europe. But I don't believe that we are solving the problem by depriving the people in our own country. On the contrary, I believe that we are creating a bigger problem. With the shortage of doctors. here on the home front, it is tha'v much more important that we should guard our own health. We cannot do that without sufficient amount of protein, of which meat is the chief source.

. MARILYN L. JACKSON. PaoviDENCE.

EDITOR: A 13-year-old private school pupil. may safely judge conditions only in his own sheltered corner. A mother is not "squawking" when she writes of conditions as she is finding them. Even in the States, one-quart er little knows how the remaining threequarters live.

MRS. E. G. COLMAN. PROVIDENCE.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 20 minutes to the gentlewoman . from Connecticut [Mrs. WOODHOUSE].

Mrs. WOODHOUSE. Mr. Chairman, much of the discussion concerning proposed changes in the operation of OPA grows out of the fact that it is difficult for us to remember all the time that we are still in a world war. The Pacific is a long way off. We have given an enthusiastic reception to our heroes returning from their victories on the European front and domestic news-and the San Francisco Conference have cut down the headlines on the Pacific war. It is not that we are less determined to see the war to a . victorious finish. It is only that other things, especially our deep desire to be again at peace, to get to the business of building a peacetime world, have made the war a bit less ever-present in our minds. We want reconversion, so we hope it is here in full.

But Japan is still to be defeated. And how mony months or years it will take to achieve victory on her lands nobody knows and no one would thinkingly dare gamble with the lives of our fighting men and the welfare of their families by acting on a guess. - OPA still has a wartime job to do. It was given the task of holding back the tide of inflation, of maintaining price stabilization, and it has done a good job.

In World War I the price of ·industrial goods rose 88 percent. In this war we have held industrial prices to a rise of only 23 percent. The last war cost $32,000,000,000. Without inflation it would have cost $18,500,000,000. Had prices advanced in this war as they did in the last war, the war would have cost, up to January 1, 1945, $325,000,000,000. It actually cost with price control, $2.45,-000,000,000. The difference is $80,000,-000,000. The restrictions of OPA upon industrial prices have been a small amount to pay for that difference in our war debt.

But more than that, price control has held down wartime rises in the cost of living and has thus saved economic suffering for millions of families of our fighting men living on their fixed and small allotments and allowances. In the past 2 years living costs have been held to a 1.4 percent advance. To the end of 1944 wholesale prices have risen 38.7 percent; in a like period in World War I they rose 114.7 percent. The cost of living has risen 28.8 percent; in World War I it rose 84.4 percent. ·

The seemingly impossible has been accomplished-cost of living and prices have been held down, production and profits have reached an all-time high. If we will forget the individual limitations which wartime conditions cause, if we will weigh the mistakes which have been made in running a war economy imposed on a civilian economy against the achievements, what do we see? ·we see our country keeping the two econo_mies going at the same time, having the best fed, best clothed, and best equipped army in the world and the civilian population maintaining its standard of living during the war with civilian goods and services in 1944 exceeding the average quality available in 1935-37. If we weigh the mistakes and achievements, we will see the true picture and look with pride on what the OPA, with the aid of 188,048 volunteer citizen workers in our home communities, has accomplished. The functioning has not been perfect, but it has been surprisingly good.

We have held back inflation. But the inflationary pressures are still here. It was at this comparable period in the last war that we took off control with the results you all know. During the two subsequent years 453,000 farmers lost their farms through foreclosure; · there were 106,000 business failures; corporation profits fell from a net gain of $6,000,000,000 to a net loss of $55,000,000. In a period of 12 months following the crash of 1920 American business took a loss of $11,000,000,000 in inventory alone. Farmers had their income cut by twothirds.

And it would happen again. The Pacific war after cut-backs will require sixty to seventy-three billion dollars a year . . The total cost of World War I was $32,000,000,000. In the last war only 25 percent of our total production went to war, 75 percent remained for civilian consumption. In 1944, the war took 44 .percent of our total production, leaving only 56 percent for civilian consumption. After cut-backs now contemplated, the Pacific war will take 36 per-

).945. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE 6493 cent of all production, leaving 64 percent for civilians. In 1944, the people of this country had $40,000,000,000 income in excess of goods and services available. lt is estimated that this excess wilr be $34,000,000,000 ·in this first year of the Pacific war. At the end of World War I, balances in checking accounts totaled $14,843,000,000. At present they are $75,100,000,000-a gain of almost $44,-000,000,000 during the war years which the people of this country can draw out and spend. In addition, there is $27,-000,000,000 in E war bonds which are readily cashable. The inflationary potential is staggering.

Our obligation to the families of our fighting men living on their small, fixed allowances and allotments, ta- the purchasers of war bond:s, to those living on pensions and on social-security benefits, to recipients of war insurance, to the white-collar worker and others living on fixed income, make it necessary to prevent inflation, which means to extend the Price Control and Stabilization Acts without changes which will make its administration still more difficult. And the extension must be for a period of time-12 months-which would permit stability for the administrative staff and for production. No one act could delay reconversion more in those lines where it is now possible than giving the producer the hope that prices might be uncontrolled or at least might go up in some 6 months. Ther.e would be a run -on mate-rials in anticipation of the expected price rise and a delay in turning -out finished goods for the market.

As the Committee on Economic Development-made up of outstanding businessmen-points out, price control has a greater and not a lesser importance now ·that production controls are beginning to be relaxed. From now until production is in volume great enough to balance demand, price control will be our chief

. protection against inflationary pressure. Even after the war iri the Pacific ends,

there will be a transition period before sufficient goods are produced to meet the pent-up demand of our own people and the demands of commodity hungry pea-

. pies abroad. Of course, it is correct to say that in

creased civilian production is the only 1·eal cure for the type of inflation we have been and still are facing. In time of peace it is the only sound cure. But in time of war materials and labor priorities must go to war demands. We could have imposed higher taxes, we could have drafted all production and avoided inflation in that way; but we did not. To continue price control, or permit inflation, are our only alternatives today and if we choose price control, as we will, it must be price control on a basis upon which the administration can operate. It must be price control right across the board. You cannot lift prices for this group or that group. You cannot have a little inflation. You can have only price control or inflation.

Criticism leveled against OPA and used as a basis for suggested changes fall under three main heads:

First. That OPA has regulated profits, and attempted to change our economic systems;

Second. That OPA has created short .. ages;

Third. That OPA pricing policies will hinder reconversion. None of the three types of charges can be sustained. Mistakes and . irritations in the administration? Yes; the personnel is human. OPA has had a thankless job and I marvel at the Administrator, who might have been in uniform on one of his beloved boats; I marvel at his patience, tolerance, and continued good will under the barrage of unthinking and often uninformed abuse heaped upon him.

As to profits: Over-all profits of .business are higher than ever before in our history. Corporation profits before taxes are five times what they were before the war; after taxes they are twice what they were in 1939.

Corporation profits after taxes were in millions-$8,100 in 1929, $4,000 in 1939, $7,300 in 1941, $8,300 in 1942, $9,900 in 1943, and $10,000 in 1944. The last 3 years were under price control.

Of course, critics point out that these are over-all figures; not every firm shows the same picture. But that is true always. According to tax reports, only 40 percent of prewar corporations were operating at a net profit. And even allowing for a decrease in the number of new small businesses and of businesses closed -when the owner went to the war or to a war plant, figures on business failures are noteworthy. In 1929 there were 22,909 failures; in 1939, 14,768; in 1942, 9,405; in 1943, 3,221; and in 1944, 1,222.

Nor has the little fellow suffered. Profits before tax_es for unincorporated manufacturing establishments were $418 000 000 in 1929, $315,000,000 in 1939, $663:ooo:ooo in 1942, $712,ooo,ooo in 1944; for wholesalers, $723,000,000 in 1939, $1,507,000,000 in 1944; for retaile~s, $1,517,000,000 in 1939, $3,416,000,000 m 1944; for service establishments, $2,296,- · 000,000 in 1939; $3,427,000,000 in 1944.

Present increases in profits before taxes as of 1943 over 1936-39 are illuminating. Hardware retailers, 365 percent; variety chain stores, 249 percent; department and specialty stores, 1,038 percent; dry-goods wholesalers, 639 percent.

As to production, in the last war our industrial production increased by 25

· percent, farm production by 5 percent. In this war industrial production has more than doubled, increasing 116 percent, and farm production has gone up 25 percent. The volume increase in 1944 over 1935-39 is notable: Machinery, 344 percent; manufactured food products, .52 percent; textiles and products, 47 percent; lumber and products, 27 percent, to name only a few at random.

Even the much-discussed beef cattle show an increase-total federally inspected production of beef during the first quarter of 1945 was 9 percent more than in 1944 and 28 percent more than

· the average for 1941-43. Cattle on feed in April 1945 numbered 8 percent more than on April l, 1944.

Production has been increased; but · . the military demand and the enlarged civilian demand have pushed against supply. A good deal of the story on food and especially meat lies in the fact that median family income for 1936-39_ was

$1,300, whereas in 1944 it was $2,600. Of course, families with, at long last, -a decent income want more and better iood.

As to reconversion: There has been some lack of understanding of OPA price policies, which accounts for the fear that

· OPA will hinder reconversion and delay the flow of a great volume of consumer goods. This fear is not justified. It is, in fact, not so much a fear of actual OPA pricing policies as a fear of the future, the fear of the unknown. This fear on the part of certain business groups is contrary to our American business tradition of adventure and risk t aking. War weariness perhaps explains the desire of some for security and curiously enough for security provided by the Govern-n1ent. ·

The individual producer who cannot produce profitably at ceilings which are adequate to bring out goods from the rest of the industry should, of course, be afforded relief when his product is needed; but thE> price level of the industry should not be fixed for him. And to determine costs for each of the 184,000 manufacturing establishments would be only less impossible than to try to detern1ine cost of production for each farmer.

But the OPA policy has shown increasing flexibility as the situation has permitted. And the expressed policy of the Administrator is to continue and increase :flexibility to aid reconversion. Any indiVidual or firm may sell a product at the existing ceiling. In the case of products which have been out of civilian produc-. tion the OPA assures to each such industry its pre-Pearl Harbor costs, usually the last quarter of 1941, plus legal increases in materials prices, and in basic industry wage rates, plus the 1936-39 profit margin. There is provision for adjustment for individual firms which cannot operate profitably under industry price standards. For small firms, who do not do over $200,000 business, there is a self-pricing formula which may be used in establishing initial reconversion production prices and later checked. ·

As to the policy of price increase absorption by the distributors, the increased profits of retailers and wholesalers give the answer. They have not suffered. And in individual cases the OPA pricing policy provides that if there

· is "no existing margin of profit reasonably sufficient to absorb them," manu-

~ facturing price increases will not have to be absorbed by distributors. There is no cost absorption required beyond the point where current earnings fall to peacetime earnings. Of course, where the complaints arise is in this phrase

· "peacetime earnings," because 1943 or · 1944 would provide a much higher base in the great majority of cases.

Cost absorption of necessary manufactured goods price increases has been essential to price stabilization. The Emergency Court of Appeals recognized this when in December 1943 it stated:

When such increases are permitted it is the duty of the Administrator, as far as possible, to require them to be absorbed at some appropriate intermediate stage Urr the process of production or distribution at which there may be an existing margin of profit reason

-ably suificent .to absorb them, ·

'CONGRESSIONA:L RECORD-~HOUSE

The OP A pricing policy is to develop great~r flexibility, to speed up reconversion, and, while aimed as it must be, at an industry level, it does make provision for individual hardship cases. OPA has never reduced prices because profits were high. Nor does it place ceilings on prof- · its. But even more important, it did not start the war nor did it create war conditions or war demands.

No one in the United States likes price control. But we would like inflation less. Full employment at home and peace abroad are the goals of the great majority of us here in America. Inflation would destroy the road to both those goals. The only way ahead is via the ex-

. tension for the coming year of the price control and stabilization acts as at present written.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 15 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I might make one or two observations that may be helpful to some of the Members. My position on this bill has been that we have.so woven OPA into our economy that it is practically impossible to eliminate it at the present time, because so long as we accept the philosophy that a Government agency shall be retained for the purpose of preventing our people from shifting away from the ownership Of dollars and credits in their favor to the ownership of things, we will have to accept a concept, I should say, similar to that which OPA oper'ates under at the present time. I should also say that that control will undoubtedly, if we continue to accept that philosophy, extend for a period of anywhere from 5 to 10 years and maybe 25 years. So taking the general attitude of the public of the United States into consideration, I have no idea that the public will do away with the OPA next December 31 or next June 30 or December 1946, or December 1950. So, personally I am prepared to accept the proposition that the OPA or some similar agency will be in operation in this coun-

. try for a very indefinite period. And moving in that general direction I have endeavored as a member of the committee to gear this procedure down to a point where Congress can look at it as often as possible and where the OPA would be forced to come before the Congress and make its report, and where the people of this country would have an opportunity to come before Congress and present their complaints and thereby bring about as harmonious a situation as is possible in de31ing with such forces and elements. Therefore, I think what we should do is to extend this act for 6 months at a time. In other words, we should presently extend it from now until next December 31, and serve notice on the country in doing so that between now and next December 31 we will again have hearings before the Committee on Banking and Currency and give the people a chance to present their grievances and show the facts as to how they are being persecuted by the agency, if that is the case, and give the Congress a chance to modify the act as Congress deems it should be modified at the moment. We would also make it very clear that Congress does not intend to let the agency die at the end of the 6 months period ·

and call for its llqtiidation at the end of this coming 6-month period, but that Congress itself proposes to assume the responsibility of asking for an accounting from time to time and when the act· is' again extended make this act as bearable to the people of this country as it is possible to do through "legislative procedure.

Now, that is just about as clear and brief as I can state my position on this question.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. PATMAN. Is it not a fact. that before the committee the gentleman opposed this 6-month extension and made a good argument in his opposition to the 6-month extension and in favor of the 12-month extension?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I am not now opposing or re·commending a 6-month extension of this act. If the gentleman wants · to be fair-he is continuously bringing up this proposition, and I yielded to him because I was sure he would bring it up again. If he wants to be fair, he will now admit that at no time have I contended for the killing of this agency next December 31. I refuse to yield any further, because I am growing tired of the gentleman's unfair approach to this proposition.

Mr. PATMAN. A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. CRAWFORD. I do call it unfair, and I do not propose to strike it out of the RECORD.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order against the statement about unfair tactics.

The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Texas request that the gentleman's words be taken down?

Mr. PATMAN. I hope the gentleman will withdraw them.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I refuse to withdraw them. If this body wants to strike the words from the RECORD, that will be all right with me.

Mr. PATMAN. The gentleman knows I have never been unfair with him. That is a very unfair statement to make.

Mr. Chairman, I withdraw the point of order and will insert the gentleman's exact statement in the RECORD and leave it to the Members to decide who is unfair.

The CHAffiMAN. The gentleman withdraws his point of order.

Mr. . CRAWFORD. The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. TALLE] presented some very factual matter here a while ago. I want to further support that because we have to recognize these facts. We know what the Government expenditures are. Anybody wiio wants to look at the Treasury statement can find out. We know how the deficit is running. We know how the Government bonds are being sold. If you want to get an eyeful of information obtain from the Treasury and from the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago, New York, !!alias, and other cities, their statements, and see what is occurring in the cashing of savings bonds in this country. 'You analyze very carefully what is taking place at this very moment in connection with the Seventh

War Loan. drive. I unhesitatingly make the charge that the dissatisfaction of the people wit:P, the administration of OPA has a tremendous influence on the fact that people are not buying bonds today

- as they would otherwise if this agency's activities were more acceptable to the general public. . .

I do not think there is any question about that. But you have got to sell bonds to somebody. Our people hold over $43,000,000,000 of these savings bonds at the present time, which they can mature any time they desire, 60 days after acquisition of the bonds. There is $43,000,000,000 of potential buying power, and if the present loan should succeed there will be approximately $50,000,000,·ooo of these bonds within the next 60-day period which they can cash on a moment's call. The Treasury has to turn out currency as currency, is demanded. Furthermore, the Treasury has to refund these issues if that payment is made.

Here is Mr. Vinson's statement, which I put in the RECORD a few moments ago, where he states the minimum expenditures are going to run $60,000,000,000 a year in connection with the Japanese -war. So you are going to continue to run a deficit of around $3,000,000,000 to $4,000,000,000 a month, which means we will file one inflationary force on top of another inflationary force. Our people are saving at the rate of $44,000,000,000 a year, net savings. Within a 4-year war period they have saved over $120,000,-000,000, which is a call for goods when they wish to exercise the call.

Bank deposits were referred to by Dr. 'TALLE. Mr.Vinson,in his statement, talks about the hundreds of billions of dollars of buying power. Mr. Vinson talks about the needs of other parts of the world for everything we produce. It is certainly the intention of the administration to send those goods from this country to those people in other countries of the world. When and where will you ever catch up so that supplies will equal demands? As long as you have a situation of that kind, as long as you participate in deficit financing, wherein will you ever find one single reason to justify the elimination of OPA, if you accept the philosophy that a Government agency must always stand guard to prevent my friend from Illino_is, for instance, shifting from ownership of dollars and credits into ownership of goods? It is a peculiar philosophy we have accepted in this country, but every woman's organization I know of, every business organization in the country-church organizations, pro.;. fessional people, Jabor organizations, and farm groups-come here ana demand that this agency be kept in power; demand that we increase appropriations for ' its use.

On that point, let me say that, if we are to retain this agency, then by all means let us give this agency the necessary personnel to remove bottlenecks, so that if my friend from New York makes application for his plant, with respect to a price formula so that he can go out and solicit business and then convert the raw material into goods and sell those goocJ,s, he may do so. He cannot do it now unless he gets from the OPA a permit. So let us not have a shortage of person-

•

/

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE G495 nel down there that forces him to keep out of business until the OPA gets a chance to issue a permit as to prices. 'Therefore, you will be called upon to support $92,000,000 of appropriation for the comlng 6 months, July 1 to December 31, and about $91,500,000 OPA appropriation for the last 6 months, as near as we can see it at the moment, giving them 1,200 additional experts to process price formulas. If yoq.can imagine that, you can readily see wbat kind of a mess we are getting into on this question of reconversion.

For instance, I am completely satisfied that the agency is now tremendously interfering with the production program of this country and with reconversion. One case was referred to a while ago by the gentleman from Nebraska, Dr. MILLER.· I _think we could bring to this floor a thousand cases if we wanted to do so. I will give you a few of them. These are specific cases, and we have the names of the firms. There is nothing confidential about it. One of them is the Jantzen Co., that produces what we used to have, those wonderful bathing suits, alohg with sweaters. Here is a company in Los Angeles, Calif., the Virtue Bros. Manufacturing Co. Their telegram says:

Dilatory tactics of OPA have delayed us 30 to 90 days in reconversion to civilian production. Disastrous questions certain unless prices are approved promptly and reasonable profits allowed. Urge law be ,amended to correct these evils, otherwise unemployment inevitable.

Here is a company located out in Michizan, a textile manufacturer of about average size. They are- at the moment wrestling with OPA Order S0-108, known as minimum average price order, which provides, in essence, that the manufacturer's average prices in 1945 shall not be greater than they were in the same categories during 1943. .

In 1943 this company was obliged to use, in certain categories,· materials that

\ were available, most of them substitutes ~ for goods unavailable because of the war.

As in the case with most substitutes, they proved to be both cheap and unsatisfactory. In the interest of progress, this company changed the basic materials as opportunity was afforded them. In consequence; with the material now available, they find themselves in the position of manufacturing an article at a cost of $2 and selling it for $1 simply because 2 years ago they had a $1 article of different nature, quality, and design in their catalog. Appeals to OPA on this problem have been fruitless. The reply was that no useful purpose is being served by such appeals because the OPA officials are simply standing by the rules.

Another business is the manufacturer of shoe dressing and shoe dyes.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself five additional minutes.

This concern is located in Massachusetts.

· Company B is a manufacturer of shoe polishes, shoe ~essings, and shoe dyes. which is located in Massac?-usetts. .

As you may know, the basic ingredient of shoe poHsh is carnauba wax, available through imports from Brazil, and not available domestically.

I am informed that an estimated 60 to· 75 manufacturers in the Greater Boston area alone are faced with the problem of going out of business before the end of the year because. this year's crop of carnauba wax has been contracted for by foreign countries at a higher price than can be offered legitimately by any United States .importer.

At the moment these companies are attempting an appeal for relief. OPA has been informed time and time again that there is absolutely no usable substitute.

' Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield. Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Did I

understand the gentleman to say that buyers of the merchandise in this country had to go to foreign countries to buy the merchandise because of OPA action?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Oh, no; the buyers of this country cannot pay a sufficiently hfgh price to compete with bidders from other countries because the price ceiling is squeezed down to the point where the American manufacturer cannot compete in the open market on raw materials in foreign countries.

Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. The product is available then in foreign countries at a price.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Yes; it is available at a price, but under the conditions imposed upon the business in this country they cannot meet that price to get the one absolutely essential ing~edient of their product. Why approve such a performance as that and at the same time vote for Bretton Woods, for instance? There is a sample of how perfectly silly we can become whe11 we get into the field of international relationships.

Company C manufactures house cl-eaning items, principally brooms, and it is located in Colorado.

·This company bas informed me of a proposed order for pricing brooms now under consideration by OPA. This order, which will be issued in spite of objections registered by OPA's own industry advisory committee on broom pricing, classifies and grades brooms in accordance with standards not known or used previously by the industry.

The results of the order, according to the industry, will:

Flrst. Result in the upgrading of many low-quality brooms, primarily those imported from foreign countries, and thereby increase production of foreign brooms for the United States market; and

Second. Cause the abandonment by many manufacturers of the production of better quality brooms, with a conse- . quent nonuse of domestically produced broom corn.

Company D is a chemical manufacturing plant located in California.

For some time this company had been in the process of manufacturing and selling a low-grade chemical at the OPA established price of $35 a ton, a price based on their maXimum selling price .as of given date. Upon analysis, the company determined that it was c~sting the,m

$38 per ton in production costs alone, excluding all overhead and other administrative charges properly attributable to this particular chemical.

The principal competitor on this particular commodity had been selling and produ,cing it at $45 per ton during the period chosen by OPA to fix prices. As a consequence, company D found itself with a tremendous number of ordersthe filling of which meant a net loss of $3 per ton.

As is usual in such cases, an appeal for a more equitable price was denied by OPA. The officials of that agency refused to credit statements ·. from com_. pany D that they intended to cease production on the commodity in question.

The final outcome is precisely this: Company D has ceased production, and OPA found itself in the position of having to certify to the War Production Board that an increase in the facilities of company D's competitor to take care of the additional demand is essential in the interest of the war. These facilities have been increased-company D's identical facilities remain idle. The company is go]ng out of business. The $45

. cost fellon is being promoted. In war production the Government pays the additional price and the more American enterprise is destroyed.

I am just not going to have any patience with that kind of performance. If such criticism is cruel to OPA I ask what kind of cruelty is being imposed upon the men who put their savings in company D? What kind of cruelty is being imposed upon their families being denied the right to go ahead and make their own way independent of the Federal Treasury? As I pointed out to Judge Vinson the other day there are two sides to this thing. He was making a great appeal not to criticize OPA. Public servants are subject to criticism. That is the only way we can maintain representative Government: To permit criticism and criticize where the thing is

'not operating propertly. And criticize is what we shall do. The new facilities have been certified, the new facilities have gone into operation and company D passes out of the picture.

Here is a telegram from Edson Moore & Co., of Detroit, Mich., one of the largest wholesale houses in the country, an old established firm:

DETROIT, MICH. Complaints of mothers this fall and winter

because of lack of underwear for their children will be more severe than any caused by cigarettes, etc. The maximum average price regulation will be largely the cause. Unless this impossible regulation is canceled or drastically•revised an already acute situation will become a serious health ·hazard. There is no substitute for warm clothing. The same difficult ies will appear with n1any other textile items.

EDSON MOORE & Co., G. W. GILLIS, President.

I have before me a statement from the Jantzen Knitting Mills, by Mr. J. A. Zehntbauer, to the effect that that company is being pushed to the wall and fin(ls it impossible to operate under the regulations of the OP A. The public will

6496 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 be denied the fine products which that company produces.

Here is a letter from the Tobin Packing Co., general offices, Rochester, N. Y., a paragraph of which reads as follows:

Last month OPA allowed us 40 cents per hundredweight additional subsidy on hogs retroactive to April 1. However, we are still losing 60 cents per hundredweight and they wm not do anything about it-. We need this amendment to force them, or our industry is going to be in very bad shape. Ittook them over 2 ~~ years to finally allow us enough subsidy on cattle to make a small profit on beef.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself five additional minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I hold in my hand· a statement from the Louisville Bedding Co., Louisville, Ky., and they send with it their cost sheets, taken right from their accounting records. They show that the ceiling price on pillows makes it impossible for them to operate. They state:

You may also be very positive in the fact that the cost sheets that we have run cannot be questioned from labor costs or raw materials, for the case we are making is actual, and not estimated.

They break down the costs in detail, showing the cost of the ticking, the feathers, both down and the regular feathers, the thread, labels, cartons, gum tape and stamps.

These are not theoretical propositions. These are people who have been up against this act.

Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Can the gentleman explain to us why it is that the OPA refuses to grant relief to old established firms but it permits new concerns to start up in competitive lines of business and lets them operate at a profit?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I do not know of any reason why, they should do it, but in the absence of a statement from the OPA as to why it allows that, I can let my imagination run wild. Any agency which is so created as the OPA and operated under such a program can, if the inner circle wants to, promote the interests of certain people and kill the rights of others. It can, if it wants to do so, confer proprietary_rights upon one company and economically guillotine another company. Take tha companies I referred to a while ago, including the $45 cost operator as against the $38 cost operator. Why is it that the $45 fellow is permitted to go ahead and the $38 man killed? I cannot answer the question. I can imagine it but I cannot answer it satisfactorily.

Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. The gentleman recalls that a manufacturer of pancake flour sold a pa~kage for 6 cents and asked for an increase to 7 cents. The OPA granted another new concern the right to make pancake fiour and gave that concern a increase from 20 to 25 cents, while the old-line people went out of business.

Mr. RAMEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield to the gentleman from Ohio.

Mr. RAMEY. I may say that in the city of Toledo, Ohio, a man has been in business for about 30 years. His son is in the armed forces. He has had to go out of business and was told by a man representing the OPA:

We must have casualties among you folks who have been in business too long and let fplks get into business who have certain philosophies.

Mr. CHENOWETH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlema_n yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. CHENOWETH. The gentleman from Michigan is bringing indictment after indictment against this agency. Do I now understand his position to be, and he is recommending to us that our position be, that th:s child we have cre·ated has now become a monster over , which we have no control whatsoever, yet it should be perpetuated-?

Mr. CRAWFORD. That is the position we are in if we accept a philosophy that a Government agency must stand guard over the actions of our people.

Mr. CHENOWETH. DJ we not as individual Members of Congress have some responsibility to correct this situation?

Mr. CRAWFORD. We do have aresponsibility and that is the reason I contend that under no circumstances should, we extend the life of this agency beyond 6 months, and in that extension we should serve notice that we will take a look at the _picture and between now and the 6-month expiration date we will further amend this law, in addition to the amendments we may put in at the present , time based on known facts, to make it endurable and acceptable to the people of the United States, because if the people repudiate this thing where will the law be anyway? You will have the same situation you had in connection with the eighteenth amendment.

Mr. CHENOWETH. The time to do · the operating is now?

Mr. CRAWFORD. The time to do the operating is now and that iS- the reason amendments are to be offered.

Mr. ROBSION of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. ROBSION of Kentucky. If the 6-month amendment is not adopted, which the gentleman says is so necessary, what them? In other words, if that amendment is not accepted, is defeated, then what will we do?

Mr. CRAWFORD. We will have no relief if the law is extended in its present

.form other than such as the agency may grant on its own initiative.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself seven additional minutes.

I would like to cqver something that you do not find in the hearings. Here is the testimony of Judge Vinson and Mr.· Davis before our committee. This whole matter moved so fast so that there was no chance to print it . .

Judge Vinson takes this position in his statement before the committee, and here is his exact language in answer to my question:

Mr. CRAWFORD. Now, going to the last paragraph OJ?. page 1, you touched on an awfully important 'phase of this proposition. That is, if we change the statutes to permit higher prices, we are opening the door to inflation.

Would you care -tci say whether or not there is under consideration by your division of government ·. and the other agencies with which you collaborate, a proposal to increase the hourly wages and decrease the hours per week as we move into the reconversion or postwar civilian production period?

Mr. VINSON. The wage policy in the reconversion period is under consideration, Fred; Mr. George Taylor, Chairman of the War Labor Board, and Mr. Will Davis and I, have had several huddles with regard to it. As a matter of fact, George Taylor and I were discussing it this ' morning, and we are going to do our dead level best to come up with a wage policy that will not cause the fires of inflation to burn too brightly and the flood of deflation to drown us.

It is a rather difficult situation as you know, we have got the inflationary forces and the deflationary forces. I am thoroughly sold on the idea that postwar we have got to have a high national income; and by that I mean I feel we have got to have high wages and high prices for raw materials and high profits. I made that statement earlier.

We are going to have a tremendous debt, and it has got to be taken care of, and the present policies are not static.

In that connection I interrogated Judge Vinson as you will find it here in this record. I said, "I am not going to press you for an answer but I want to know what you men are doing down there with respect to increasing this wage level, and if you increase the wage level, what are you going to do about increasing the price level?" He came back with a reply in substance, that increased production would take care of the increased wages with no increase in price.

Let me get this point clear to you. Suppose my friend here from Wisconsi:a has a factory that is running to capacity, and he knows what his costs are on capacity production. You come along and force him to increase the wage.

You say to him, "You must not in· crease your price level." His irreducible cost based on maximum production is higher than his selling price, because the selling price cannot be raised. What is he going to do? . He will do one of three things: He will not produce, or he will produce at a loss and exhaust his profit previously accumulated, or he will pro-

- duce at a loss until he finally faces bankruptcy. There is the testimony of Judge Vinson. I put the case squarely up to him because I know of scores of cases where maximum production and the irreducible cost has been greater than the selling price, and if you have a situation like that, the more you produce the faster you go_ broke financially. If that is the concept of Judge Vinson a:nd Mr. Davis and OPA that the price ceiling shall not be advanced and that wages shall be increased, where the devil do you think ~Te are going to be 6 months from now? W9 just cannot afford to go along with those things and not protest. We must not bring about universal un-employment in this country through OPA.

Mr .. KEEFE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlel;llan yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield to ,the gentleman from Wisconsin~

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORb-HOUSE 6497 Mr. KEEFE.' In line with what the

gentleman is now stating, this situation has been brought to my attention repeat.:. edly, and I have h ad repeated conferences with people in the OPA about it. You take the situation that some people have talked abou'. so glibly about concerns making money'~- They are making money. I will take one of those concerns. It is making money performing war contracts. It is making war mate.:. rial. It formerly made a line of mill work, doors, and sash in its regular manufacturing capacity. Now the war work is being cut back and they want to go into the manufacture of a line of doors to absorb the labor that is being carried in that plant and to put on some additionr.J help to take care of the 60,000,000, jobs. They go to OPA and ask for a price upon that door that they are to manufacture. OPA fixes a price on that door on the basis of profit' of the whole profit picture of all the items which they are making.

Mr. CRAWFORD. Over-all profit. Mr. KEEFE. Over-all profit picture,

and says to them, "You are making a profit in your business. You are making a profit today. Therefore we will fix a price on that door which will not permit you to make a profit on the manufacture of that item."

The manufacturer says, "The price which you put on thi~ door will compel me to make that door not at a profit but at a loss, and it will cause my stockholders $100,000 a year loss in this particular plant if I ruri full production on the manufacture of those doors." The OPA comes back and says, "You charge that $100,000 less against the profit which you have been making on your war material or your regular line, whatever it may be." The manufacturer comes back and says, "That is unfair to me; it is unfair to my stockholders and therefore I refuse to make doors and I am closing down that part of my plant and my business."

Mr. CRAWFORD. And it leaves the country without doors.

Mr. KEEFE. Under those circumstances, how in the world are you going to put 60,000,000 people to work unless you can preserve this profit motive and profit incentive all down the. line to encourage this risk capital to go into tile business of manufacturing in order to put people to work?

Mr. CRAWFORD. You will not put them to work.

Mr. KEEFE. May I say further, in all due respect to the OPA, I have taken the matter up with the OPA and I find a disposition on the_ir part to do something about that particular individual case and give some relief to that company. But the process is going to be so slow that we will not get conversion and we will not get back into production for months and months and months unless we can have a definite policy established in the OPA that will be all inclusive and will do away with this policy which they themselves admit is causing them interminable trouble and difficulty at the present time.

The CHAIRMAN. The time ·of the gentleman from Michigan has again ex-pired. ·

Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself two more minutes. ' The gentleman from Wisconsin has

made a powerful statement right straight down the line. Now I will clo-se by saying this, because I know what some of the Members are up against on this proposition: Tlie argument is made that a 6-month extension would cause a black market to develop and for the personnel of the OPA to disintegrate, and other arguments are made along that line. If the argument held water then it would be true for the last 6 months that the act might be in fQrce, whenever that might be. I take no stock in that argument as being of any consequence, because this law is not going to die next December 31. It makes little difference what we do here today in amending this bill; this law will be extended indefinitely from time to time. Get that clearly in your minds because every day we set the forces in that direction, and we are going to have to do that until a sore public rebels and revolts and kills the thing by com-mon practice. .

What we should do and it is a responsibility that we cannot avoid, is to make this proposition as bearable to the American people as ,we can. If we extend it 6 months and at the same time have it fully understood another extension will be made, and have another accounting at the end of this year and thus put our forces together as best we can and get the public to cooperate with it we will get along and work out some way. But to jump over a 12-month and 1~month period is somewhat of an insult to the people of this country and especially those who are b_eing crucified by the policies being followed.

Mr. WHITE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CRAWFORD. I yield. Mr. WHITE. The Federal· Reserve

banks are issuing a million dollars every 30 days. What is going to become of that $30,000,000 of additional new currency?

Mr. CRAWFORD. Well, that is an addition to the inflationary forces.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. PATMAN].

ANSWERING UNFAIR CHARGE

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, I was very much surprised a while ago when I asked the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAWFORD] if he die~ not advocate at least a 12-month extension of OPA in the Committee on Banking and Currency when the bill was being considered, and he accused me of being unfair, a charge I do not like to have made against me. I have never been unfair to a Member of this House knowingly and never expect to be. So I will just leave to the Members of this House, in view of the facts, as to whether or not I was unfair to the gentleman from Michigan, who is next on the committee to the ranking Republican member the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. WoLCOTT].

This question came up in the Banking and Currency Committee and the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAWFORD] made a very courageous statement against it. I complimented him for it at the time. When I asked the question

a· while ago when he was taking a different position, advocating a 6-month extension instead of 12 months as he advocated in the committee, instead of saying that he had advocated at least a 12-month extension in the committee, he accused me of being unfair.

. On June 8, just a few days ago, before the Committee on Banking and Currency of the House we were hearing the testimony of a witness. This is to be found on page 2.12 of part 3 of that. testimony. · I will quote exactly what the gentleman from Michigan said, as recorded on page 212 of the testimony:

Mr. CRAWFORD. If the act was extended for only 6 months, the law would cease to operate entirely at the end of that time, but if extended a year, in my opinion, it gives much greater strength to the whole structure for everybody concerned, and still leaves the Administrator in a position to exempt your industry if it is advisable. What would you think about that?

Mr. Palmer, the witness, made a reply,and then the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAWFORD] said further on page 212:

Mr. CRAWFORD. Of course, the Administrator has the problem on his hands of holding or obtaining personnel on a 3-, or 6-, or 9-month basis, which would be very difficult, whereas if he has a year's approach he might be able to get some pretty good personnel.

Further in the testimony the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAWFORD] said-and I wish the Members would remember this now and see whether or not I was unfair to the gentleman in asking him that very appropriate question-the record .of the hearings shows the following on page 212:

Mr. CRAWFORD. Personally, I am unfriendly to a 3- or 6-month extension and to an 18-month extension. I think we should extend it for a year, because everybody will have in mind, on bot h sides of the fence, the problems of the progress of the war and the shifts in our general economic structure, and we will have paw;ed through another crop year, and it seems to me that it would be fair to everyone for us to come back here next spring, next May or June, and consider this rna tter.

Now, in view of that testimony, which I have repeated word for word, I leave it to the Memb"ers of this House whether or not I was unfair when I asked the gentleman if he did not take a different position in the committee. I was not criticizing him for it. I thought he had some logical reason for changing his position. I wanted to have the benefit of it. SIX-MONTH EXTENSION WOULD SABOTAGE OPA

The parliamentary situation is that when this resolution is read the chairman of our committee will offer an amendment to extend it for 1 year. It is now 18 months in the resolut ion. If it is amended to 6 months, it goes back to the House and we will only vote on one thing, whether we will accept it with the 6-month provision, or not. Then if that is voted down it goes back to the 18 months as provided in the original resolution. If the 6-month provision is adopted I certainly hope we vote it down in the House and vote for the 18-month extension. For the very reason that the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAWFORD] gave to the House committee, it

6498 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 should be extended ·for at least 18 months. I insist that to extend this law for only 6 months would be tantamount to sabotaging price control and stabilization.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Texas has expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. JoNKMAN].

Mr. JONKMAN. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that we are all agreed that price control or the Office of Price Administration must be continued. Especially is this true in the food supply. To do away with price fixing and rationing all at once would produce a condition of chaos.

On the other hand, OPA in their price fixing and rationing have not accomplished and will not accomplish what a great many people ascribe to it. It is also true that their operation has created practically as ·much, if not more, chaos than has been avoided. I receive many letters in which constituents seem to have the impression that the continuation of the Office of Price Administration will increase their food supply or at least enlarge it over what that supply would be without OPA. Nothing could be further from the truth.

OPA is not at all interested in seeing to it that the consumer is supplied with food. Its only objectives are to fix the price of foods or freeze them as nearly as possible, and to see that under that price whatever food is on hand is given equal distribution. OPA has demonstrated time and again its conviction that if it succeeds in these objectives, its full mission is being accomplished regardless of what happens to the consumer or the producer. ·

Other agencies have their individual objectives. The Foreign Economic Administration, for instance, has been concerned only with acqu\ring its requirements for·foreign consumption with total disregard for restrictions as to the needs of home consumption. · The Commodity Credit Corporation

and the War Food Administration have the problems of securing production to meet the foreign and domestic demands. They, however, are hamstrung by the above recited objective of OPA, which prevents price increases as an incentive to production, and must rely principally on subsidies to stimulate production. The same independence and individuality of action is true of all other agencies connected with civilian production, and especially the production and distribution of food. There is no correlated and organized effort to a common end. It is a good deal like roping a number of wild horses, who with a loop around their neck and the other end of the rope tied to a wagon, are pulling in every direction instead of trained horses in the harness under the direction of a driver who controls the reins.

This analysis of the situation was admitted to me by a man who has occupied high places up to the present time in all of the Government agencies concerned with the production and distribution of food. He said it is absolutely true that each agency has its objective isolated and

independent from every other agency and there will never be improvement until there is organization from the top down.

This need for the correlation of these various agencies under a single head is something I began to work for as early as September of 1942, almost 3 years ago, when I said:

I do not think it can be shown in the history of any nation that the imposition of price ceilings alone has worked out successfully. The inevitable result has been to strangle production, create further shortages, black markets, and final chaos in which the wealthy survive and the poor perish.

In another speech the same month I said:

Sure, we are all in favor of keeping down the price of foodstuffs to a reasonable level and after the Army is well fed we want decent food to be within the reach of all c'ivilians alike. · But unless we make getting the required production of necessary farm production our first consideration, with due regard for such elements as anti-inflation measures, we rnay be in danger of a food famine just as we are now experiencing or facing at least, a rubber famine. I make these observations with a consciousness that some of them may be founded on over-cautiousness, but with Mr. Baruch I still say, "better be safe than sorry," and I would like to see a. competent administ:t;ator with a. proper organization invested with over-all power and responsibility to insure that our food problem does not meet with the same negligent disaster that overtook our rubber problem.

A year or so after I began making these speeches the Republican Congressional Food Study Committee, with THOMAS A. JENKINS as chairman, was organized, under the direction of the minority leader, JOSEPH W. MARTIN, Jr. This committee recognized the crying need of a single administrator with a competent organization to take charge of our over-all food problem. It introduced legislation for this purpose and hammered on this need until the Agriculture Committee recognized it and virtually took over the Jenkins bill which was reported out of committee but thereafter killed through administration obstructionists.

,Now, as a result of what I, in September 1942, described as the administration's trusting our food supply to the .haphazard results of cross-purpose effort, conflict of_authority, clashing of personalities, delays and duplications of the Department of Agriculture, the Food Requirements Committee, the War Production Board, and several other alPhabetical agencies and bureaucracies, our food situation is indeed critical, especially in such articles of food as sugar, meat, fats and oils, and other commodities.

It is true that in some commodities we have a sufficient supply, and yet in these oftentimes consumption is frustrated by lack of others. For instance, what real good is an abundance of wheat without sufficient shortening and sugar for bakers to bake? This pathetic and tragic situation 1n our food supply is clearly caused, as above stated, by the administration having neither organization nor a program. The organization, as I have said before, has made a fetish of price control~ .which it has distorted into price freezing, and thereby, of course, the natural incentive to produc-

tion, namely increased prices, is cut off entirely, and naturally we must expect a stifling of and decrease of production.

The administration, in lieu of and substitute for this method of increasing production, resorted to the policy of subsidies. While I am not in favor of subsidies, with proper organization and plenty of appropriation for subsidies, production probably could be maintained by the use of them in the absence of price increases. However, it seems to me that here the administration is again playing politics and is afraid to use the necessary moneys in the form of subsidies to insure food for our people.

Let me give an illustration. Michigan, I understand, produces about 90 percent of the navy or white beans consumed by our people. Last year bean production in Michigan was down about 15 or 20 percent. The price of beans, including a small subsidy, is $6.75 per hundredweight. This year the acreage is still lower, and a few weeks ago representative bean growers and processors came to Washington to see the War Food Administrator about an additional 75 cents subsidy to bring the price up to $7.50. The theory stated to the War Food Administrator was that other crops were more profitable and therefore beans had been neglected by the growers, that Michigan had a rainy season up to that time, and many acreages would have to be replanted, and that if the price was raised to $7.50 per hundredweight, it would materially increase the bean production of our State, and that beans, being of high protein content, and a good substitute for meat, constituted a neces-

· sary crop. . Along with other Michigan Members

of Congress, I accompanied the delegation to the War Food Administrator's office and we had a favorable reception and apparently his approval. He said, however, that it would have to be submitted to certain other individuals, which was done. When we came back the next day it was thumbs down on the argument that to grant the increase would necessitate an increase all across the board which would take eight to twelve million dollars and was not justifiable.

I called his attention to the fact that the cost was not the first consideration, that three-fourths cent a pound increase in price would easily be absorbed by the consuming public without any undue burden, and without injury to our economy; that the only question was, assuming that he wanted the beans, which he did, whether he would get them without the subsidy, and that he either did not care about them or he gambled that he would get them without a subsidy. He intimated the latter was probably the situation, and I retorted that if he lost, of course there would be no beans and that would be the reason. Yet, if I may borrow New Deal terminology, this involved only eight or twelve million dollars.

That, Mr. Chairman, gives in a nutshell the cause of our present chaotic food conditions. Orderly and sufficient food production can be secured only by paying the cost of that production, and unless the cost is paid, it just cannot be produced. If the administration is committed to freezing of prices and will not

1945 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6499 substitute what ,should be accomplished by price increase with subsidies, the peo..; ple will go hungry and be without food. It will not help them that the price of sugar is 6 cents ·a pound if there is no sugar to be had. '· ·

It is true that the use of subsidies iS going to require a considerable outlay of money. For instance, we consume 7,000,000,000 tons of sugar a year, and if in order to secure the · necessary sugar, -producers were to be subsidized in the amount of 1 cent a pound, that would cost $140,000,000 in subsidies. We consume annually 24,000,000,000 pounds of meat, of which 9,000,000,000 is beef. And, if as certain processors testified

. some time ago, it would require 4- 'or 5-cent subsidies· to cover the cost of prodhction, this subsidy at 5 cents a pound for the 9,000,000,000 pounds of beef, would amount to $450,000,000, and so we could go on. But the cold fact is that if the administration accepts the sudsidy theory as a substitute for the price increase theory to secure production, it will take instead of the present one to two billion dollars, many billions of dollars.

To spend billions of dollars for subsidies at the present time is just as unpopular as a general increase in the price structure, and so the administration finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. I repeat, it is unpopular to increase prices and if is unpopular to spend billions in subsidies. Agencies· responsible for price freezing refuse to increase prices, of course, and agencies responsible for the · use of subsidies refuse to assume the responsibility that is theil~s. The simple but irrefutable result is that nothing is done to secure the necessary production, and the people starve and go hungry at least as to certain commodities. And this situation is only in the beginning. We will see much worse conditions before the end of the year. Already in one city in my State I have read in the newspapers of food riots. Already we are

. reading in the newspapers reports that child nutrition is deleteriously affected by our food situation.

The exasperating thing is that the division of authority in various agencies, which, of course, carries with it responsibility, makes it difficult to lay the blame for our deplorable condition on any particular agency or person. Furthermore, I quite agree with the statement made by the chail·man of the Banking and Currency Committee yesterday when he said, "When we pass a law, the law determines the powers and duties of those who act under it. Then to pass another act to say that we have passed an act, and you must keep within the scope of the act, would be senseless and futile." Nevertheless, the various agencies have flagrantly and grossly transcended their powers and failed in their responsibilities as prescribed in price-control legislatioin. In this they have, up to the present time, enjoyed the indulgence and protection of the administration in defiance of Congress. Officials ostensibly clothed with authority for policy making have, in many instances, been nothing more than public-relation officials put for:th o_r _1:emoved as. the s~tuatioJ:?.

warranted, while . the originators of the blunders and failures carry on incognito.

.The only relief in sight lies in the appointment of CLINTON P. ANDERSON to the now combined offices of Secretary ·of Agriculture and War Food Administrator. The present law invests him in that capacity with authority to remedy many of the evils now existing· and it is to be hoped that the administration will carry out the will of Congress, for then and then only can we eventually find relief from the present deplorable and dangerous state of our economy and food supply.

Mr. · WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. KNuTSON].

Mr. KNUTSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Minnesota? ·

There was no objection. Mr. KNUTSON. Mr. Chairman, I

have just introduced an amendment to . the Selective Service Act to define by legislation just what are the employment seniority rights of men and women who are being honorably discharged from the armed forces. I believe the situation is so confused in connection with this matter, with the added burden of unemployment facing many of our returned veterans in several large industrial centers, that I hope the Military Affairs Committee will give this meas·ure consideration before the Congress recesses next month.

As most of you know, employment seniority rights are vital to an individual seeking employment in this country today when so many employers are under contract with labor unions. There seems to have developed differences of opinion as to just what seniority rights a veteran of this war should have for the time spent in the armed services, and I am sure it is the will of Congress to clear up any such confusion and misunderstandings and give the men and women who are taking·off the uniforms of their country every possible right. We can pass GI benefit bills and perhaps bonus bills, but unless the Congress meets the issue of clarifying employment seniority rights we are still falling far short in discharging our obligation to these men and women.

I do not believe -there need be long or extensive hearings on my proposed amendment to the Selective Service Act. It can and should be expedited. By way of explanation, I propose we establish the veterans' seniority rights by law, notwithstanding any general employment policy or contrary provisions of any employment contract entered into, amended, or renewed by any employer after September 16, 1940, when the original act was approved by which a member of the armed forces is entitled to a prior right to his or her old job. I think it is only fair that the yeterans, in connection with seniority rights, should be given the same treatment war workers' were given as to work hours under the Executive order covering that subject. This would allow time and a half for -more than 40 hours .in ~ny

1 week, double time for the seventh consecutive· workday, as well as double time for the six legal ·holidays recognized in that particular Execut-ive order.

Another feature of my bill is that this seniority would apply whether a man or woman had previously worked for a given employer or not. This. seems to be · a matter on which there is great confusion, and the same can be said for a veteran returning to a job he or she previously held and which may have been reclassified as to seniority rights during the veteran's absence. In this case, the veteran is entitled to his or her old job, regardless of any seniority rights held by an employee who was not a member of the armed forces.

Concluding this brief summary, the same penalties now fixed for violating the Selective Service Act would be provided for violations of this new section, and the criminal provisions would also cover anyone conspiring to violate or nullify these new provisions.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. MONRONEY].

M_r. MONRONEY. Mr. Chairman, I would appreciate it if you would indulge · me, for the first part of my talk, the unique privilege of letting me talk to you not as a Democratic Member of Congress, not as a member of the Banking and Currency Committee, but as one of a large number, many thousands, of small businessmen throughout this country, because I want to assure you that above and beyond my political affiliations, my desire to see this country's small businesses prosper exceeds any partisan interest that I may have.

MANY MISTAKES MADE

I should like first to say that we should rationalize a little bit on the matter of price control. I will stand here and frankly admit that OPA has made a thousand mistakes; yes, ten thousand mistakes; but. I say that is a pretty good batting average in the matter of price . co~trol, in time of war, o~r 8,000,000 priCes.

When the Banking and Currency Committee took up the matter of price control we who wer·e in business knew, and any thinking Member of Congress knew, we were embarking on an impossible job. It was a job that you and I as legislators, or that every businessman, knew was impossible. ·

We knew from history that it was impossible to adequately, equitably, and perfectly fix and control prices. That · was one of the main reasons that you and I have never favored the Government running business; but we had another problem of greatest moment with the war coming on. We saw that the problem of trying in our best way to stabilize our economy even though we could not reach perfection was a necessary war measure. We could do a better job for the Nation as a whole, yes; and for business and for consumers by trying to do our best at an impossible job to effect stabilization, even making the thousand or the ten thousand mistakes, that in making the one greatest of all mistakes, that of not doing , anything whatever about inftatio.I!,•

6500 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE POLICY IS EFFECTIVE

So we embarked on this policy 3 years ago. We passed a bill through this Congress that I was very doubtful and dubious of; and I stand here before you today to say that it has worked far better than the most sanguine hopes I had for it; and I believe if you search your hearts you will be forced to admit that it is working better than the best hopes that_ you had for it.

Yes; there have been business difficulties under OPA, troublesome business difficulties under OPA these past 3 years; and there will be more business difficulties under OPA; but in all fairness I want to ask you as a small businessman: Have you ever seen the time in normal buSiness that we have not had difficulties; that we have not had hardships and almost insurmountable problems? Why, Mr. Chairman, that is the reason for the profit system; that is why business, big and little, is entitled to make a profit and does make a profit, because it must find ways of resolving and solving these difficulties.

PROBLEMS HAVE SHIFTED

Yes; I went through about 10 years of inventory problems in small business. I ~do not have inventory problems any more; I do not go to the market and find that the value of the goods that I might have, $50,000 or $60,000 worth of goods, has slipped 15 percent overnight ~s the new market opens, because my inventory is firm due to stabilization.

Yes; I know we now have trouble with · priorities. So the accent has shifted from inventory to the problem of getting the goods. And would it be unreasonable to assume that we can correct the one problem absolutely and not have any difficulty on the other side of the picture?

Yes; I have had trouble with manpower. I had tro~ble for 10 years through the depression with manpower as many, many employees looked to my small~store for their only livelihood, and I kept them on ana did manage s_ome way to get through the depression. I still have '- manpower problem today but it is because I cannot get enough people to work for me. .

Yes; I have trouble now with prices, but I had trouble with prices all through the depression and all through the period of recovery because I had a price ceiling on my merchandise. -Retailers, wholesalers, and manufacturers have always had price· ceilings on their merchandise. They were .the price ceilings put on them by their competitors hungry for business, by the A. & P. Grocery Co., by Sears Roebuck and by Montgomery Ward; and I am telling you as a small. retailer here today that the ceilings allowed me today are far more liberal and far more equitable than the ceilings that were imposed on business by the A. & P. Tea Co., and by Sears Roebuck Co., and by Montgomery Ward.

CANNOT EXPECT UTOPIA

I believe the people of this country appreciate and will admit that you cannot expect Utopia in wartime. But you are going to have complaints now against OPA from your retailers, from your manufacturers, and from your jobbers just the same as ·..,here have always ·been

the self-same complaints in business, be- , .cause the basic problems have always been there and always will be there. But let us look at the over-all result of price control · THE OPA IS THE NEW "WHIPPING BOY" FOR ALL

BUSINESS ILLS

When we set up the Office of Price Administration we knew it was a near impossible job, but we set up an umpire, we created him here in this Congress to call according to the baseball rules that were laid down by this Congress, these decisions. Some of them were pretty easy· decisions because the picture was obvious. Some of them were pretty difficult because there was a lot of dust around second base as the umpire called the man out.

You know enough about baseball to know that the umpire, no matter how fair he is, no matter how hard he tries, must in a close decision decide in favor of one team and against the other team, because that is the way the picture is. This umpire is going to make some people mad. He is going to make one team very happy and make the other team very sore. That is the reason for the shower of pop bottles at times.

Mr. CANFIELD. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey.

Mr. CANFIELD. :No umpire can wait 6 months before he makes a decision, and

· I can present evidence of such a situation in my district.

Mr. MONRONEY. I think that is a very good point the gentleman has mentioned. I think the difficult job that lies ahead is speed on these reconversion Pt:ices. I do not disagree with the gentleman for a minute. I am completely in his corner on that 'proposition and I say to the gentleman that Chester Bowles is in his ·corner on ·that, too. When you understand the reconversion pricing policies that have been put into effect, when you examine them, you will agree with me, and I will come to tliat a little later in my statement.

UMPIRE IS CUSSED

I say that the umpire is bound to get cussed sometimes and I think the umpires expect it, but as rational thinking men must realize that complaints are going to come to our desks, on these close decisions, and they are close decisions, are going to favor one team, often it is the consumers' team, oftentimes the manufactur~rs' team. When a manufacturer talks about his raw materials, he may be in the OPA corner. When they turn down an advance in his finished product, they are going to be against the umpire. Let us be rational and reasonable · on this thing and realize that these kicks must come in and will come in.

NO POPULARITY CONTEST

The OPA umpire was . not set up to win a popularity contest. We did not expect him to be voted the most ·popular gentleman in Washington because we knew he had the most terrific job that had ever been wished on any human being in government activity. I say let us not choose on the basis of a popularity contest.

· Let us look at the net results and the purposes of the Stabilization Act to stabilize wages and prices as near as practicable, bearing in mind the date of October 1, 1942.

Has that been done? Follow the line and you will see that within almost 1 percent this has been performed. You may ask, but at what cost? Yes, of course, there has been some cost, there has been some suffering and some hardship, but every man within thE> sound of my voice knows that the profits of big business and little business, rich business and poor business, production, jobbing, wholesaling, distribution, are at an alltime high figure. You know that industrial and farm production are at an all-time high figure. .

Yet you will have the line held to within 1 percent of the price that existed when we passed that great piece of legislation through this Congress, in the form of the Stabilization Act of October 1, 1942, which directed the President to stabilize wages and prices. I am proud of the fight I made years ago with my colleague from Tennessee [Mr. GoRE] for that principle, a year before the administration was able to see the necessity ;for it.

DON'T FUMBLE NOW

Mr. Chairman~ we have gone , a long way. Yes, business has suffered a lot. This has been a hard game, it has been a hard drag, but let us not fumble the ball now that we are on the 1-yard line. Let us not nullify all of the progress that has been made during three long years of self-denial and self-control now that we approach the goal when we can see daylight ahead and see many prices coming out from under control of the OPA. .

Mr. Chairman, when you have an act coming before this Congress, and you find men like Eric Johnston, head of the United Sta:tes Chamber of Commerce; when you have men like Marriner Eccles, head of the Federal Reserve Board; when you have men like Phil Murray, head of the CIO, and Bill Green, head of the A. F. of L.; when you have that great farm leader, Ed O'Neal, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation; and when you have Mr. Patton, head of the Farmers Union, coming in and agreeing with Mr. Albert Goss, of the National Grange; when you have the Committee on Economic Development, a great organization composed of businessmen, coming down and saying, "More than ever before we need to continue price control because we are getting close to the goal," when you get these elements of labor. farmer, and businessmen saying, "Please, now that we are so near home, let us not wreck this thing that we have gone through for 3 years and tear it apart,'" I believe that is advice this Congress should and must follow because it is sound advice.

DO NOT TINKER NOW

Yes; we can tinker with the law a little bit and that is an argument that will be urged here today. But, Mr. Chairman, as I have studied this law through 3 years, may I say there is not a ·single thing that anybody who wants to amend this law is seeking that cannot be-done

l945 CONGRESSIONAL · RECORD.-HOUSE 6501 under the present law. The law· is much better than the committee originally be-

. lieved when it was passed, because the act gives this flexible power, this flexible right, to adjust to changing conditions .that is the picture of American business life.

I know it will also be said that the ~dministration of the law is to blame, and I say again they have made thousands of mistakes, ~ut you are not going to improve the administration of the act by writing a hundred amendments into the law. No law in the world is better than the administration of it. You will only create added confusion.

WE MUST HELP

It takes careful, consistent, considerate administration. It takes the help on the part of the Members of Congress to call to the attention of this administration the shortcomings in the administration of that act. You will nof improve the administration of the act by writing any amendments to it.

You merely make it more difficult for Mr. Bowles to get the tt).ings done that he is trying his dead ~evel best to do. He

· is trying to run a very difficult operation, an organization dealing with 8,000,000 prices, and I say that this is the time to help him and not to hurt him.

Now Members of Congress in all good · faith will introduce amendments that they think are well thought out and carefully considered. Many of these amendments, not to their knowledge, will be placed in here and supported outside by propaganda agencies, by pressure groups that are expressly out to wreck price control. ·

DO ~OT BE DUPED

The Members of Congress must not be duped into such action. Yes; I know some of the amendments that are to be .o.tfered, and after a 3-year study I can say that many of these amendments will absolutely wreck price control.

Oh, yes; there is no question whether the act will be extended. Congress wm pass the Price Control Act. But I beg of you today, let us not pass the Price Control Act in name only. Let us not have the people of this country go through three long, hard years under the act and then hand them at the end a

·Jlre extinguisher labeled "to put out the fires 'of inflation," and when they attempt to use it they find it filled with gasoline.

Yes; that i.s what is apt to happen with some of these amendments that are Uable to be put in.

Mr . . HARNESS of . Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. If that is the gentleman's theory how does he expect to get some common-sense administration of the law?

Mr. MONRONEY. May I say to the gentleman that the act, I feel, has had common-sense administration. I believe there have been, as I say again, 10,000 or more mistakes made, and it is your job and my job as Congressmen to call the attention of the OPA to these ahortcomings and urge that they do everything within the limits of human reason and judgment tO solve them~ .

NOT ALWAYS MY TEAM

And again I say to you that the umpire cannot always call the plays in favor of my team. Sometimes he will call the plays in favor of the other team.

Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. In answer to the gentleman may I say that I have for 3 years been trying to urge them to correct the mistakes, but they pay . no attention to you and you get no relief. The people are suffering.

Mr. MONRONEY. I think, with all of · the experience of the gentleman, if he takes it over a period of 12 months, he will find that many, many of the things

. that he has called the attention of the ·OPA to, with all due candor, when justice was on his side, that he secured a rea-sonable adjustment for his constituents.

They cannot do it 100 percent of the time, because you cannot call the plays always in favor of my team.

Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. There just has not been any relief given by OPA.

Mr. MONRONEY. The gentleman is badly misinformed.

Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlemen yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts.

FOOD SHORTAGE

Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. Perhaps one of the most pressing situations

. facing the people of our part of the country, namely, New England, is the question ()f getting food. I discussed that question before the committee, as the gentleman knows, last Saturday. We have received many letters and

. many telephone calls stating, "We can .. not get beef; we cannot get poultry." · We have received long-distance telephone calls saying, "We cannot even get eggs." Now when is the gentleman going to be

· able to tell the Members of the House who represent the great industrial part of this country, where the population exists in such large numbers, about the relief they are going to get? They are not getting it and something is stopping them from getting it. Now what is the answer to it?

Mr. MONRONEY.- That is a very good question, and I would like to say that the gentleman made a very able presentation to our committee.

Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. It is an A, B, _C question, is it not?

Mr. MONRONEY. That is so. Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. We

have the money and we want to buy but we cannot get the things to buy,

Mr. MONRONEY. Unfortunately, and I know the gentleman is more ·aware of this than I am because he ser.ves ably on the Committee on Naval Affairs.

Mr. BATES of MassachUsetts. I am fully informed also that on the farms and on the ranges of this country practically without exception we have more cattle on the hoof than in any other period in the history of this country.

Mr. MONRONEY. That is true. Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. And

we have the money to buy it if we can only get it to the table. What is the answer to it?.

PRODUCTION IS UP

Mr. MONRONEY. The gentleman also realizes that the kill of beef is up over 35 percent beyond what it was in ordinary prewar years. The farmers o"f this country have produced over 40 percent more food for the tables .of America than they have in any prewar t ime. Unfortunately that production is not eqough to meet the increased demand for food because many, many people now have moved to industrial centers and are requiring more food in connection .with the work that they do in those centers.

The Army and Navy take 65 percent of the meat that formerly went into interstate commerce.

The meat processing is running in my own State, and I think in most St ates, about 40 percent above what it ran in the previous war year. Unfortunately, the gentleman .in New England receives his meat through federally inspected plants because a law passed by Congress will not let any meat move across State lines that has not been killed in federally inspected plants.

The Army is taking, along with the Navy, 65 percent of the beef out of the plants that the gentleman's people must

· look to for their meat supply. Now, the OPA has lately, I will admit,

moved to try and solve this very difficult situation. I am hearing from my little independent slaughterers from nonfederally inspected slaughterers _in Oklahoma claiming this is dictatorship to order this meat into channels of national distribution so that the gentleman far away from the cattle ranges can get beef.

That should have been done earlier . But it was the desire of the OPA, I sincerely believe, to avoid any possible dislocation of normal busmess channels which led them away from channeling this meat through sources which would enfore this channeling to reach into national distribution.

Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. The most pertinent question I would like to ask the gentleman is this: With the tremendous record number of cattle on the hoof in the country, why is the slaughter this year estimated to be only 3 percent above what it was last year, with the slaughter of hogs 24 percent. below? What is the answer?

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the -gentleman has expired.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 additional minutes to t1;1e gentleman from Oklahoma.

Mr. MONRONEY. I do not have those figures at my finger tips, but I think you

, will find if you checl{ into the 3-percent figure, that that includes the decrease in the hog slaughter as well as the increase in the cattle slaughter.

Mr. BATES of Massachusetts. No; the figure is 3-percent increase on the beef alone and 24-percent decrease on hogs. That is the estimate.

Mr. MONRONEY. I regret that I have not that figure at my finger tips. I know my own State is running better than 35 percent ahead.

SHORTAGE OF STOCK FEED

. If I may proceed just a bit further, the 'OPA has been blamed in this House almost daily because of the decrease in the

'6502 'CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 supply of pork. The action which happened occurred in the winter of 1943. At that tiine we had the most tremendous abundance of pork on the farms in this country. But, my friend, you and I remember that the Governor of New York threatened an embargo after the war against all western products if Iowa. and Illinois did not send corn to keep the dairy cattle of New York alive.

That is how critical the corn shortage was that year. The hogs had to be sent to market. It was after the harvest in the next year before we could be sure of what the corn supply was and whether we would have enough feed to maintain a larger quantity of livestock on the farm. The effort was then made to push up the support prices and the ceiling prices to get pork production back on the farms.

SHORTAGES IN PORK

Stripping down the meat shortage to its bare essentials, you will find it is the shortage of pork that has thrown pressure on beef, with the result that the present beef shortage is directly attributable to the fact that the production of livestock outran the production of feed·stuffs on the farm. I cannot see any use in criticizing or crucifying the OPA for its failure to have adequate feedstuffs on ·the farms of this country.

Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield. Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. I would

like to make the observation that the committee of this House which investigated the food shortage reported that because of the War Food Administration and because of the OPA the farmers who used to feed the range cattle and put on 400 or 500 pounds of extra beef are no longer able to do it at a profit. The result is we are getting a poorer grade of beef and a less quantity of beef.

Mr. MONRONEY. That is a very good question, Mr. HARNEss. In my part of the country we produce those cattle that go into the feeder's lot. I know three different times that the OPA have tried to broaden the spread. We need the feeders in the feed lots.

INCREASED PRICE ABSORBED

But each time help has been designed to reach the feeder the price has gone up for the cattle before the feeder buys them. So his spread has been thus absorbed. You have to have the cattle in the feed lots. The last time the 50-cent increase was put on, if you will check the price on the ranges in Oklahoma and Texas you will find that even though the feeder had to put a certain number of pounds on the animal before he could get a direct 50-cent subsidy from the Government through the AAA the price of the feeder stock absorbed much of that 50 cents.

I would like to proceed at this time with reference to the specific amendments that may be offered.

One of the principal extension amendments that will be offered will be the limitation of the OPA for a 6 months' duration. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CRAWFORD] has made an able argument for the extension of only 6 months.

Mr. POAGE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield. :Mr. POAGE. In connection with what

the gentleman from Massachusetts said there, it seems to me that we ought to go just a little further, -and honestly I want an explanation of it. The gentleman explained that now there was an effort being made to move meat through federally inspected plants. Of course, the purpose of it is to get meat to centers in the East from your country and mine.

Mr. MONRONEY. And to the Army and Navy as well.

Mr. POAGE. And to the Army and Navy also. But from what little observation I have had of it, they put an order in, the effect of which was simply to close all the local slaughterers in my part of the country that were feeding my people in central Texas and that were killing beef. There is plenty of beef there for them. They were killing it. They were feeding the· people there. They were not feeding anybody here, over in New England. They were feeding the people down there. They closed most of those plants with an order about 6 weeks ago. How did that add any meat in Boston, Mass., or in Washington, D. C.? How did that put an extra pound of meat on the tables in those cities?

INTERSTATE SUPPLY INCREASED

Mr. MONRONEY. It increased the runs in meat that came in the federally inspected plants by that percentage.

Now, I have yielded so long on this food question that I must go on. I will tell you how you gentlemen can correct this whole thing, if you will allow me.

If the great Committee on Agriculture of this House will bring out tomorrow morning a temporary suspension of Federal inspection of meat and then order the big packer, the little packer, the small-sized packer, and every -other slaughterhouse in this country to set aside a certain percentage for the Army and the Navy and lend-lease supplies, under adequate local inspection, you will

· do a great deal to correct this shortage of meat throughout the entire country. You will move cattle from the ranges, and you will see this meat blockade broken. ·

But you cannot break up the bottle- ' neck elements of meat that must go to war and to two-thirds of the industrial sections of this country by bottlenecking them through federally inspected plants. Let the Committee on Agriculture bring in that suspension order. The law which the Committee on Agriculture has on the statute books for inspection of meat is the bottleneck. Oh, you will say that sanitary reasons are demanded. Probably so. But I say that if we can ship fish-the most highly perishable commodity known in foodstuffs-across the country without Federal inspection, if we can ship poultry from one end of this country to the other without Federal inspection, we can take a few chances on meat or substitute adequate local inspection of meat for the present rigid Federal rules on interstate shipment.

Mr. PATMAN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield.

ALL SLAUGHTERERS CAN REOPEN

Mr. PATMAN. Is it not a fact that if the Committee on Agriculture will get that bill passed all these slaughterhouses can reopen, and there will be no quotas on them?

Mr. ·MONRONEY. Only a few setaside quotas for the Army and the Navy.

· Mr. POAGE. Will the gentleman yield again?

Mr. MONRONEY. Yes; I yield. Mr. POAGE. This is the first time that

has been suggested, that our committee do any of these things. Possibly the gentleman's suggestion is good. It appeals to me. It may be a step in the right direction, but before we do that we should have some explanation here. The very question I -asked a moment ago, which has not been answered, is when we closed the small slaughtering plants over the country it unquestionably stopped the flow of ' meat to the local communities, but how did it add any meat to the cities in Massachusetts or in New York?

The gentleman from Oklahoma has said it added to the available meat for the large packers to handle. That obviously could not be the situation because there is a surplus of meat now, and any packer who wants it can have it right in central Texas today, but the packers have got all the meat they can handle. It is a question of bottleneck in the packinghouses; not a shortage of meat on the range.

GET PREWAR QUOTAS

Mr. MONRONEY. Well, I would like to have a beefsteak, too. I would like to say they did not close all these small packers. Most of the little packers who could prove that they had been collecting points which they should have collected were licensed and allowed to kill 75 percent of the amount of beef they killed last year, which is the normal average kill for all prewar years.

Mr. POAGE. The gentleman just said the Committee on Agriculture should bring in a bill allowing all these people to slaughter, and now he tells us that they have only closed those which are a menace to public health.

Mr. MONRONEY. I beg the gentleman's pardon. I did not say a menace to public health. The people who were menacing ration control and operating in the black market were closed. Most of those have gone by the board. This quota is based· on the number of ration points that the packer collected last year. If he was in the black market he has not got any points collected, and a lot of those boys are out of business.

But the legitimate small packer is still allowed to kill 75 percent of all the beef he killed last year, which is about his average prewar kill; and he is allowed to kill 50 percent of the hogs he killed -last year, which figures out pretty close to the normal prewar kill. But you are not going to correct it all u~_fil you do what I was talking about oy ·sus~ pending temporarily this Federal inspection control.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Oklahoma has again expired.

Mr. SPENCE. I yield the gentleman 10 additional minutes, Mr. Chairman.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6503 Mr. WHITE. Will the gentleman

yield? · Mr. MONRONEY. I yield. .

- Mr. WIDTE. In the first place, they cannot ship meat in interstate commerce unless it is inspected.

Mr. MONRONEY. That is right. Mr. WIDTE. In the second place, they

have a system which shuts off the little packers.

Mr. MONRONEY. They have a quota. If they did not collect meat points, they are out of business.

Now, I would like to talk about some other things in this price-control bill, because they are important. I have taken too much of your time, and I apologize sincerely for it. However, there are some amendments· that I think attention should be called to.

SIX-MONTH EXTENSION

For instance, the amendment with reference to continuing OPA for 6 months. I do not think you can have adequate enforcement if you are going to end OPA in 6 months, thus violating the normal policy that the House has always had, of giving it a 12-month extension. Suddenly it is proposed to cut this. extension in half.

I think you will find that enforcement will go by the boards and, instead of

. having· less black markets, you will have ~ore black markets. In the old days, · If you announced that prohibition was going to expire on January 1, 1946, I think you would find a lot more bootleggers setting up business to get in ahead of that dead line.

So I believe this 6-month extension will cripple enforcement and lead to the stimulation .of black markets. I think you will cripple business itself, because if you give OPA a 6-month extension you are not going to get the flexibility in adjustments of sound complaints and needed price increases. If the men in that agency know they are going out of

. business 6 months from now, necessary adjustments will lag. You are doing business a grave injustice; you are doing a grave injustice to all business that you represent. - I do not know of any smart manufac

turer who is building up for reconversion who is going to ship a single order before January 1, 1946, if he thinks he might get a 20 or 30 percent increase after that.

MERCHANDISE WITHHELD

'!'hey may build up a stock in the fac .. tory, they may build up a stock in the warehouse, but the goods are not going to get into the channels of trade now when we need these various products so badly.

It is going to demoralize the operation of the Price Control Act. Extend the life of this act for only 6 months, and you will find that all the good men left in OPA are going to get into private business or into other Government agencies.

No man who is well qualified is going to sit there and wait to get scooped with a lingering death. There will be nothing efficient left of OPA. Pass the 6- . month extension, and it would be unreasonalbe to expect these goods to flow into the market in adequate quantity! if

OPA has ~ chance of dying at the end of 6 months.

l..OOK AT PRICE RAISES

Let us examine the best figures we can COMMITI'EE WILL STUDY ACT get. . Mr. LEMKE appeared before OUr

'!'he committee has promised, and I committee and gave us some farm figstand before you today to promise, if I ures on the Lemke cost of production; so have anything to do with it, that the I guess we can take those figures for conimittee will carefully examine OPA comparison. not later than January of this coming Choice beef, Mr. LEMKE says, $22.61. year. Choice beef today is selling, with subsidy

You know ·and I know we are going included, for $17 a hundred, an increase into a condition ahead that no man can of 33% percent on beef. foresee, and it is absolutely necessary to His cost of production on veal calves have the act not expire at that time but is $19.20. The price now is $18, up only to examine the existing act in the light 7 percent. of conditions that will be current then. " Mr. LEMKE's cost of production on

I would like to have the House indulge lambs is $22 a hundred. Today's price is me a moment as I speak about the $15.50; an increase of 40 percent on Wherry cost-of-production amendment. lambs. I have called it the "cost of disruption" Mr. LEMKE's cost of production on hogs amendment. You will find that there is $22.25. Today's price is $14.75; up 50 are no firm figures in the United States pe'rcent. in any agricultural college, in the De- Mr. LEMKE's figure on milk is $5 a hunpartment of Agriculture, or elsewhere dred. Today's average price is about $3 that agree within 30 percent of what a a hundred, up 66% percent. farmer's cost of production is. RULEs oUT sUBsiDIES

CONDEMNED BY FARM LEADERS On top Of that, . I believe any lawyer The farm leaders of this country I be- who studies the Wherry amendment will

lieve are better qualified to answer just agree that it not only raises the price what this means, to give their judgment, but rules out the entire subsidy program because they have dealt with this prob- that this Congress only a few weeks ago lem a long time. passed by an overwhelming vote. That

I should like first of all ·to call your is the way the amendment reads. It ·attention to a statement made by Mr. does not include the subsidies at all. It O'Neill, head of the Farm Bureau Feder- says it is unlawful to fix or maintain any ation, one of the leading farm organiza- producer's price tht".t does not give him tions of the country, representing 6,000,- cost. of production plus a profit. A most 000 farmers. Mr. O'Neill says about the careful study of this amendment will Wherry amendment: convince any reasonable man that out

It is unsound, unworkable. It would be the window goes the subsidy program. impossible to administer such a provision ap- In addition to these big increases plying to more than 6,000,000 farms, no two enumerated above, then you can add to of which are exactly alike. It is simply im~ those prices I have just given you on possible to obtain complete cost of produc~ round steak 10.7 cents a pound, because tion figures for producers of farm commodi~ that is the effect of the subsidy operaties. Even 1f it were possible to secure such tion. You can add 5.9 cents a pound on figures it would be impossible to apply a cost~ the cost of a pork chop. You can add 6.6 of-production formula to the producer of any commodity. cents a pound on sliced ham. You can

Let us see what Mr. James G. Patton, head of the Farmers Union, said Mr. Patton's organization happens to be the one farm organization that has always advocated real cost of production. That has been their battle cry through the years, and yet Mr. Patton says:

FARMERS UNION OPPOSED

The Wherry amendment is silly on the face of it. The National Farmers' Union has for many years fought for cost of production for farmers. The Wherry amendment ts a legislative fraud and will not give any farmer any more income than he is making now.

Those are the farm leaders speaking. What does Mr. Albert Goss, president of the National Grange, say about it? He says:

No one could· quarrel with the objective but we do not believe the OPA could administer the provisions of the amendment and maintain any appreciable control over food prices.

You cannot get firm figures-but the best figure we could get was that if this were applied in the closest and truest sense of the statistics available it would run the Nation's food bill up $3,000,4 000,000. You raise the costs across the board about 10 percent on all foodstuffs and some will run as high as 50 percent.

add 17.7 cents a pound on butter. And · 13.5 cents on a pound of cheese. That is what your Wherry cost-of-production amendment will add in addition to these other increases. You cannot have a sensible, sane operation if you go to that kind of an amendment.

Mr. TABER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MONRONEY. I yield to the gen4 tleman from New York.

Mr. TABER. Did I understand the gentleman to say that the operation of that amendment would increase food prices $3,000,000,000? .

Mr. MONRONEY. That is the nearest figure anyone can give.

;Mr. TABER. And the subsidy at present is $6,000,000,000.

Mr. MONRONEY. How much? Mr. TABER. Six billion dollars. Mr. MONRONEY. Not on food. The

gentleman is including oil, steel lead zinc, and all those others. ' '·

Mr. TABER. I am only stating what Mr. Bowles told us. . ·

Mr. MONRONEY. The gentleman is speaking about the whole subsidy pro" gram. ·

FARMERS STAND TO LOSE

Mr. Chairman, what is this going to do to the farmers?' It is going to build

6504. CONG-RESSIONAL RECORD~HOUSE JUNE '21 . the farmer up to a position where he is going to be blamed for this devastating rise in prices. The farm leaders know .that farm prices have already reached about as far as they are going to reach, judging by past events. We know that in the last war, after the armistice, farm prices rose without control only 12 per. cent before they hit the· skids. The cost of living rose 43 percent. · Then after the big drop came farm prices, within about 6 months, went down

. one-half of what they were, but farm costs went down only one-sixth. So you are building the farmer up on a plateau and you leave him there. ·

This Congress, in its wisdom, has not been unmindful of the welfare · of the .farmer. In the consideration of the first Price Control Act, of the Stabilization Act of October 1, 1942, and in subsequent

. acts, we have consistently written into the act the safeguards demanded by the real farmers of this Nation.

ELEVEN FARM SAFEGUARDS

They came to our committee and to this Congress and asked for safeguards based on their time-honored policy of parity. This was their policy and this was what the committee and the Congress gladly gave them. This is still the yardstick by which the real friends of the farmer, their duly elected representatives who head their principal farm organizations, wish to apply against all prices involving farm commodities.

Let us look at these safeguards that have been written into the act to protect , the farmers. There are not 1 nor 2, but 11 basic safeguards to farm prices-

. all based on the farmers' own yardstick, parity . .

To enumerate briefly they are as fol. lows:

First. No price below parity or comparable price to parity on non basic · commodities.

Second: No price below highest price for farm commodities below levels existing between January 1, ~942, and September 15, 1942.

· Third ..... Prices must be increased to farmers if producers' costs increase after

· January 1, 1941. . _Fourth. Prices ll).USt be modified upward where necessary to secure maxi

. mum production. Under this all farm products average 16 percent above parity.

Fifth. Price increase must be granted in case of disaster to farm production in

. area. Fifty-two adjustments made un'der this claU3e.

Sixth. No price set on processed foods or goods from agricultural commodities

. which do not reftect to farm producer all of price-provision guarantees.

Seventh. No reduction in ceiling prices to be made without giving farmers at least 15 days' notice before start of plant- .

. ing season. Assurance also given for longer periods of time on many agricultural products.

Eighth. No price adjustment to be made without prior approval of War Food

·Administrator. OPA has also added provision to consult War Food Administrator on all food processed from agricultural commodities.

Ninth. Provision for adequate consultation with farm producers before

.changes made in pri.c_es ... Und~r this 1,220 members from farms serve on 61 district agricultural advisory committees. Also, 357 farmers serve on 45 industry committees.

Tenth. In addition to prohibition against ceilings below parity, OPA is directed to help support· agricultural products to reach parity. Producer loans provided in companion act guaranteeing support prices for 2 years after the war.

Eleventh. Provision in Stabilization Act for extraordinary adjustment upward of farm prices to correct gross inequities.

CHESTER BOWLES' LETTER

To further supplement this information, I submit herewith a letter to me from Mr. Chester Bowles, Administrator of the OPA, fully (iescribing these 11' provisions of the act that protects the farmers.

Mr. Bowles' letter follows: OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION,

Washington, D. C., June 20, 1945. Hon. A. S. MIKE MONRONEY, .

House of .Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR CONGRESSMAN MONRONEY: You have asked for a summary of the provisions of the present stabilization laws which protect farm producers. I am glad to give you this. The number and scope of these provisions, I think, are not always fully appreciated.

The principal provisions protecting farm · producers fall into several ·distinct classes: ' I. PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE LEVEL OF MAXI. MUM PRICES FOR AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES

There are four basic provisions or groups of provisions which lay down minimum standards below which no maximum price can be established or maintained for any agdcultural commodity. Each of these four requirements must be satisfied in the case of every agricultural commodity for which a maximum price is fixed.

First. The "parity or comparable price" requirement: Maximum prices for agricultural commodities must reflect parity to producers or, in 9ase a comparable price has been determined as provided by law, the comparable price. The parity or comparable

· price is to be determined and published by the War Food Administrator and may be adjusted by him for grade, location, and seasonal differentials. Maximum prices must reflect any such adjustments that have been so determined and published ..

Second. The "highest price" requirement: Maximum prices .for agricultural commod

. ities must reflect .the highest price received by the producers of the commodity between

· January 1, 1942, and September 15, 1942, as · determined and published by the War Food · Administrator, and as adjusted by him for

grade, location and seasonal differentials. This second minimum requirement must be adjusted, upward or downward, by the Economic Stabilization Director, as the President's delegate, to the extent that he finds necessary to correct gross inequities. To date very few downward adjustments have been made. Upward adjustments are ordinarily unnecessary because of other provisions of law-particularly the maximum production

· requirement. Third. The increased costs and farm labor

requirements: Maximum prices for agricultural commodities must be modified where necessary to reflect increased labor or other costs incurred by producers of the commodity

. since January 1, 1941, or where necessary to give adequate weighting to farm labor. A substantial number of upward adjustments have been made under these provisions.

Fourth. The maximum production re_quirement: Maxi~um prices for agricultural

commodities must be thocttfied where necessary ' to secure rriaximui:n production of the commodity for . w..a.r purpo_ses: . Tllis has proyed ~<? . be . the m95t imp9r~ant basis for upward adjus~ment in maximum prices for agricultural coimnodities. The actual prices received by f~rmers for· farm products today, according to the mos~ recent United States Department of Agriculture reports, average .16 percent higher th,an current parity. ~lle ·a good many prices are fixed at above-parity levels in order to ·col!lply with the second and' third requireme'nts, just mentioned, the majority of : prices which are above parity have been established at such levels because of the maximum production requirement.

This maximum production requirement 'will continue to be applicable so long_ as the price control law is in effect. The overall record demonstrates, I think, that this office; as well as the War Food Admiriistra·tion-which has ' primary responsibility for making recommendations concerning production needs-and the Office of Economic Stabilization-which makes the final decis.ion concerning prices necessary to secure maximum production-have carried it out faithfully. You know my own conviction that an avalanche of production is the only final .answer to inflation. You can be assured that, believing th1s, I shall be more than ever alert in the crucial trans! tion period that lies ahead to see that this office continues to play its part in fulfilling the spirit and purpose of this provision.

In addition to the ·four special requirements which I have discussed, maximum prices for agricultural commodities must, of course, satisfy the basic requirement of the

· law, applicable to all commodities, that maxImum prices shall be generally fair and equitable and such as will, · in the judgment of the Administrator, effectuate the purposes of the act.

Finally, I should note a fifth special requirement applicable to fresh fruits and vegetables which the Congr~ss added to the law last June. Maximum prices for these

. commodities must be adjusted from time to time "to make appropriate allowances for substantial reductions in merchantable crop yields, unusual increases in costs of production, and other factors which result from hazards occurring in connection with the production and marketing of such commodity." Our records show that thus far no less than 52 price adjustments have been made under this provision. II. PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE LEVEL OF MAXI

MUM PRICES FOR THE PRODUCTS OF AGRICUL• TURAL COMMODITIES The present law further protects the farm

· producer by requiring that maximum prices for commodities which are processed in whole or in substantial part from agricultural commodities must not be below a price which will refiect to the producers of the agricultural commodity involved the highest of the applicable price standards of the law. In the case of products made in whole or· major part from cotton or cotton yarn, this requirement must be satisfied separately for each major item. The maximum production requirement of the law also applies directly to commodities made in whole or substantial part from agricultural commodities as

· well as to the agricultural commodities themselves.

The Stabilization Act, in addition, expressly requires that a generally fair and

, equitable margin must be allowed for the processing of agricultural commodities. III. PROVISiqNS FOR NOTICE OF MAXIMUM PRICES

FOR AGRICULTURAL COMMODITIES The Congress last June added to th~ law

a requirement that, "before growers maximum prices are established or lowered for any agricultural commodity which is the product of annual or seasonal planting, the Price Administrator shall give to such growers, not less than 15 days prior to the normal plant-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~HOUSE 6505 1ng season in each major producing a;rea at~ected, notice of the maximum prices he proposes to esta_l?lish therefor."

At the tjme of the hearings on the present extension resolution before the Senate Banking and Currency Committee, the question was raised of giving comparable protection in the somewhat different case of commodities which are not the product of annual or seasonal planting. In a letter to Senator BUTLER which is quoted i;n the report of the Senate committee, I . outlined the policy which I proposed to follow in this regard. The Senate committee accepted my assurance that prices would be announced for a specified period and sufficiently in advance of the normal production- and marketing period to permit farmers to plan their operations accordingly, and would not be lowered during such period, "subject only to such adjustments as may be found necessary in order to meet unforeseen and substantial changes in economic conditions which require action under the stabilization and price support policies enacted by Congress or where market price adjustments are needed to correct gross inequities in differentials for ·grades or markets!'

As you know, the House Banking and Currency Committee has expressly concurred in this portion of the Senate committee's report.

I should like to add that all the responsible officials of the Government are keenly aware of the impol'tance of maximum notice and stability in connection with ceilings for farm commodities, so as to enable farmers to plan their production. The accumulated experience of more than 3 years now makes possible much better administration in this regard than was possible, or achieved, while the price-control program was being developeq. IV. P.ROVISION REQUIRING PRIOR APPROVAL OF WAR

FOOD ADMINISTRATOR OF ANY ACTION WITH · · RESPEC?r TO AN AGRI9ULTURAL COMMODITY

The. price-control law from the beginning has required that no action shall be ta,ken with respect to any agricultural commodity without the prior approval of the Secretary of Agricult:ure--now by Executive order, the War Food Administrator. When disagreements occur between' this office and the War Food Administration, they ·are resolved on behalf of t)Je President by the Economic Stabilization Director or the Director of War Mobilization and Reconversion.

I should add that, while the statute does not expressly so require, this office consults with the War Food Administration in matters relating to the pricing of processed commodities which may have a bearing on agricultural production. Moreover, any action by this office with respect to a processed commodity which the War Food Administration believes will affect agricultural production may be submitt~d by the War Food Administrator to the Economic Stabilization Director for final decision. V. PROVISIONS REQUIRING CONSULTATION WITH

PRODUCERS

The law requires the gdministrator before issuing a price regulation to consult so far as practicable with representative members of the indust;ry affected. In the administration of the regulation, it requires him to consult with an industry advisory committee when such a committee has been appointed under the law.

In the last year particularly we have made great strides toward taking better advantage of the immensely valuable assistance of farmers and farmers' representatives in the administration of the price-control program. We now have established and functioning 45 industry advisory committees for farm commodities, with 357 farmer members. There are now 61 district agricultural advisory committees, \'ith 1,220 me%Ilbers. our agricul-

XCl---410

, tural relations adviser, aided by seven regional · agricultural relations advisers, are in da.Uy - contact with farmers and farm organizations.

In addition, the agricultural relations ad·viser and I join with the War Food Admin-istrator in monthly meetings to exchange views with farm leaders.

The record of this war will show no more patriotic and farsighted service on the home front than that which has been given by the farm leaders of this country in supporting and improving the price-control program. This office is pledged to do its utmost to see that this service comes to its full fruition in the continued well-being of farm producers and in protection to them and to the whole Nation against disaster and stagnation such .as followed the last war.

VI. PROVISIONS IN AID OF PRICE-SUPPORT PROGRAMS

While this office does not tnstitute or administer programs supporting the level of farm prices, the Stabilization Act of 1942, as amended, contains important provisions relating to such programs.

Section 3 requires the President, through any agenqy of the Government, to take all lawful action to assure the producers of any of. the basic agricultural commodities (cotton, corn, wheat, rice, tobacco, and peanuts) and certain nonbasic agricultural commodities not less than the higher of the two prices specified in the first two requirements for farm price ceilings listed in the first section of this letter.

In addition, section 8 (a) provides that farm prices of the basic commodities shall be supported by producer loans at 90 percent of parity in · the case of corn, wheat, tobacco, rice, and peanuts, and 92¥2 percent of parity in the case of cotton. (For cotton harvested after 1943 but, planted before 1945, the Surplus Property Act of 1944 increased the loan rate to 95 percent.) These loans must be continued for at least 2 years after the war.

Finally, section 9 (a) amends section 4 (a) of the Commodity Credit Corporation Act of 1941, by increasing the loan rate ·for commodities supported under that section and extending the support obligations also for at least 2 years after the war.

VII. OTHER PROVIS'IONS

Among other provisions of the present law which protect farm producers, to which attention should be called, are sections 2 (e), 2 (f), 2 (m), and 3, (d) of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, and the general · provision of_ section 1 of the Stabilization Act of 1942 which authorizes the Economic Stabilization Director, as the President's delegate, to adjust maximum prices where necessary to aid in the effective prosecution of the war or to correct gross inequities.

It seems to me piain, from the. enumeration I have given, that the provisions of the present stabilization laws are ample to afford protection to farm producers and to make possible the maximum production we so vitally need. The Office of Price Administra-

. tion is committed to the prompt, fair, and effective use of its authority so as to accomplish those great ends.

Sincerely, CHESTER BOWLES, Administrator.

THE TASK OF CONGRESS

In conclusion, I would like to point out that there will continue to be kicks coming in. We, as Members of Congress, have our choice to try to adjust these kicks by sensible and fair administration of the act, or to wreck the Price Control Act that has served the great majority of the Nation so well. We can take the few kicks, or we can turn the Nation over to its bfggest ·heartache, a. wreck of economic co!lapse, of infhition~

unemployment, decimated savings, and . a repudiation of the dollax: purchasing power of tlie bonds we have sold to the people of this country.

Surely the men who have fought on the beaches of Normandy, on Iwo Jima, and Okinawa, and on the Rhine are entitled to better treatment than to return

- to find the Nation they have sacrificed so much for now rewards them with inflation and economic chaos on the home front. Surely the wives and widows of these men can be spared this cruel end. Surely the farmers who have worked 18 and 20 hours a day to turn in a miracle of production from the land are entitled to a fairer deal than uncontrolled inflation.

Businessmen and industrialists, workers in factories, veterans, and their families look to Congress for us to do our part in holding the line. We dare not fail them. We dare not trick them with a bill that is riddled with price-increasing amendments.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Oklahoma has expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentl~man from Dlinois [Mr. VURSELL].

Mr. VURSELL. Mr. Chairman, probably what I have to say will answer with facts a good many of the statements that have been made by the speaker who just preceded me.

Mr. Chairman, again we have the Price Control Act under the administration of the OPA up for extension. This act has had almost unanimous -support from its inception by the ·Republicans and the Democrats. Without regard to partisan politics we have all generally agreed that it was necessary to ration food among the people by reason of the fact that there was a greater demand for food than there was food to supply the demand.

We wrote into the act the power to control prices to prevent inflation because we knew if the supply was not equal to the demand the people would bid the prices up to inflation levels.

l\1r. Chairman, the Republicans and some 'independent Democrats have insisted each year when the act was up for extension that we try to correct some of the gross inequities which have been brought about by reason of bad administration. Generally, I regret to say, through the pressure of the Administra- · tion in power, the leaders of the Administration from the President down, have insisted that the act be extended practically without amendments which we, on our side of the aisle and some Democrats, have offered in an effort to correct the abuses and maladministration . of those in charge of the enforcement of OPA. We have never sought to destroy the purposes of OPA, but we have always sought to improve its workability,, and today we offer amendments and still seek to improve the administration of the act in the interest of the people, the war effort, and the Government. Today, running true to form, those in charge of handling this bill for the Administration insist on perpetuating the gl'aring mistakes that are being made against millions of people and insist that this holy

•

6506 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 thing, as they seem to regard it, must be driven through without amendments.

The Price Control Act was brought into being in 1942. We started the war in earnest after t.he Pearl Harbor attack in December 1941, and were wholly unpre~ pared. Business leaders, through their efforts and in cooperation with the labor~ ing men of this country, and by the use of American ingenuity, engineering science and research, developed the use of radar, the finest air force in the world, the duck boats, amphibious landing boats of designs never dreamed of, the great B-2Ss that are now bombing and burning off the cities of Japan, the greatest navy with the newest and finest ships in the world with the greatest fire power, and lately the rocket guns, the most deadly and powerful military instrument in the world, with hundreds of other inventions due to science and engineering. Thi~ because they changed, discarded out~ moded equipment and improved and progressed. We overtook and surpassed the Axis technicians and surpassed the world. The result is that we· have won the war in Europe, and are far on th-e road to winning the war against Japan.

The point and the parallel I wish to draw is that we have not improved and changed the OPA. We have not pro~ gressed on the home front in perfecting the price control and rationing. · Every chance to improve this act has been op~ posed by the administration. If we had adopted such tactics in our war program the war would have been lost.

Mr. Chairman, can it be possible that those who have prevented improving price control are right? We know they are wrong. The American people all over this country know they have been wrong. Our people have patriotically attempted to comply with price control notwithstanding all of its abuses. The farmers, the businessmen, and the con~ sumers today, who are short on food. know those who have opposed such im~ provement have been wrong, and they want us as their representatives to cast out the evils of administration and im~ prove rationing and price control. · Yet, today, the administration says "No," and today, as a year ago the Republican Mem~ hers, almost unanimously, seek to im~ prove the administration of this act in the interest of the people. I regret to use the term "Republicans," yet I think the people ought to know the truth.

When the Congress passed this act, the reading of it was plain and understand~ able. Those who have administered it have gone beyond the power given to them Under the act. By going beyond this power they have brought abuses of regimentation and control against the people that were never intended. we· have pointed thi~ out time and again and sought to compel the administrators to follow the intent of the law. They have refused and continue to refuse. We have sought to write in amendments that would make it unlawful for them to con~ tinue these abuses. A year ago, with almost a solid vote of the Republicans and some independent Democrats, who · refused to be controlled by the adminis~ tration, we were able to correct some of· its abuses •.

There are amendments which will be offered later which would correct these abuses but it is very doubtful if we will be able to secure enough votes for their adoption because the orders are to extend it again without amendment.

The OPA backed up by a great propaganda machine for the purpose of influencing the thought of the people have run roughshod over the Congress and the American people. They have not told the people the whole truth. The OPA has taken advantage of the war situa~ tion and had added to price control profit control which never was written into the act. The results are that by the bungling of the Administration by the OPA officials and the War Food Ad~ ministration they have brought about a wholly unnecessary sugar shortage, and a meat famine throughout the Nation. The results are that undernourishment and starvation of women and children in Europe is abroad in the liberated countries to which our President made com~ mitments we would help feed their people as the countries were liberated.

The results are that we have a food · fa111-ine here in our own country, a short~ age of meat, eggs, poultry, and sugar, wholly because of the bungling and mal~ administration of price control, wholly unnecessary and easily preventable had the right policies been followed.

The sugar shortage · was caused because the Administration set prices on beet sugar, cane sugar produced in the United States and on import sugar from Cuba and Puerto Rico at less than the cost of production and a small profit. You cannot get full production without allowing a profit for the investment and for the labor that goes into that production.

No one can successfully deny the charge that the War Food Administration and OPA are wholly responsible for this unnecessary sugar shortage. We tried -to prevent it a year ago but those in power would not listen; Millions of pounds of fruit will not be canned because of the lack of sugar.

Mr. Chairman, now let me refer to the meat shortage. In 1942, we asked the farmers to increase their hog, poultry,and egg production. Notwithstanding the fact that 35 percent of the farm boys of military age had been taken into the Army and that the farmers were short 65 percent in farm machinery as compared with normal times. The farmers, their wives, and children worked unthinkable hours to keep faith with their Government in its request for greater production. They were guaran-: teed certain prices for hogs, poultry, and eggs.

In 1943 they increased hog production to an all-time high by raising 121,000,000 pigs. You will recall in 1944, the Government needed 80,000,000 bushels of corn for the war effort over a period of 6 months. What did they do? They froze 360,000,000 bushels of corn in the great corn-producing States and the· farmers were left without feed to finish out these pigs. The farmers' hogs could starve or be thrown on the market. They : thl'ew them on the market and truck•·

loads of hogs were backed , up for miles waiting to be delivered to the stockyards all over the Nation, which were glutted. The Government then reduced the price it had solemnly promised the farmers and made matters worse. ·The farmers lost faith in the word of the Government, sold off their brood stock, and reduced their output. ·

Pork constitutes over 50 percent of the meat and fats of this Nation. The next year, in 1944, the pig crop dropped in this country to 86,000,000 head, 35,-000,000 less than were produced in 1943. There is 50 percent of your meat shortage. The WFA and the OPA did it. No one can deny these· figures or what I have said. The War Food Administra~ tion and the Office of Price Administra~ tion are directly and solely responsible for the shortage of bacon and pork throughout the land today.

Now, let us take a look at the beef problem. We now have on foot 81,000,-000 head of cattle, lO,OOO,ODO mo~·e than . we had when the war began. Yet we have very little beef. Why fs this? Let me give you the answer and the reasons.

L3.st year, in 1944, we killed 33,700,000 head of cows, calves, and cattle of all kinds. The beef shortage has been caused by several different mistakes of the War Food Administration and particularly the OPA. They have set prices on all types of beef that are too low considering the cost of production. While these prices may :seem high to some, you must take into consideration that farm labor will cost you today from five to six to seven dollars a day as compared with farm labor before the war began at less than half -that amount.

To make· matters worse, they have compelled the processors-meaning the small packing houses-to sell much of their meat to the Government at a loss. When a packer is compelled to sell meat at a· loss, he naturally buys the cattle as low as he can, which depresses the market to the farmer. One of the worst · mistakes in handling the meat problem has been that on prime cattle the price was set so low that the cattle feeders of tl)e Nation ha.d to go out of business, and here is what happened: They closed their feed l_ots.

These prices set by the OPA haye forced the farmer and the cattleman, in an e;ffort_ to make a little profit, to throw his calves and young cattle on the market from veal calves up to six- and eight-· hundred-pound cattle off of the grass mostly before they were finished out to around twelve b.undred pounds. The quickest profit a farmer can make, if any, is to sell' a veal calf or a baby beef. He cannot sell yearlings and 2-year-olds to the cattle feeders, because they have quit · business because they cannot -make a profit. The OPA put them out of business. A 600-pound steer off of the grass, if he goes into the feed lot, within a few months will take on 250 to 300 pounds, and you will get prime beef. If millions of young cattle weighing from six to eight hundred pounds are slaughtered rather than being fed out in the feed lots. you lose the additional 250 to 300 pounds. Over 500,000,000 pounds of beef were de· nied the American people in 1944 because

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6507 the cattle feeders went out of business because of the prices set by OPA. These are some of the reasons for the beef shortage.

Following this thought, let me show you, by figures, what really happened that ha:s brought about this meat shortage.

In 1943 we slaughtered 9,900,000 head of calves, and that was too many.

In 1944 the figure jumped to 13,600,000 calves-an increase of over 3,000,000. If prices had been set that were fair and equitable, doubtless 5,000,000 of these calves would have been finished out into ten- to twelve-hundred-pound steers. Many of them should have gone to the feed lt>ts. They could not because OPA has done away with cattle feeding. Millions of head of grass-fed, half-grown, and half-finished cattle have been thrown on the market.

Now, let us look at the sheep situation. In 1943, according to the Department

of Agriculture statistics, and all of these figures I have quoted are Government figures, there were 49,900,000 head of breeding sheep.

In 1944 there was a drop to 45,170,000 head of breeding sheep. And, as ot. June 1, 1945, it has come down and down to 41 ,000,000 head of breeding sheep. That is what has caused your shortage of mutton, and the War Food Administration and the OPA are directly responsible for this situation-no profitless mutton. Farmers have been going out of the sheep business because when they keep books on them and know what they cost they are losing money. Without some profit you cannot get full production in any lin~.

With the shortage of wool on the market and with sheep being depletea in this country, the price of lambs and wool is being held down today by the War Food Administration and OPA at less than the price of production. I spe~k from some personal experience because I have a big :flock of sheep on which I am losing mon~y.

Now, let us take a look at poultry. You will recall that in 1943 the farmers were asked to produce poultry and eggs as never before. They responded as never before with a bumper crop, and what happened? The Government failed to keep its price commitment on poultry and eggs that it had solemnly pledged the farmers when it asked them to overproduce. And, during 1944, the Government bought and allowed to spoil that we know of, according to their own records, which, in my judgment is only a part of the facts, 5,00Q,OOO cases of eggs, and today eggs are rationed six to the customer. And today there is a shortage of beef, pork, mutton, poultry, and eggs throughout the Nation. Yet they ask us to extend this act again without amendments.

Mr. Chairman, they shout, "Hold the line; keep price control''; yet they have not held the line, but in fact their maladministration of this act has made it impossible to hold the line. The facts are that if you will add and average these food prices of meat and poultry bought at OPA prices and bought in the black markets, you will discover that prices

have risen beyond the imagination of the people. .

The ·Congressional Food Committee which has toured the country and held hearings in many of the big cities, and the Republican Food Study Committee , which has held hearings all over the Nation, constantly seeking information as to prices say that over 60 percent of the meat and poultry being sold in America today is sold at the very high prices charged in the black market. We have forced the people in most walks of life among the farmers, the businessmen, and the citizens who sought meat, to break and violate the regulations of OPA in order to obtain what they were always able to obtain in America before the OPA took charge of price control and rationing,

During the days of the eighteenth amendment, bootlegging in beverages sprea.d all over the Nation. Today, because of mistakes of OPA, we are bootlegging in the black market much of the eggs, poultry, butter, milk, cream, beef, mutton, and pork. This condition is a crime against the integrity and morale of the American people which has been forced upon them against their will and desire.

Yet, they say extend price control without any amendments. Do not disturb this holy thing.

How can we change and improve it now if we have enough votes in this body? And, we can change it if you of the majority will join with us.

We should amend the act to give to the new Secretary of Agriculture all of the powers now held by . the War Food Administration, by the Director of Economic Stabilization and by the Office of Price Administration, to set the price and control the entire food set-up rather than to allow it to be continued and bungled by a half dozen different bureaus. Such an amendment will be. offered by the gentleman from Ohio, Congressman JENKINs, chairm!ln of the Republican Food Study Committee.

We should reverse the policy of the War Food Administration and the Office of Price Administration and start from the bottom up rather than from the top down as they have done. Start with the farmer and producer by giving him a small and reasonable profit, giving the processor, who is the little and big packer, a small and reasonable profit, give the cattle feeder a small and reasonable profit and give the retail distributor a small and reasonable profit. Profit only will get production.

America has grown and developed as no other nation in the world on such a policy. On the policy of giving a reasonable profit to all men from the bottom to the top who are engaged in agriculture, business activities, labor, or industry. This policy, if adhered to, with responsibility and control invested in the Department of Agriculture under the able leadership of former Congressman Clinton Anderson, will get production and get it started in a hurry. It will make it possible to hold the line when the line is established in its proper place. Nothing will successfully fight inflation except greater production. This change will get greater production~

There are other amendments in the interest of the little businessmen, the processors, and the big businessmen that should be adopted in the extension of this act which is the just right of these American people, a right that has been denied them constantly by the Office of Price Administration.

There will be ah amendment offered to help take care of the great peach crop in southern Illinois and over the Nation. This amendment will compel OPA to take the ceiling off of peaches when there is a normal or greater than a normal crop. Why do we want it?

We want it because peaches are perishable, and we know if you set the price of No. 1 peaches at $3.65 a bushel, those handling peaches in the big cities and elsewhere at retail will add their profit to that, which will be 0. K.'d by the OPA, -and the top No. 1 price will be the price of peaches. The result will be that this price will be so high on the lower grades that only the high grades will sell, the producer will be prevented from buying peaches at a lower price, and the hardworl{ing farmers and orchardists, with their millions invested, will have millions of bushels of peaches left to rot in the orchards because the delivery of these highly perishable peaches to the market ih the interest of the consumer and producer will be slowed down until this tremendous loss in food to the consumer and this loss of millions of bushels of peaches to the farmer will be the net result.

And, have they held the line? When you add the black-market prices to legitimate prices and divide the results they have not begun to protect the consumer and hold the line. And, when you add possibly $2,500,000,000 that the Government has paid out in subsidies which must come out of the pockets of you tax payers-! say, when you have added this to the combined legitimate and black-market prices too, you begin to get the real picture.

This administration has tried 'to make you believe that your food costs are what you pay over the legitimate counters. They have not stressed or pointed out to you that you have to pay back to the Government in taxes enough money to retire these StJbsidies of over a billion dollars to date. They want to extend OPA another year without amendments.

The Illinois Agricultural Association and many of the great organizations of the country say that the act should not be extended more than for 6 months because of the rapid changing conditions due to our success in the European war, to reconversion and many other factors.

We Republicans and a few independent Democrats have pleaded for corrective and enabling amendments that will remove these abuses and make the act more workable.

Iri this great Nation, of which we are so proud, we have often said with pride, "It cannot happen here", but this thing has happened, which is beyond the imagination of the American people at any time since they landed on Plymouth Rock.

You can go from butcher shop to butcher shop, from store to store throughout the length and breadth of

6508 ·qoNGRESSIONAL ·RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 this country ·and seldom can you buy meat in this great agricultural Nation. The ice boxes are empty, yet the house .. wives are armed with red points from the OPA. The OPA has found itself long on rationing orders and points but short on meat, poultry, butter, cream, and eggs.

The proverbial old rhyme of Old Mother Hubbard's cupboard being bare has happened here in America, in this land of plenty, by the bungling and mis· management of the Vlar Food Adminis· tration and the Otlice of Price Adminis· tration. ·

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. THOM].

Mr. THOM. Mr. Chairman, when un~ conditional surrender came in Europe, there was an immediate feeling that we should start the march back to normal . in our civilian activities. Restrictions of all kinds, necessary, we must all admit, to the successful prosecution of the war had been irksome, and many felt that release from their enforcement should im· mediately follow the termination of the European phase of the war.

Some segments of our people have been fundamentally opposed to the interference of price control with the processes -of business, and, while they lost their original :fight to let the law of supply and demand fix the prices, they were ready at the end of the European war to agitate for immediate scrapping of the price-control system. Propaganda was set in motion to discredit the OPA in the -eyes of the public. In the midst of a meat and sugar shortage, there was a fertile field in which to work.

However, it was not long until the public began to understand that the great evils of in:fiation following World War I descended upon the American people after the end of . that war. In fact, for a time after the armistice, rising prices were held in check. But inflation resumed its course in March 1919, and in the ensuing scramble for the purchase of goods to restock, there came the explo· sion that was so disastrous. Business suffered an $11,000,000,000 loss in inventory. Corporation profits fell from a .net of more than $6,000,000,000 to a net loss of $55,000,000.

It, therefore, became suddenly clear to those who looked at the over-all eco· nomic picture of the country, and not merely at their own grievances against price control, that the stage is set for a similar economic upset if Gt.t this moment the price-control program were scuttled.

Consequently, the forces of assault soon took to cover, and during the hearings before the Banking and Currency Committee of the House of Representa .. tives, not a single witness to my recol .. lect~n. openly recommended the discon ..

• tinuance of price control. Furthermore, business, farm, and Ja ..

bor organizations, despite their diver .. gencies of opinion on other matters, joined in the· demand for the extension of the life of this Government activity. Rein·esentatives of the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Manufacturers Association, the Fa.rm Bureau, the National Grange, the CIO,

and the American Federation of Labor all took the position that price controls should not be lifted. ·

Individual grievances against the ad .. ministration of the act have been plentiful. Hardly a segment of business that appeared through spokesmen before the committee could endorse the program unqualifiedly. Each urged suggestions for amendment of the law. If all the proposed amendments had been written into the law, however, I fear that its pri· mary purpose would have been transformed from that of controlling inftatton to promoting inflation~

When the ·European war cam~ to an end, there was another widespread feeling that seized upon the ordinary businessman as well as the laborer in the factory. Both were stricken by a similar fear. The factory owner saw his war orders being cut back, and instantly he began thinking and planning -.about reconverting his factory to the manufacture of the product that he ordinarily produced before the war summoned him to the fabrication of war supplies. The laborer knew that until the reconversion process was completed, he would probably be faced by unemployment, and he began to think about unemployment insurance and other things that would protect his status when the working forces were reduced. These are substantial fears, and I believe the Banking and Cur· rericy Committee fully realize their grav .. ity. The Office of Price Administration has adopted a conversion policy, having as its basic cornerstone the purpose of increasing production by suitable . price adjustments. Perhaps, experience will suggest changes in this policy. At least, the administrators should hardly be held to an inflexible policy written into the law on this subject, for each time they encountered difficulties they would have to appeal for amendments, thus throwing the whole law again into interminable dispute.

We are, of course, hoping that the administrators of the law, will revise their policy through administrative action whenever results are unsatisfactory. However, it is to be pointed out that !f they are .continually occupied with defending the law before investigating com .. mittees they will find little time for con .. structive study of their administrative practices. Incidentally, the responsible staff in the OPA have duties few men would care to assume. I asked a num· ber of witnesses before the Banking and Currency Committee whether they would accept the job of Administrator, and their replies were such that Mr. Bowles, the present Administrator, can feel certain that not many top-ranking businessmen want to offer themselves to be .. come martyrs in the field of price con .. trol. Privately, they marvel that Mr. Bowles, considering his own business future, would care to hazard it by re .. maining as Administrator.

When Mr. Eric Johnston, president of the United States Chamber of Commerce, appeared as a witness, I asked him as a businessman, this question:

I take it from your testimony that you have had quite a. blt of worry advising the ~overnment on the ~lng of a price tor

sardines. · How would you like to have the Bowles job of arriving at a. price on thou· sands and thousands of articles?

Mr. JoHNSTON. I would not want it for all .the tea in China.

On the House floor yesterday afternoon, a number of Members were insistent upon knowing something about the shortage of meat. In the examination of witnesses who appear-ed before the Banking and Currency Committee, I undertook to examine a number of them on this subject. Not having any basic knowledge of the livestock indust ry, I .confess that the inquiry I made would not fairly permit me to say that I have got at the bottom of the problem. But I have uncovered some facts that you may wish to hear, and from them you may be able to draw some conclusions.

We should not forget, at the very outset, that food production of all kinds was affected in volume, by the drafting of farm workers into the Army, and by the attraction of others into war industry by reason of high wage rates. ·

Everybody is agreed that one of the chief items of the food supply, pork, is down in production at least 40 percent. I have not examined the basic orders of the War Food Administration to which are !lttributed this decline. Therefore, I am not able to appraise blame. It is asserted that a dwin,dling food supply for livestock caused the War Food Administration to take certain steps for the reduction of hog numbers, and that such steps instead of producing a decrease of 10 percent, so frightened the hog raisers that they let the production drop 40 per· cent.

With the hog market at low ebb, it is obvious that the demand for cattle would increase.

What mystifies the city consumer of meat, and myself, included, is why with the ranges full of cattle there is not a larger supply of meat available. There can seemingly be no question about the size of the cattle population. A news writer, Ray Sprigle, is now contributing a series of articles in newspapers on the meat shortage subject, and on the basis of his interrogation of Albert K. Mitchell, a large cattle owner, he writes:

While the whole Nation is in the grip of a meat shortage, the cattle-producing rancher of the West is doing some earnest worrying about the threat of an oversupply of meat on the hoof. Ten million cattle above normal constitute a real danger to the western cattle industry. The western cattlemen want to see those 10,000,000 excess cattle liquidated as soon as possible. And if they get their way, there's an end to your meat famine.

Turning now to the population of the so -called feed lots, I have listened to some Members of the House discuss this question almost daily, and I had come to the conclusion that the feed yard is entirely desolate and unoccupied. But this does not match up with the statement of the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. ELLENDER], who in recent debate, said:

Our committee heard considerable testimony with respect to the number of cattle now being fed in contrast with prior years. Judging from some of the testimony which our committee heard, one would assume that 1n many instances no cattle were being fed, ihat cattle feeders had quit the business an<l

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6509 that they did not intend to reenter it. But bere are the figures:

Cattle and calves on feed as of January 1 of each of the following years was: Year 1930, 3,113,000; 1935; lowest year, 2,215,000.

The average from 1930 to 1939 was 2,980,-000 head; in 1940 the aggregate was 3,633,000 head; in 1941 it was 4,065,000 head; in 1942, ~t was 4,185,000 head; in 1943, which was the banner year, it was 4,445,000 head; in 1944, it was 3,967,000 head, and the estimate for the year 1945 is 4,173,000 head.

Just let me remark that the banner year of 1943 was made possible because Henry Wallace's ever normal granary was unloading the corn and wheat that had been stored from surplus years.

Now, if there are such number of cat~ tie on the range and in the feeding lots, why do they not move to market?

I tried my best to find out from the attorney of the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association, Mr. Joe G. Montague, why the people of the cities in my congressional district cannot get the benefit of shipments of cattle to our territory from Texas, and this was his answer:

When ceiling prices are established, one effect of ceiling prices is to eliminate the competitive angle in markets; there is no reason why the grower, if he knows that he is going to get the same price, say, in Fort Worth, Tex., that he would get at Canton, Ohio, under ceiling regulations, the only differential being the freight rate, why should /we shippers, when we have plenty of market there at Fort Worth-they will take om· cattle-why should we shippers ship to Canton, Ohio, when the only thing that ever brought cattle to Canton, Ohio, to start with, was differential in prices? And that is eliminated when you have fixed firm ceilings.

May I continue the questions and answers between myself and Mr. Montague?

Mr. THOM. Well, now, of course, that is getting back to the question that the cattle will stop in the region of production and are fed to the people who live there, and we in Ohio are deprived of meat. The power of government ought to be sufficient in the midst of war to see that some of these cattle go to the sections where there is a shortage iD cattle, whether you like it or not.

'Mr. MoNTAGUE. No; I do not. I do not like that. I do not want the Government stepping in.

Mr. THOM. Well, we are not going to let the people starve in this country. We are going to put the cattle where they are needed.

Mr. MONTAGUE. They won't starve. Mr. THOM. You are satisfi~d with the

prices you are getting for cattle? ' Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes, sir,

About the time of this colloquy, the Office of Price Administration issued what was denominated an area distribution order that compels every packer to distribute in the same counties which he served in 1944 a proportionate amount of meat this year. That, in effect, accomplishes with dressed meat what I said ought to be done, although it does not compel the cattle grower to sell.

Having been a newspaper reporter in my time, I began interrogating some cattle raisers, both inside and outside of the House of Representatives, to obtain from them under the well-known rule that a reporter never divulges the source of his information, come what may, and I un-

covered some alleged reasons · why the cattle are not moving. Many herds being on grass at this time of the year, the owner is loath to sell them until they reach their maximum weight, especially when he knows there is a ready market that may last a long time, and so long as drought does not kill off the pasture. Secondly, the ordinary cattle .owner is in excellent condition financially, and not harassed by bank loans that compel him to sell. Thirdly, if the OPA is abolished, higher prices will immediately follow.

Senator LucAs, of Tilinois, whose State deals heavily in livestock, in debate a few weeks ago in the Senate said:

I note the statement that some incentive should be given in order to get the cattle to market. What is the incentive? It has to be another subsidy, I take it, although the producers in the South and Southwest are getting far above the parity price, yet they want more.

There is one reason, I presume, why they are not sending the cattle to market; they are holding them for higher prices. Some day, as the Senator from Louisiana says, when hogs again glut the market, they will wish they had sold their cattle instead of holding them for higher prices.

All I know, repeating a well-known phrase, is what I read in the newspapers, and under date of June 9 the Associated Press said:

Spurred by higher steer prices, producers increased cattle shipments this week and the run to Chicago yards reached approximately 50,000 head, the largest since midwinter. Handlers also noted an increase in salable hogs as farmers began marketing the first of las~ fall's pig crop.

Maybe this is a sign that what Senator ELLENDER predicted may come true.

As one of the means of helping the so-called feeder of cattle, the OPA agreed to give him direct a subsidy of 50 cents per hundredweight for cattle fed. · The Safeway Stores, in a brief submitted to the Banking and currency Committee, said of the subsidy offered to cattle feeders:

A check of markets in Texas, Nebraska, and on the Pacific slope showed that asking prices for feeder stock advanced from 25 to 50 cents per hundredweight within 5 days after the announcement of the Vinson directive.

Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield at that point?

Mr. THOM. I yield. Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. When

our special food committee was investigating the situation in Ohio we found that the producer was very well satisfied with his price but that there had been a break-down in the process of distribution. The packer--, to whom the gentleman referred, should be required to make an allocation. He has first the set-aside order from 60 to 80 percent for Government purposes which leaves him very little. But during the time that he has been working under these orders he has been losing money on the animal itself and, naturally, he has not built up the quantity slaughtered that would supply these areas such as the gentleman has in his section.

Mr. THOM. Yes; but I want to know why the cattle do not come ofi the ranges. That is the question.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HARNESS].

Mr. HARNESS of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, it is apparent here today,-as it has always been apparent, that a continuation of firm, effective inflation controls is necessary. It is obvious that this Congress, and the country at large, understands that necessity. In fact, rio thinking person to my knowledge argues that existing price-control legislation should be permitted to lapse, or that we should knock down our defenses against the inflationary flood which constantly threatens us until that threat has definitely been removed.

The question before this House is not . whether we should fight against inflation or give up the battle. We are determining here whether we shall make justice, decency, and common sense mandatory in the administration of this extraordinary authority, or whet,her we shall sanction another period of the glaring maladministration, yes, even deliberate misinterpretation and perversion of law which has characterized OPA's stewardship of this authority to date.

No agency of this Government has ever been so universally and bitterly criticized, and I am sure none has ever so richly deserved criticism as the Office of Price Administration. It has seemed to blunder and bungle its way ,into one shortage after another. It has created shortages where none need ever have occurred. It has deprived us one by one of beef, poultry, pork, sugar, and practically every basic food until this richest of all nations is sinking rapidly to hunger levels, with certainty that conditions will become worse in months ahead. It has aggravated and magnified scarcities into real crises. And its one unfailing solution to every specific emergency is to tbfeaten, bulldoze, coerce, and deceive. No housewife will soon forget how OPA campaigned for the administration by easing up on her supplies last summer and fall, and then a little later doublecrossed her and ·canceled her reserves of meat, sugar, and canned-goods points. The lame explanation was merely that they had made a bad guess about our supplies. · It has wrecked or crippled thousands of businesses and industries and it has brought about the most serious dislocations in our machinery of civilian production and distribution at the very time that we most desperately need the full potential of our national resources and facilities.

When I said a moment ago that OPA seems to have blundered and bungled this richest of all countries into the sorry situation in which we find ourselves today, I used the term carefully and intentionally. Like most Americans, I went along for months with the theory that OPA's endless parade of mistakes resulted from the fact that the agency just did not have the brains, the practical business experience and the administrative skill on the sta:I:I to cope with the

6510 CONGR.ESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 ·

tremendous responsibilities thrust upon it.

But looking at the OPA record, it is simply impossible to believe that such a complete and colossal failure could have resulted from mere incompetence. When you look at the basic problem in its simplest terms, you are oound to admit that high school children on their first exposure to elementary economics could readily have grasped the simple verities which the OPA seems to have missed entirely. The first of these is that the only firm and lasting cure for shortages and the resulting inflationary pressures is production of a supply adequate to meet demand. It makes no particle of difference how many storm troopers OPA marshals into its Gestapo to beat down that simple fact of economic life, it still remains to haunt us.

The second simple fact is that you can- . not force an American farmer, businessman, or manufacturer to produce and distribute the things we must have at prices which will bankrupt him if he continues the operation. Yet my files are loaded with evidence in case after case where OPA price ceilings and other restrictions simply force the individual or company to cease operations, or work his way into bankruptcy.

There is nothing in the Price Control Act which authorizes OPA to contror profits, but everyone of you here knows that that is exactly what OPA has been and is trying to do. Why? . To head off inflation? You. may still think so. I think it is solely for the primary_purpose of promoting scarcities, which, in turn, will make it necessary to continue inflation controls and thus to keep OPA alive. But beyond this, I think there is a secondary but more important long-range · purpose. Deep behind the scenes in OPA and throughout the rest of this administration, in fact, is a group, a force, a ~chool of thought that assiduously works to remodel the whole American system.

If we extend this authority here without definite provisions which will at least attempt to remove this destructionist. philosophy, you will be writing a death sentence for thousands of American enterprises, and a guaranty that we will plunge deeper into crisis and chaos in the coming year. It is argued that our new President can be depended upon to get us back to common sense, that he is conducting a thorough house cleaning

, and reorganization that will insure a more intelligent, more American administration of price controls. I merely point out that he has made not a single change in the OPA picture in his 60-day tenure. I would like to report the significant fact that I appealed directly to Mr. Truman shortly after he went into the White House to look personally. into this critical situation and to make the complete house cleaning that is necessary. I wrote him as follows on May 19, 1945: Hon. HARRY S. TRUMAN,

President of the United States, The White House, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: Your attention iS

respectlully called to the attached statement of account of the purchase, processing, and sale of a single beef animal by an independent packing company. .

This st atement is offered wit h no thought that. 1t will add anything to the vast fund

~ . of authentic information regarding the Nation's critical meat shortage which I know you already poEsess. Rather, it is offered because it seems to me· to be so perfectly typl-. cal in the present critical situation.

The processor in this instance is a small packer doing business on a comparatively. modest scale within a comparatively limited area of distribution. In every respect, he is not unlike thousands of other smaller independent packers who have normally operated throughout the country to provide a large percentage of the Nation's meat supply. ·

Note that the processor here actually paid $2.70 more for the live animal than he received for the finished meat and all salabl~ byproducts. You will note, too, that no account is taken of the packer's normal costs of processing, which must also be added to his losses in this transaction. ·'

If this report is typical for the processing industry generally, as I believe we must agree that it is, I am sure you have already seen the necessity for prompt remedial act ion. I "have full confidence, therefore, in the reports current that you are moving to correct t h e critical food situation as rapidly as possible.

May I suggest, however, that among the steps to be takin to insure prompt and effective relief you go beyond mere physical reorganization. l believe it will be necessary to force sweeping changes in the policies and philosophy within the responsible emergency agencies which have led us into this present crisis.

We would agree, I feel sure, that the legis- . lation which Congress has provided for price· and inflation control is sound and adequate for the purpose. It must follow, then, that. the faults and weaknesses are administrative.

Primarily responsible for the present crisis, in my opinion. is the fact that the emergency agencies have perverted the clear purpos.e of the laws to control prices: and hsve used this emergency authority all too frequently to control profits and thus to alter . the whole fabric of American business and industry.

May I urge you, therefore, to deal summarily with this insidious philosophy, and with all those in whatever administrative capacity who have been responsible for the perversion of the basic authority which Congress has granted.

If I may offer my own observations, I would suggest that mere physicftl reorganization and redelegation of authority at the top will not cure the. present ills. · I believe effective and lasting relief will come only through sweeping changes in personnel down to the lowest levels of administrative authority.

Respectfully yours, FOREST A. HARNESS.

A mere acknowledgment from a Presidential secretary constitutes the only visible response to this appeal to date.

If the Democratic majority here wishes to acquiesce in that sort of administration, if it refuses to support amendments which are the only means by which this Congress can force a fair, effective administration of this authority in conformity with American principles, then I must reserve the right to withhold my . support of this legislation on final passage.

I say that with the utmost reluctance, for I sincerely believe, as I know each of you here believes, that the original pricecontrol law as we wrote it is perfectly sound and en,tirely adequate if it were only administered honestly as . it was written. Because some people may still not fully understand where the trouble lies, I want to repeat with all possible emphasis that the fault is not at all with

the basic law whfch' Congress has provided, but solely with the administrators who have · deliberately misinterpreted and preverted that lavi to suit their own devious purposes. .

I shall not oppose this legislat ion·, even in the unamended form in which the administration ·.desires, for I know that to do so would be to invite unbridled inflation and chaos. Continuation of price administ ration, even in its present sorry form, is preferable to the alternat ive of no control whatever, for we can at least hope that we may somehow in the f~ture kill this long-range threat to the American way of life before it has completely wrecked our free-enterprise sys-. tern. But if it comes to a question of choosing the lesser of two serious evils, I shall report to my people back home that I have not willingly been a party to this wrecking program. If . we must ac- . cept a continuation of the OPA program in its present form, let us make it clear that the administration majority leaves us no alternative.·

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minut €s to the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. RIZLEY].

Mr. RIZLEY. Mr. Chairman, of course it is an easy matter for someone to tal{e the position or attempt to take the position. that anyone who · opposes extensionof the present Price Control Act withoutthe changing of an "i" or the crossing of a ''t" is opposed to price control. We can expect some people who want to .cloud the issue to make such statements. As the gentleman from Indiana just said, anyone with common intelligence be-· lieves that there ought to be price control during times like these, and some sensible sort of stabilization act, but that does not necessarily mean that we must take a particular bill and without amending it in any respect be charged with being opposed to price control because we are opposed to that particular law. I am going to take just a little bit different attitude toward the OPA than did my distinguished friend from Oklahoma and some other gentlemen who havespoken here. I am not going to charge OPA with all of the responsibility of this thing. I know there has been many silly things done in administration of it, but, after all, this law is the responsibility of the Congress. .

Mr. Chairman, we have witnessed an amazing parade of the Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle speaking intensely, passionately, and apparently in all sincerety in respect to the shortcomings of OPA, and painting picture after picture of business after business that has been completely destroyed and forced to close because of rules, orders, regulations, and directives that have been prescribed and enforced by the administrators of this agency, and which these speaking Members of the Congress say is without authority of law and not contained in the law. Yesterday's REc- · ORD is full of citations by the brave men· of this House who point out the Gestapo methods that the administrators and their agents of these agencies have used against their constituents and the people of this country.

Yes; they hold up their hands in h·oly. horror as they describe food shortages

1945 CONGRESSIO-NAL RECORD-HOUSE 6511 and thriving black markets all over the country. They compare the situation with the balmy days of AI Capone. But when they have concluded, they finally say that this "sacred cow" is not our responsibility. It is untouchable. We must not do anytping about it. They say we must vote for its continuance as is; that we must not adopt a single amendment; that we must not change the dotting of an "i" or the crossing of a "t."

Rumor has it that word has gone down that the House must pass this bill without a single amendment. That immediately after it is passed it will be suggested that the bill from the other body be deleted, except as to the acting clause, and the House bill without amendment substituted; and that the conferees from the other body will agree to take their own baby, stripped and divested beyond recognition, and embrace and take to their own bosoms our child that we have substituted as their own.

Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that we can shake off and shun our responsibility to the people of this country in any such fashion. If we have a law which either in the law itself or in its interpretation and administration is closing the doors of thousands of merchants in this country, then it is our duty to remedy that law. If our people are being subje:cted to prosecution and humiliation by the Gestapo methods that many of these gentlemen have described here in the last few hours, it is our duty as their representatives to put a stop to it. If we have a law that is creating shortages of food and fiber where we have a surplus of the food and fiber of which there is a shortage in this country, it is our duty to remedy' the situation. In my humble judgment, the people of this country are not going to take "Yes, but" for an answer.

It is claimed by those who are in a position to know that we have 10,000,000 more cattle in this country than we have had before, but we have no meat. A representative of the OPA told me no longer than last evening that restrictions that had been imposed by the Congress in respect to Federal inspection of slaughtering had played a large part in their inability to supply meat under OPA regulations. If that is true, we ought to do something about it. It is the primary responsibility first of the Banking and Currency Committee and then the whole membership of this House to do something or at least attempt to do something in respect to the situation.

Mr. Chairman, several months ago I had occasion to address the House on the subject of regimentation by bureaucracy. At that time I called to the attention of the House conditions that existed in my own congressional district, and, after making a very careful survey, some of the things that I found to be uppermost in the thinking of the people whom I have the honor to represent. I shall not burden 'you again with that speech, but, among other things, I said:

After appearing before most of the civic clubs in my district, after speaking before various church organizations of many different creeds and beliefs, and after visiting many farms and places of business and talking to hundreds of people in their homes through- _ out the district and my State, the question

which was most propounded to me was: "Will we be able to recapture and return to the people their rights, freedoms, and liberties after the war? Will we be able to untangle and release the web of regimentation and control that has been so thor()ughly woven over and around them by the hundred or more agencies and bureaus that have come into being under the New Deal during the past decade? Will we be able to return to the people 's Government back to the people?"

Admitting that when our country is at war, necessarily we must give the executive branch of the Government vast and almost abritrary power in many respects, nevertheless the question remains, "Just how far are we to let these agencies go to which that power has been delegated? Just how long are we going to permit t~ese agencies to prescribe rules, directives and procedures that clearly violate the authority given the executive branch of the Government in the laws which we have enacted?"

By no stretch of the imagination can some of these agencies justify the extent to which they have gone in the construction of the laws that they are set up to administer, and the rules they have promulgated arid are enforcing in the administration of these laws. From day to day I am receiving letters from my constituents giving me examples of the arbitrary and.nonsensical rules and regulations that have been made effective by various of these agencies, and which they are using with the force of law against our citizens. The limits of time, of course, prohibit my calling to your attention any great number, the ridiculous things that some ' of these agencies are doing under the guise. of administering tqe_law which Congress enacted for the guidance of such agencies. At this point, I wish to call your attention to a letter which I recently received from a substantial business concern in one of the cities of my district:

NICHOLS-KITCHENS MOTOR Co.,

Enid, Okla., June 13, 1945. Hon. Ross RIZLEY,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR Sm: We submitted the following ad

to our local newspaper, namely, the Enid Morning News, to be run as a classified ad on June 8: "WANTED: ESSENTIAL TRANSPORTATION WORKERS

"Permanent jobs with excellent 'postwar future in ~n essential industry. Top wages and the best -of equipment and working conditions.

"Five automobile mechanics, one parts manager, one lubrication man.

"NICHOLS-KITCHENS MOTOR Co., "415 East Broadway, Enid, Okla."

The advertising manager of the aforementioned paper called me upon my arrival back at my office after having submitted 11le ad and informed me that the local War Manpower Commission object ed tor the words "permanent" and "postwar future," and for that reason they could not run my ad as submitted. We rewrote the ad, leaving out "permanent" and "postwar" and anything that might be suggestive of such and they ran as rewritten.

The following Sunday, June 10, the enclosed ad was in the Daily Oklahoman, and has been in the paper several days since. You will note that it includes both the words "permanent" and "postwar future":

"AUTO AND TRUCK MECHANICS

"Permanent positions in essential industry. Excellent salary, _ desirable hours and

working conditions. Sick and accident insurance furnished. Excellent postwar future. See Mr. Cavnar.

"DENISON MoToR Co., "Dodge-Plymouth D istributor,

"Fifth and Robinson."

I would appreciate hearing from you regarding the War Manpower Commission's authority in this matter in rejecting my ad in Enid and accepting an ad in Oklahoma City that is almost identical. I might mention that in the Oklahoma City paper there are numerous other advertisements in the helpwant ed column that include the words "permanent" and "postwar," as well as some of them quoting salaries. This appears to be discrimination against either an individual or a community antl does not seem to follow the line of democratic reasoning.

We are attempting to operate a Dodge and Plymouth dealership in Enid, which normally ' employs six mechanics, and we find ourselves at this time in a position of having no mechanics and no parts man, having supplied t~e various aircraft factories, ship yards, local a1r field, and the Army and Navy with some 20 employees in the past 3 years. For that reason we feel that we should be entitled to insert an advertisement in the newspaper that would have some appeal to veterans who h~ve been discharged from the Army, or an arrcraft worker who has been laid off because of cancellation of contract, or a mechanic in some category who is looking for a permanent job with a postwar future.

We will greatly appreciate any assistance that your office can render us regarding jhis matter.

Respectfully yours, NICHOLS-KITCHENS MOTOR Co.,

By E. E. KITCHENs, Partner.

Now I am sure no oriP. in the Congress presumed that the Manpower Commission would, by any stretch of the imagination, prescribe any such nonsensical regulation as is described by my constituent .. Have we reached a place in this country where two cities, only 90 miles distant from each other, similarly situated with similar business institutions, are, by virtue of Government regulations, required to have different standards and different regulations in respect to their business enterprises? Now please, do not someone jump up and say "Do not you know there is a war on?" Certainly I know it. In my opinion, the boys who are doing the fighting believe that, among other things, what they are fighting for is the right to be free to run such an ad as is suggested herein. Certainly they think they are fighting to keep the citizens in one community from discriminating against citizens in an adjacent community, and one newspaper from having preferred privileges over another newspaper.

This week we are to determine whether we are to continue the Office of Price Administration and, if so, for how long. I just received through the mail from one of my constitutents a form of affidavit which she says the OPA official said she v:ould have to sign before they would issue .to her a certificate authorizing her to pursue her remedy by law for the eviction of a tenant living in one of her houses. This lady and her gogd family were residents of my district for many, many years. A few years ago she moved to California and bought a home. Her father back in Oklahoma was in ill health, and so she came back to Oklahoma for a while to be with him. . She later returned to California, and under

6512 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE ·21 the contract she had , with a tenant, whom she had permitted to move into her property when she went back to Oklahoma, she endeavored to give notice as provided by the laws of California so that she might obtain possession of her dwelling house. She sent me g copy of the affidavit which the OPA agent told her she must sign. · Did anyone who voted for the original Price Control Act or -the Stabilization Act or the continuance of price control contemplate they were giving some Government bureaucreJt the right to promulgate a rule that would prohibit the sale of real property? It so happens that in this particular case, according to the good lady, she had no thought of offering the house for sale, but she was reluctant to sign an affidavit which precluded her from selling her property if she wanted to. On~ of the things in this affidavit that strikes me as perhaps more significant than any other thing which it contains is this statement:

warning: Any false statement - on t_bis form is a crime, subject to heavy penalt1es.

I include herein as a part of my remarks a complete copy of the affidavit ref erred to. Form 8-R-LA-53 12-12-44

Docket No. E-36548

OFFICE OF PRICE ADMINISTRATION, Los ANGELES DEFENSE.-RENTAL AREA,

1037 South Broadway, Los Angeles 15, Calif ., May 17, 1945.

· AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER

I, ------------~ being duly sworn, depose and state as follows:

I bave filed a petition requesting the area rent director of the Los Angeles defenserental ar~a to issue a certificate authorizing me to purs·1e my remedies at local law for tbe eviction of ------------· tenant of housing accommodations situated at ----------·

My sole purpose in tbus seeking possession of this property is to obtain.it for immediate use and occupancy as a permanent dwelling for a member of my immediate family. The name of this member is ____________ , who is related to me in tbat (be) (sbe) is my ______ ,

This relative (bas) (bas not) customarily lived with me as a member of my immediate household. (Strike out inapplicable word.)

If I obtain possession, I expect to charge this member of my family rent in the amount of$------ per _________ ___ , ·

The reason why I must have possession of this property for the use of this member of my family is ------------------------------

I became owner of this property on _______ _ 19 ____ ,

I do not intend or contemplate the sale, or any attempt to sell the above described premises, nor do I intend or contemplate any attempt to rent such premises to any person except the above-named member of my family.

(Signature of petitioner) Subscribed and sworn to in my presence

bY------------ personally known to me, tbis __________ day ot_ ___________ , 194 __ _

LSFAL] ----------------------(Signature of officer administering oath)

Warning: Any false statement on this form is a crime, subject to heavy penalties.

My State of Oklahoma is a great meatproducing State. My own congressional district is rich in the production of beef, of pm;k, and in the production of wheat.

Wheat harvest is now under way. We have a huge surplus of wheat in ·this country. The graneries, the terminal elevators, and all available places for storage are filled to the brim aqd ov~rflowing, and millions of bushels of wheat are being piled on the ground because of unavailable storage space.

Many farmers with their sons in the service are having a tremendeus problem in obtaining sufficient harvest hands to harvest the crop. I recently had a telegram signed by all the members of the chamber of commerce in one of my counties. I want to read it to you:

Harper County is facing an emergency which will restrict procurement of outside labor to harvest one of its largest wheat crops. To relieve the situation the undersigned chambers of commerce were called together by the county organization to meet with the local meat slaughterers and restaurant operators which are this week threatened with closing for want of meat. On a basis of last years' statistics harvest laborers will increase the county population at least 20 percent. Slaughtering has been reduced 25 percent on beef and 50 percent on pork. With this unreasonable predicament it will be impossible for the harvest crews to be fed. Harper County has a surplus of Medium to Good grade beef cattle. Grant us permission to process our local meat and we will need no packing-house products. We face no harvester shortage but these men must be fed if we save our wheat. We beg your assistance in this crisis.

Incidentally, I might throw in at this point the fact that recently, notwithstanding this huge surplus of wheat, the Congress appropriated $190,000,000 in subsidies to the flour mills so that they could make flour . .

If Congress does not reassert itself and do something about some of these silly, fantasitc things that are being done by some of these agencies, the people will.' I am warning you now that we had better write some common-sense amendments into this Price Control Act if we are to continue it, or we will be facing situations here in this great country of ours that will indeed be hard to cope with. My people in Oklahoma will ·never bow or subscribe to these totalitarian ideologies.

Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Chair-man, will the gentleman yield? ·

Mr: RIZLEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. REED of New York. Right on that point, this might be interesting. In 1941 there were 3,341,000 industries in this country under the various classifica·tions of small business, but in 1942 there were only 3,071,300. In 1943 they had dropped to 2,833,900, or a total small-. business mortality of 507,100.

Mr. RIZLEY. I thank the gentleman for that contribution.

Mr. REED of New York. That does not cover the year 1944, which was even more disastrous.

Mr. RIZLEY. I am sure those are the facts. I was surprised when the distinguished gentleman from Texas, who is . the head of the conunittee dealing with small business in this country, a committee set up by this Congress, said that he did not think anyone could point out a single business in the United States that has been closed because of the OPA.

.Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Cha.irman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RIZLEY. I yield to the gentleman for a question.

Mr. PATMAN. ·Is it not a fact that I said on account . of not receiving sufficient profits by reason of orders of the OPA?

·. Mr. RIZLEY. No; I am sorry I cannot agree with the distinguished gentleman; that is not what he said. He said nothing about receiving sufficient profits. The gentleman challenged the gentleman from Wisconsin to point out a single business that had been closed in this country because of the methods of the OPA or WPB.

Mr. TABER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RIZLEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. TABER. A shoe factory employing 500 people has just been closed up in my territory because of the OPA operations.

Mr. RIZLEY. Of course; and we could stand here all afternoon and point out case after case. We all know about it. But that is not the thing I am talking about. Of course, we know about it. But who is responsible for it? Are we going to wash our hands of the thing completely and say, "Yes; it is going on; but we must not do a thing on earth about it"?

Mr. CHENOWETH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RIZLEY. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Mr. CHENOWETH. May I suggest to the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma that if the OPA will rescind the slaughter quota order tliey will get all the meat they want in these areas. tomorrow.

Mr. RIZLEY. There is no question about it.

The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield .five additional minutes to the gentleman.

Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RIZLEY. I yield. Mr. WOLCOTT. An order was re

cently promulgated which restricts the slaughtering of farm cattle for commercial use to 400 pounds. It is true that the farmer can slaughter all the beef he wants to eat himself, but he can slaughter only 400 pounds to sell.

Mr. RIZLEY. May I say to my distinguished friend that because of that order, and by reason of various and sundry other orders, just as ridiculous, let us amend the law and tell them they cannot do any such thing. Let us take some of this responsibility ourselves and not try to put it all on the OPA.

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

Mr. RIZLEY. I yield. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I would like to

inform the gentleman that I have a letter in my office which I received within the week from a farmer in Ohio who had a herd of dairy cows break through a fence and get on a railroad track. Two of the cows had their legs broken. He

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6513 was told b.y the OPA that he could not butcher those cows and use the meat, nor could he sell the meat, nor could he even sell the carcasses to a fertilizer works. He was compelled to bury the cattle. Now if that makes common sense I am very much surprised.

Mr. RIZLEY. I am not surprised. I want to say to my good friend from Ohio that my people in Oklahoma would not have paid any attention to such a foolish requirement as that.

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. May I say to the gentleman in reply that I advised the man he had only himself to blame -and that he should have taken a good-sized hickory club and knocked the OPA official in the head with it and buried him along with the cattle.

Mr. RIZLEY. I am glad that you did. We can show irritation after irritation and mutiplied examples of nonsensical orders and directives. They might be called small instances, but there is somethil'lg more basic in back of the whole thing than that, apparently. We have a law here that has caused these situations that they have been talking about for the past few days. Yet, they say we must not amend it, that it is too sacred, that we must not touch it. My friend from Oklahoma says we are going to have uncontrolled. inflation if we change a single letter of this law. That is what he would have me believe.

Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. RIZLEY. Yes. Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. I d01JlOt

think you will find so much trouble wi'th the law that was passed as with the aliministration of it and the interpretation placed upon it by the New Deal blue..; printers down here in the OPA, Mr. RIZLEY. Yes; I agree with my friend but I say to him, let us take some of the responsibility ourselves.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. TRAYNOR].

Mr. TRAYNOR. Mr. Chairman, I am strongly supporting the pending resolution, House Joint Resolution 101, and would like to invite attention to the following communication to the chairman of the Banking· and Currency Committee from a large ·number of splendid citizens of Delaware:

WILMINGTON, DEL., June 21, 1945. Hon. BRENT SPENCE,

Chairman, House Banking and Currency Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN SPENCE: A delegation composed of representatives of 40,000 members of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industri~l Organizations in the State of Delaware are in Washington today in the interest of effective price control to prevent inflation and to maintain prices at their existing levels. · We urge the passage by Congress of the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 101) to extend the activities of the Office of Price Administration without any amendments that may hamper the effective control of prices in this Nation. We believe that the OPA should be extended for the full fiscal year. We are opposed to amendments that would permit a raise in rentals. We are opposed to amendments, similar to the Wherry amendment

which passed the United States Senate, that would guarantee profit on each commodity before the price ceiling can be fixed.

The workers of this Nation have limited earnings, frozen by the Little Steel formula Their standard of living is lower than it should be in this period of our economic development. Permitting increases in prices and rentals would burden them with undue hardships. We cannot repeat the fiasco that occurred after World War I when prices of basic commodities were allowed to rise so high that inflation set in and m1111ons of

. our citizens were unable to buy the bare necessities of life.

We urge the House of Representatives to face the period ahead with a realistic understanding of the needs and problems of all the American people. We urge the House of Representatives to accept the recommendations of the Banking and Currency Commltee and pass the joint resolution extending price control for the coming year without any amendments.

Joint Labor Legislative Committee of . Delaware: Gilbert Lewis, President, Delaware CIO Council; Marie Hitchen, Teachers Union, AFL, Local 762; Otis W. Swartz, Vice President, CIO Council; Mabel Johnson, Local 840, UAW, CIO; John W. Tyno,

. Delaware State Federation of La-. bor; G. Ramler, ILGWU, AFL; Leslie Davis, CIO, USWA; H. P. 'Heller, IUMSWA, No. 40; George F. Schlor, Local 36; Charles Quinn, IUMSWA, No. 3; Michael F. Caffrey; Ben Stahl, Executive Secret~ry, CIO Council, Lee R. Vlckus, IUMSWA, Local 3; Walter J. Turoczy, IUMSWA, CIO; Michael Kowalski, Local 201, IFLGWU; . Leroy H. Weatherly, Local 2618, NSA; Ada Rose, ILGWU, AFL.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from California [Mr. ELLIOTT].

Mr . • ELLIOTT. Mr. Chairman, I am going to talk about a number of things and I have brought a little proof to prove my point. I am going to lay these potatoes out so that you Members from agricultural areas can see what I mean when I start talking on that phase of the subject.

At the very beginning of the setting up of the Office of Price ·Administration, knowing agriculture as I do, I could not feel I was doing justice to my people and vote for the OPA. I. felt that the policing of agriculture would cause less food eventually to be placed on the table. So I wrote many letters to my congressional district to people explaining my position in regard to the Office · of Price Administration. It was not long until this shortage of food was being felt. As the very able gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. RIZLEY] just said, I am not going to blame the OPA entirely. I feel it is the duty of this Congress and our duty as Representatives to correct the evil that now exists. We all know that is a great deal.

I was somewhat surprised when I appeared before the Committee on Banking and Currency last Friday. I intended to discuss several subjects and finally stopped on two. That was 1 of the 2 days that were set aside for Members of the House to testify. I think I spoke about 10 or 15 minutes and I left and went back to my office. On arriving at my office I found a telephone call from my colleague the gentleman ;from Cali ...

fornia [Mr. OuTLAND], who is a member of the Committee on Banking and Currency, asking if I could go along on the Price Control Act, without any amendment, for one mo~:e year. I said I could not.

This is why I was disappointed. I took my time, hoping that through my explanatlon I might be able to convince the members of the Committee on Banking and Currency that amendments should be offered by the committee and brought to the :fioor of the House of Representatives, where we might vote on the legislation. It looked to me like they wanted to have assurance of the exten.:sion of the program far in advance without any amendments.

If I have sufficient time this afternoon, I am going to attempt to point cut why I believe we should have some adjustments. If it cannot be done by Mr . Bowles and his assistants, then we as Congressmen should provide amendments to the bill to make .it possible that working conditions can be altered in the OPA to the point of giving relief to the people who are in trouble .

I am just going to take a minute to cite one specific case, in Lindsay, Calif., in my Congressional district, a district rich in citrus, grapes, and olives, 85 percent of the olives produced in the United States are produced in that community. Olive oil has been very essential to our war effort. We talk about people not being put out of business. There were two bakeries in that community when the quota was set up for sugar. There was a severe frost and freeze. About 2,500 men and their families who-came to that community annually to help· harvest the

_ crops did not come on account of this freeze. . The quota was put on that time. Later when they came back to normal operating conditions the sugar was not there for the bakeries. So one bakery. was closed and now the sugar shortage has affected the second bakery. It can onlY operate part time. It is operated by a man who has been in business many years. Why do we want these little businesses in each community? Mr. Chairman, these small businesses are the backbone of our communities; they are the people who own their own property and work the business themselves with their families. Yet, the bakers in Los Angeles are supplied with all the sugar they need and they come daily into my Congressional district, a distance of over 400 miles, round trip, to deliver bread, and one of our bakeries in Lindsay is out of business and the second is about ready to close his doors. I think that is the kind of a situation which needs adjusting.

I went to Lindsay, Calif., this spring and held a hearing and invited the people from OPA in the Frenso office in the San Joaquin Valley, to attend and also the San Francisco regional office. After they went over the files of the man who is still operating on part time trying to keep his doors open, to provide jobs for people whom he had employed for several years, and to furnish the community with bakery products, those people representing the Office of Price Administration from Fresno and San Francisco

~.

6514 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOU_SE .JUNE _21

recommended an increase. But what happened? The case had to be sent back to Washington beca}lse it was out of the ordinary, and the office in Wash~ ington turned that bakery down. So, little by little they are forcing that man out of business. Here is a letter by the owner to prove my statement:

LINDSAY BAKERY, Lindsay, Calif,, May 25, 1945.

The Honorable ALFRED J. ELLIOTT, House of Representatives,

Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. ELLioTT: We received your letter

and also the copy of the OP A and certainly do appreciate all your are doing for us, the community of Lindsay. ·

For the past 3 months we have been operating half days trying our best to keep the bakery open. Unfortunately we are about out of sugar, having 8 days' supply left. Will be obliged to close our doors again until our next quota of sugar which is July 1. Then the quota is so low we can only operate about half of our period. Of course, we lose our employees when we close and are driving our customers away; in other words, gradually being forced out of business. I cannot see how the OP A can say this community is being adequately supplied when it's denied the privilege of a retail bakery.

Thanking you very kindly, I am, Respectfully yours,

M. R. FuLKER.

I am not complaining to the Committee on Banking and Currency, but if I were a member of that committee I would demand that this kind of -condition be changed. I believe we owe it to the American people. That little community has bought bonds and stamps, and time and time again has gone over the top early in the campaign while other communities were not doing their share, and yet one of their businesses is already closed up. and a second is at the point of being closed. That is item No.1.

I read in the Washington Post this morning that a potato famine is feared in 1945. How are you going to get away from these famines in potatoes, meat, and other foods? You cannot do it by the point system; you have to do it by the production method. If you have not enough water in your jug and you need more water, you have to put more in; you cannot stand outside and say, "You have only so many points; that is why you cannot get more in your jug."

I hold in my hand here potatoes that are being produced in Kern County, Calif., by theW. B. Camp farms. This county is now shipping potatoes at the rate of about 625 carloads a day. The Office of Price Administration should have listened to those farmers who certainly :tnow their business-and by the way, these potatoes are not fully grown yet; they are just little wee ones, even though they are 8 inches long. We picked them to show you what they are like when they are just starting, I want to show you what a little adjustment, what a little business sense would mean. The price for these potatoes on June 1 was $2.80 a hundredweight. The price was I'educed on June 1 to $2.40. It was a late season. They had to continue to ir~ rigate to keep the potatoes growing in the San Joaquin Valley, They had to ~ain~ tain an irrigation system with water trickling through the rows P:aY: and night.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from California has expired.

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman five additional minutes.

Mr. ELLIOTT. So these farmers said: "If you will give us 20 cents more a hun~ · dredweight, permit the potatoes to stay in the ground and grow, we can increase the tonnage per acre, keep them growing another 15 days, and let these potatoes reach full size." This telegram from one of the prominent potato growers in my district will throw some light on the subject:

ARVIN, CALIF., May 29, 1945. Honorable Congressman A. J. ELLIOTT,

Washington, D. C.: Impossible to meet conditions resulting

from price cut of 40 cents per·sack of potatoes to go into operation June 1. Poor weather retarded normal rate of growth this year resulting in unsatisfactory crop. Proposed measurement will work unbearable hardship on both grower and consumer. Request May price level remains U.nchanged.

R. L. STOCKTON, Jr.

· I tell you, it is nothing to see a potato 12 and 13 inches long in the San Joaquin Valley with irrigation. If we are going to have a potato !amine let us tell those farmers to get busy, for they can produce another crop of potatoes this year; not a continuation of the spring crop, but those farmers can plant the land in August and on the 15th day of November produce another large crop of potatoes. That is what I mean by using business methods and adjustments. Permit the farmer to know in advance what he is going to receive in price. Let us not wait until we· are in the midst of a crop and then start juggling the figures.

'\Ve should criticize nobody but ourselves. We talk about fair business, I will show you another example. Mr. Chairman, let me point out to you what happened in the grape industry last year, and I am sorry the gentleman from California [Mr. GEARHART] is ·not present. Our districts adjoin and we produce the bulk of the rail?ins grown in the l,Jnited States in these two congressional dis-

. tricts. Our raisin people were told that the War Food Administration needed raisins. They were not so much interested in wine grapes or table grapes, so a ceiling was placed on them. They told the farmers, to produce more raisins. ·

What happened? It takes 4 tons of green grapes to make 1 ton of dried raisins. The man who complied with the Government program and did what the Government wanted him to do got approximately $200 a ton for his raisins; but the man across the road who did not adhere to the Government program, who waited to see what was going to happen, received what? The Office of Price Administration took off the ceiling, so the man across the road who did ·not dry his

. grapes and sold his grapes for juice got as much as $100 and $160 a ton for his grapes, or about $400 to $600 for the same amount of grapes that the raisin grower received $200 per ton.

Mr. Chairman, how do those farmers feel? How would you feel i! you had complied with the Government program

and for 4 tons of grapes received $200 while your neighbor across the road, who moved around with the OPA and its shuf:tling and juggling of prices, rUles, and regulations, which in many inst.ances made the farmers dizzy trying to keep up with them, received $100 to $160 a ton for the grapes.

That is why I say we need some ad- · justment, we need some amendments to the Price Control Act for clarification. How many of you have read the regula- . tions relating to fresh fruits and yegetables? There were about 50 rules and regulations. At the present time there are 72. No wonder there are so many eyes in these potatoes. They need them in order to keep up with the rules and regulations of the OPA at the present time.

Mr. Chairman, I want to quote from the executive secretary of the Kern County Potato Growers Association, Mr. Sid Carnine, of Bakersfield, Calif., just three lines:

The sooner that we can get rid of the OP A control of fruits and vegetables the sooner we will get rid of the black market and a lot of other aches and pains.

That remark comes from people residing in a county where 55,000 acres of potatoes are being harvested.

Now, Mr. Chairman, let me refer to the lumber situation. We have had a bad condition in tpat field in connection with the mishandling of lumber· and the 'pricing of lumber. At this time I want to read a wire from Bernard B. Barber, secretary-manager, Lumber Merchants Association of Northern California:

FRESNO, CALIF., June 20, 1945, Congressman A. J. ELLIOTT,

House Office BuiLding, washington, D. a.:

· The present policy of OPA forcing retail distributors to absorb all increases in cost from the manufacturer is getting progressively worse. Because of this policy many products including grape stakes and fence posts, etc., normally handled by retail lum• ber dealers are moving exclusively through black market. The lumber dealers of northern California, of which there are more than 4"0, urgently request your support of amendments now under consideration in the House Which will permit tbe retail dealer to use the normal mark-up on the merchandise they distribute.

BERNARD B. BARBER, Secretary-Manager, Lumber Mer

chants _ Association oj Northern California.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from California has expired~ · Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield

· the gentleman two additional minutes. Mr. PHILLIPS. Mr. Chairman, will

the gentleman yield? Mr. ELLIOTT. I yield to the gentle~

man from California. Mr. PHILLIPS. This is an extremely

important matter for the people in all parts of the United States, because 15 percent of the vegetables in the United States come from this district that has these problems, and in the case of spring vegetables about 30 percent.

Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. Chairman, I want to read a short telegram froni H. C. L~gg, who ran for Governo1· of the State of

1945 CONGR.ESSIONAU RECORD-HOUSE 6515 California some years ago on the Democratic ticket. He states, as follows: ·

WHI'ITIER, CALIF., June 20, 1945. Hon. ALFRED ELLIOTT,

Member of Congress, House of Representatives:

The entire house-construction industry is at a standstill on the west coast due to a shortage of gypsum board for plastering . . Manufacturers advise OPA ceiling on this product does not permit its manufacture except at a loss. In view of urgent need for house-construction program to continue uninterrupted, may I suggest you have this matter investigated and request OPA act promptly on any action deemed necessary.

Thanks. HERBERT C. LEGG,

Mr. Chairman, I have three letters here that I will place in the RECORD which show the situation in reference to rent:

BAKERSFIELD; CALIF., June 16, 1945, Hon. ALFRED J. ELLIO'IT,

Congressman, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. ,

DEAR MR. ELLIOTT: I am taking the }iberty of writing you as a Kern County citizen, and property holder of Kern County. I think that a rank injustice has been done to me as well as other property holders in Kern County by establishing a rent-control office here, where you receive not only discourteous but unjust treatment.

I purchased my rental property in question in April of 1944. It was in a deplorable condition-was part of an old estate being settled. I immediately started repairs and renovation of all rentals at a considerable expense, and have continued these improvements to date. I had every article of furniture reconditioned, besides adding five rooms of my own furnit\lre, together with nu~erous new articles. I had modern electncal wiring installed and the inside of the rentals repaired. It would take ages to tell what I ha.ve do::1e in the past year, yet Mr. Broad, of the local rent control board, tells me that I must revert to the 1943 rentals, and to refund the difference in rentals to my tenants, all of which I have done.

The former owner, who fell heir to this property, h ad her interests in Mojave, Calif., and allowed one of the tenants to carry on, and it unquestionably showed the result of that lack of f'hterest. There were seven-children living there, besides the adults, so you can imagine the state it was in. Even the yard was disgraceful to the community, yet I am not to be compensated in any way for all my improvements at a considerable cost of money; also my own efforts and time over a period of a year or more. ·

I was born and reared in Bakersfield, Ca1if., and have numerous friends here who are property owners, and I do not think rents are unreasonable except _perhaps in a very few instances, but why should I -be made to suffer for these unscrupulous few.

The repairs and upkeep of rental pro~erty ts tremendous-it cost $66 to have a refrigerator repaired, when the ceiling price was $67.50, but I had to have the appliance, so paid the bill-that is only one item o1 dozens which come up every month. The tenants have no consideration for the landlord, neither has the rent control board, so what must we do? I am really on the verge of a nervous break-down as a result of the whole thing-1 have to work outside my home to make ends meet, and I am seriously thinking of locking up my rentals, so that I can do justice to my employment-! think it w111 pay me.

I sincerely hope you will pardon me if I seem to unload my burdens upon you, as I know you must have many, but I don't know whom else to appeal to.

Please give us favorable consideration when the matter is brought up in the House-spare

us the expense of financing a. rent-control office here-we are not in a defense zone, and don't need them, nor their insults. I took time off from my office to go down and register thinking ·r would be away about a half ho~r-1 was from 1:30 p. m. until 6 p. m. in the rent-control office, being yelled and screamed at by Mr. Broad-you would think I was a convict asking for an early parole. It just isn't right.

I want to thank you in advance for your kind consideration, of my case, and those of many others in Kern County, and may God give you strength to carry on in your ministration of your duties to the people of this great State of California.

Yours very truly, (Mrs.) HAZEL K. DUNN.

BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., May 12, 1945. Hon. ALFRED J. ELLIO'IT,

Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CONGRESSMAN: As a property

owner and one who is suffering because of the rent control established by the OPA in Kern County on May 1, 1945, I am writing to ask if you as our Representative in Washington will use your efforts to see that the allocation of funds to carry on this particular office is not granted as we do not need rent control here since all defense work has been completed here.

I shall consider this a personal favor if you will help me and other property owners out in this effort to give the property back to the rightful owners that we may handle our rentals as we did in the past.

sincerely yours, YVON C. MORLEY,

BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., June 5, 1945. Hon. ALFRED J. ELLIO'IT,

Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. ELLIOTT: I wonder if you realize

the injustice that is being done by the OPA rent control in California? The maximum rent date on their reports were set back nearly a year and a half in order to pick out a year when the rents were low. Individuals most' of them elderly people or widows are slow to raise their rents in following the trend of the times, especially if they like their tenants. These tenants which they like are usually people with a pride in their home. With a large amount of homes for sale and easy money, they have given up their rented places to move to homes of their own. Land· lords have raised the rent when the tenants are changing and the result is that these widows and elderly people now find themselves forced to back up for nearly a year and a half on the amount of rent they will receive. Everything else has greatly increased. Their tenants are getting higher wages than they did before and landlords are forced to pay twice as much for eveqrthing that they use as well as the repairs on the houses which they rent although the moderate increases which they have added to their rents are now being taken away from· them by the OPA.

Some landlords have undoubtedly been very bad, but they will get away with their high prices in spite of the OPA and it will only be the law abiding, docile citizens who try to obey the law that will be hurt.

Your help in abolishing the OPA and its unjust rules at the first opportunity, will be appreciated by all of us.

Very truly yours, CLAUDE R. BLODGET.

The cut in sugar during the canning season where thousands of tons of fruits that families could can for next winter wlll not be utjlized due to the fact that the rationing of sugar is at such a point those people have no sugar to can the fruit. Consideration is not given to people 30 miles from towns. '!'hos.r

people have to bake their own bread. When a person in the city gets the same allotment as a person far away from the city there is something wrong, because the conditions · are vastly different. Those people grow berries and fruits to can and when they cannot get the sugar the food goes to waste. I read a letter from the housewives of Badger, Calif.:

BADGER, TULARE CoUNTY, CALIF., June 11, 1945.

ALFRED J. ELLIOTT, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. ELLioTT: We housewives are very much upset over the drastic cut in canning sugar to 10 pounds per person. We have tried to cooperate with the OPA and are willing to do without foods if it will contribute to the war effort or relieve the suffering in Europe, but we do object to huge truckloads of sugar going to wineries, bre~eries, and distilleries while our good Call-: fornia fruits rot because we have no sugar to put them up.

Why can't manufacture of all beverages, including soft drinks, be stopped until our canning season is over? Canned fruits sup- · ply vitamins essential to our diet. In all probab111ty there are enough beverages on hand to quench the public thirst during the summer.

If Congress would stop the wholesale delivery of drinks to Nazi prisoners it would help some. We know for a fact that several hundred cases of soft drinks at a time have be~n delivered to one work camp in this county employing German prisoners, and as many as 1,500~ cases of beer have gone to the same group in 1 day. If these men would put out any work it would be different, but it burns us up for them to live off the fat of the land while you take away our sugar necessary to the good health of our children.

In our mountain community we can't run to town often for baked goods and other foods, as we are 30 miles from the nearest shopping center, and ga.soline is rationed. So we are all raising berries and other fruits. We can't use them this season as we can't get to first base on 10 pounds a person.

You aren't afraid to speak your mind and seem to get things done. The women in your district are looking to you to get us more sugar.

Sincerely, HOUSEWIVES OF BADGE~.

Mr. Chairman, I am trying to point out to the membership that we need some kind of adjustment to protect the food after the farmer has produced it.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from California has again expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from New York [Mr. REED].

Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Chairman, I believe one of the great issues to come before the Congress in the future will be the question of suppressing in some way the propaganda machine that is now operating in practically every bureau of the Government. You have on your desks a pamphlet entitled "~enewal of the Stabilization and ExtensiOn Act. Office of Price Administration. Chester Bowles, Administrator."

I think the time has come when the Congress will have to assert itself and not arm these propaganda bureaucrats with taxpayers' money to bend the will of the people to this and other un-American philosophies.

. .

6516 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD.-HOUSE JUNE 2l Mr. JENKINS. Mr. Chairman; will the

gentleman yield? Mr. REED of New York. I yield to the

gentleman from Ohio. · Mr. JENKINS: I wish to state that I

have read several articles put out by Mr. Bowles, but this is the most ridiculous of all.

Mr. REED of New York. I agree with the gentleman.

This document to which I have referred, issued from the Office of Price Administration by Chester Bowles, Administrator, is an insult to the taxpayers of this country. It is issued for no other purpose than to prostitue the thinking of the public and to create class pressure in support of a law that has not been administered according to the letter, spirit, or intent of the Congress of the United States. I know of no centralized mechanism now in operation more insidious, more dangerous to free institutions and our form of government than the type of propaganda emanating from Government agencies such as the OPA financed by the taxpayers of this country.

This Price Control and Stabilization Act has already worked irreparable harm to industry and to the farmers and to the consumers. The purpose and intent of the law was to increase production for war purposes and to see that prices for products should reflect the increased cost of production. The OPA has failed in these objectives. It has created a shortage in fat whlch is a most important food product. · The unwise regulations of the OPA have caused a great decline in hogs available for food. There has been a marked decline arid a dangerou~ one in the number of sheep in this country, and every housewife knows the situation so far as poultry, eggs, and beef are concerned.

There is no one who is familiar with the cattle business who does not realize that there are more eef cattle on the hoof than heretofore, yet meat is not available and the black market in meat :flourishes because of the inept · actions of the OPA.

We hear so much clamor on the question of inflation. I agree that an uncontrolled inflation is the most devastating calamity outside of war itself that can befall a people. Black markets are the natural consequence of inflation; one form of inflation, as everybody knows, is in the field of food shortage. There is plenty of money with which to buy food, but only a limited amount of food is available, thus the consumer not being able to get it by bidding up the price in the legitimate market, turns to the black market. The failure of the OPA to permit the cost of production has created inflation of price of beef, ham, poultry, eggs, vegetables, fruit, and many {)ther commodities. There is only one answer to the problem of inflation and that has been repeatedly pointed out on this floor and that is adequate production. The OPA has thrown every obstacle in the way of production by its rules and regulations which have violated every rule of sound economics that might make for greater production.

I dare say that practically the entire population of 130,000,000 persons in this

country would be against the extension of this act based upon their own experiences in· attempting-to purchase the food they require were it not for the propaganda that has gone out iri the form of tons of printed pamphlets to mislead and deceive the public into believing that the OPA has prevented a skyrocl{eting increase in the price of foodstuffs and other necessities. I want to call attention to the fact that the OPA has had on its pay rolls on May 1 of this year 63,873 persons. The first appropriation which it requested was $4,500,000. It received in 1944, $171,500,000. This year, 1945, the OPA is asking for $192,000,000. This vast army is on the increase and the larger the army of agents to snoop into everybody's affairs the greater will be the cost in millions which the taxpayers will have to pay. We hear the OPA officials and their cohorts urging the extension of this act as essential to insure rapid reconversion. It might be well to see just what has happened to small business consisting of manufacturers, wholesalers, retailers, and service establishments under the OPA rules and regulations. The Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce estimated that in the prewar year, 1941, there were more than 2,750,000 small business establishments in the United States, which constituted more than 90 percent of the total business concerns. And these 2,750,000 smallbusiness establishments employed more than ·s,350,000 workers. This number does not include agriculture, mining, forestry, fishing, transportation, communication, utilities, and the professions. I might add further that all of the concerns in operation in 1941 totaled 3,041,-000. After the enactment of the OPA law in 1942 the number of business concerns in the United States numbered 3,071,300. The number of business concerns in 1943 had dropped to 2,833,900. In other words, you could say that there has been a mortality among business concerns amounting to 507,100 from 1S41 to 1943, inclusive.

There is-no doubt whatever that this destruction of . private enterprise h,as been far more rapid during 1944, and under the domination of the OPA, if this act is extended, business mortality will be even more tragic than what our private-enterprise system has already suffered.

It must be remembered that behind each o.ne of these destroyed or suspended small business concerns a pay roll is lost. The real purpose of reconversion is to·cre:ate pay rolls to absorb the unemployed. Put as many business enterprises into production as possible, then an abundant supply of goods and foods will be available to meet the demand of the public and thus keep the price of foods and goods down. I would be willing to guarantee and to stake my reputation, such as it may be, on the prophecy that had the OPA carried out the law and permitted the cost of production, the black markets would have disappeared; the people would have had an adequate supply of the necessities of life, and with{)ut curtailing the essential needs of our Army and Navy, nor preventing our fulfilling our food commitments · to the people of the liberated countries~

· I am for price control, but I know that it cannot be brought about by hamstringing the producers whether in the factory or on the farm. There has been so many illustrations given of the iniquitous character and effects of the regulations formulated by the OPA that I do not need to furnish a bill of particulars. The people whom I have the honor to represent know that they are paying high prices for such food as they are able to obtain and that they are unable to procure meat and many other things they might have in abundance were it not for the bureaucratic tyranny imposed upon them. I know ·also that the farmers in my district find it difficult to plan when the OPA refuses to fix the ceiling price for the 1S45 crops. The farmers have suffered from the hazards such as -late snows, late frosts, continuous heavy rains, and, among other things, the huge draft of labor that has been made upon their farm labor. They cannot plan without knowing what price they are going t.o receive for their farm products such as grapes, apples, and peaches. They know that their crops are short. The OPA knows just as well now as they can possibly know later that there is ·a provision in the law with reference to fixing a maximum price wi.th respect to fresh fruit or fresh vegetables as follows:

Whenever a maximum price h as been established, under this act or otherwise, with res.pect to any fresh fruit or any fresh vegetable, the Administrator from time to time shall adjust such maximum price in order to make appropriate allowances for substantial reductions in merchantable crop yields, unusual increases in costs of production, and other factors which result from hazards occurring in connection with the production and marketing· of such commodit:r.

The Congress could have had no other purpose than to permit a price ceiling for a product that had suffered from any one of the hazards interfering with PI~oduction. The hazard did not have to be country-wide, but only local in charac:.ter, to warrant the OPA irf lifting the price ceiling in the locality or the area where the hazard occurred. The law has been so badly administered and has caused· such devastating consequences to t.he people that I cannot see any reason whatever for permitting more than 60,000 agents to torment, harass, and bedevil the producers and consumers of this country in utter defiance of the plain mandate of the land.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. ROBERTSON].

Mr. ROBERTSON of North Dakota. Mr. Chairman, this legislation should be amended to compel reorganiZation of OPA.

The question before us today is the extension of the Price Control Act under which the Office of Price Administration operates. It can well be said that the e:trorts of OPA are a noble experiment, noble in purpose, and no one can deny that in many respects it has worked to "hold the line" against inflation.

The errors of judgment of the past few months have produced a ver1table revolution throughout the country. People are becoming alarmed as to the short-

•

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6517 age of various foods, particularly meats and butter, also sugar. The question of cotton and woolen fabrics for ordinary clothing purposes is becoming daily alarming. Whether this is entirely chargeable to the Office of Price.Admi:p.istration, or in part to the Office of War Food Administration, I do not propose to say here. At least it is our understanding that they work in close· collaboration, including the War Production Board.

If these extreme shortages are justified beyond doubt, it is the duty of the Office of Price Administration to advise us of all the facts. If they occur as a result of errors of judgment; it is equally the duty of the 'Office of Price Administration to advise us of the facts. The people are demanding that Congress act. We are holding the bag.

This, under no stretch of imagination, should become a partisan question. All of us must serve in the capacity of patriots here, and ours is a solemn duty to attempt to hold the line against inflation. But the duty of the Office of Price Administration is no less solemn than is ours. There is every indication to me that there is need for a house cleaning of personnel in many places in this organization. Such errors as have occurred could not occur were men there with practical experience and with creditable business careers. There are in some instances men possessed of these qualities and my contact with them revealed to me beyond a doubt that they are making a great contribution to the cause, but there still linger on this staff men possessed of an ideal altogether un-American. Men who believe that it is their duty to chart a new course for American citizens to change the plan of American life. That the system so long in vogue has failed and that by some ingenious qualities they possess they can make for American citizens a better place in life. All regulations of OPA should be subject to the review of the courts.

This has been unfortunately one of the bad qualities of the New Deal in many of its branches. The resentment that is taking place today throughout the country against the edict of the Office of Price Administration is refreshing indeed because it indicates that the people of these United States of America will not yield to b:>vernmental regimentation, that they pro:>ose to cling steadfastly to the practices and the habits of the past. They want no regimentation. They are willing to face competition in its severest form and they believe that with open competition ~he best plan yet evolved will prevail.

It is the duty of the Office of Price Administration to attempt to hold the price line, but in doing this they need only to adhere to the language in the law under which was created and under which it operates. It is plain and understandable. We must never forget the fact that in America we live under a profit system.

There is nothing unworthy about this system except in cases where undue profits are taken. Certainly there was no disposition on the part of the War Department, when we were laying plans for war, to ignore the stimulus of the

profit motive. It is for this reason that so many of our early contracts were placed on the cost-plUs basis, and while it is true that this Congress at a later date felt obliged to pass legislation providing for a review and renegotiation against excessive profits, nevertheless the outstanding accomplishment in the production of war equipment is a great tribute to the profit system in these United States of America.

If it can be proven that things cannot be accomplished if profits have been removed by a so-called planned economy, then it becomes tht simple duty of the Department to replace the profit system in order that it may stimulate men to go further to accomplish greater things . . Regardless of character or size no business should be forced to quit.

It is reasonable to assume that if we are short of beef and pork and cotton and woolens, that some place along the line the rules are not working. Men are rebelling and as a result the population suffers. This is a human question in which we are all agreed that we must try to save our country from inflation, but it is likewise one in which we are all agreed that only the best and most practical minds can make it work. We should not hesitate to adopt amendments irrespective of the side from which they come, if they are offered in the spirit of helpfulness, with a sincere desire to make the OfJce of Price Administration work. If they are given with a desire to destroy the effectiveness, they should be rejected. Surely we can meet this situation on a common ground. Businesses that have operated successfully both for their owners and with a service to the public that has been approved for many years should not be disturbed by OPA only so far as price is concerned. The system should not be forced to change. ·

Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 13 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois lMr. KELLY].

Mr. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, a great deal has been said about the fine job done 'by the Office of Price Administration, by holding in line prices on consum·er commodities, with which we all agree and give praise where praise is due. And after hearing many fine speeches of this type, one would think they were free from any charges of maladministration or of criticism. Criticism used for constructive thought is an essential factor in a democracy.

We are all familiar with some inequalities prevailing in the administration of the Price Control Act. While it has done a good job of holding in line certain price levels, it has failed in others.

I listened to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. PATMAN] yesterday, who made a fine statement, extending praise for the good job done by the Office of Price Administration, and I have a profound respect for his knowledge of same, and I believe all of us will agree.

He stated, however, that in 1944 there were less failures in business than any previous years, and we all recognize that fact, because over a given number of years the most failures in business are people who are engaged in new business, and we are all familiar with the facts

that there were no new businesses established since 1942, because they could not be established unless they were connected with the war effort.

But he has not stated how many places of business were put out of business by the OPA, and I do not mean those that violated any portion of the act.

I have always supported price-control legislation, and I intend to support this bill, but if this agency is to be immune from criticism, based upon maladministration, I do not think all of the people, including ourselves, who have encountered the abuse that many citizens of America have been subjected to by those in authority not using common sense in the administration of the a,ct are going to take this abuse sitting down.

I may state, from my own experience. that I tried numerous times to contact Mr. Bowles, personally, but was never accorded the privilege of talking to him.

I also contacted the local OPA director in the city of"Chicago, Mr. Isbell,-to call his attention to some of the inequities that I, myself, encountered, and after numerous attempts to make an appointment, by telephone, received no consideration, as he was always in a conference, no matter what time of the day I called. I then wrote him a letter, but never received any reply.

When the Price Control Act was passed by Congress, the citizens of this Nation were requested to assist the Government, through the OPA agency, in holding prices in line by reporting violations, but when a Member of Congress could not even have the privilege of reaching the proper authority, how could a citizen be heard?

I called Mr. Isbell's attention to inequities that were occurring in the large restaurants, with regard to the tremendously increased price of food in the hotels, and named one hotel that was, in my opinion, violating the OPA regulation, but I have never heard from him to this day, and I -would not expect to hear from him because he represents the large restaurant men's association in the city of Chicago.

Therefore, people were driven from their homes to the restaurants, in order to get substantial food.

I think the American people are most charitable in extending aid and sharing their food products with the starving people of the woild, but unless we start to take care of the American people, and, particularly, of our growing children, in giving them the proper food required for their bodies, the coming generation will suffer from malnutrition.

I think the OPA should wake up and that all agencies of this Government that are directly involved in the handling of food of all kinds should get men of ability and who have some conception of the problems involved.

One thing is certain. There is one cold, hard fact that must be faced: 'rhat is, black marketing cannot be controlled by price ceiling manipulation.

I have talked to many small packers, who say: "OPA controls force legitimate slaughterers to operate at a loss." · Packers all over the country report that they are unable to purcl).ase cattle at prices

6518' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:__HOUSE JUNE.·21

less than OPA ceiling prices on live cattle. Of course, - legitimate slaughterers are compelled to sell the dressed beef at OPA ceiling prices, and on all grades of cattle . legitimate slaughterers are losing money. The losses being sustained by the slaugh- ' terers operating in the Chicago area may · be illustrated as follows:

A Chicago slaughterer pays for a 1,000-pound AA cattle at ceiling prices $17 · per hundred, or a total cost of $170 for the cattle. If he is nonprocessing slaughterer, he will eventually receive a subsidy payment of $2.80 a hundred or $28 on the cattle, reducing his net cost to $142. Present experience is that this cattle yields 60 percent dressed beef, or 600 pounds, which he sells at the ceiling price of 20Y2 cents per pound. He, therefore, obtains for the dressed beef $123, and in addition gets $17.50 for the "drop," giving him a total yield from the cattle of .$140.50, or a net actual loss on the cattle, without figuring expenses, of $1.50. The average slaughterer's overhead costs approximate between 90 cents and $1 per hundred pounds. Figuring the average slaughterer's overhead at 94 cents per hundred, or $9.40 on this 1,000 pound cattle, and adding this $9.40 to the loss ·on the cattle itself of $1.50, makes the slaughterer's net loss on this 1,000-pound cattle at OPA ceiling prices $10.90 after taking all factors, including subsidy, into consideration.

Using a similar method of computation the same slaughterer has a loss of $10.75 on cattle grading A, a loss of $9.65 on cattle grading B, a loss of $7.75 on cattle grading C, and a loss of $5.52 on cutters and canners, and a loss of $5.20 on bulls.

In order to operate at a profit and · still sell at OPA ceiling prices, a slaughterer would have to purchase AA cattle at approximately $15.50 per 100 pounds, A cattle at approximately $14.25 per 100 pounds, B cattle at approximately $11.50 per 100 pounds, C cattle at ·approximately $9.50 per 100 pounds, cutters and · canners at approximately $6.75 per 100 pounds, and bulls at approximately $8.50 per 100 pounds. These prices are approximate in all cases and are computed on the basis of the slaughterer's reselling at OPA ceiling prices. In some instances, it would be possible for the slaughterer to pay up to 75 cents additional per 100 pounds and still operate at a profit, but in order to accomplish this, the cattle would have to dress out at the percentages indicated in the OPA regulations and the slaughterers' experience is that cattle is presently dressing out at somewhat less than the percentages indicated by the OPA regulations. If slaughterers are to continue to operate legitimately, it is quite apparent that either the OPA ceiling prices at which the slaughterer must sell must be raised or the subsidies to slaughterers must be increased.

But to increase prices would create further hardship upon the consuming public. The present price controls are obviously forcing meat into the black market, and that is the reason why when

. the workingman's wife goes to the butcher shop on Saturday afternoon. she finds the shop closed with a sign on it "Open on Tuesday." The working-

man thus is unable to buy' meat for ·nome consumption, while the· man with time on his hands arid money in his pocket · goes to a restaurant and pays from $3 to $5 for a meal with plenty ·of meat, \ and the restaurant operator selling at · such prices does not have to worry too much about what he pays for the meat, and the wliole system.leads to black-mar~ ket operations and inequitable distribu-tion of the meat supply. ·

For the past several months the OPA in Chicago has been sending its investig-ators .into meat markets throughout the city to make purchases and otherwise attempt to get evidence of violations. · When the investigator makes his report, it is referred to one of a staff of attorneYs anq a form notic~ is sent to the retailer to come into the OPA office for an interview at a time stated in the notice. When the retailer arrives, he · finds himself huddled up with a lot of other retailers in the same fix, and ·despite the time indicated in his notice, .he has to wait for his turn to be interviewed.

He is then interviewed, usually by a ·woman attorney who has had neither experi{mce in the ineat business, nor much, if any, experience in the actual practice of law. He is immediately informed that he has violated the price regulat_ions and . given · to understand that the processes of the law are about to be brought down on his head. He is told, however, that . if he· will pay an amount stated, ·usually $50, even though the · alleged violation might have been a m~tter of a few cents, · plus about $23.50 in court costs, and sign a stipulation for the .issuance of an . in- . junction, the matter will be taken .care of without him coming to court.

Scores of butchers not fully understanding their rights and being unfamiliar with the consequences of operating under an injunction, and being in fear of what will happen to them if they , do not go along with the suggested program, have signed these stipulations and paid .the $50 plus the $23.50 in costs. When they do this, a suit is eventually prepared and filed in court, the appearance and consent of the defendant to the issuance of the injunction filed, and the injunction issued. The OPA then has the retailer in the position of having . consented to an injunction, and if he violates the regulations in any respect in the future, he can be subject to summary punishment for the violation of the injunction and might even find himself incarcerated ·in the county jail for contempt of court.

None of these features are explained to the retailer when it is suggested to him that he consent to the injunction and, of course, it is not suggested to him · that he seek counsel and be advised of . his rights. The Chicago office of the OPA is merely trying to make a record without regard to the consequences affecting the retailer.

,. Over 200 suits have been filed in which this procedure has been followed and · scores of other retailers have been threatened and are being threatened daily with similar suits.

Another agency of the Government is the War Food Administration.

Under War Food· Act' No. 1, ·which was · solely under the supervision of the OP A, · it messed up the· whole marketing situation, and it was · so messed up that the · Honorable Marvin Jones, a former Member of this House and a man who understood the cattle situation, was called on to clear up this mess. ·

Under his leadership, War Food Act' No. 2 was created. He; with his fine wisdom and knowledge, that all of us know and appreciate, cleared up much of this mess, ·and cases of fnequities were rectified, where specific cases were brought'· to his attention.

Under the set-up of the War Food Administration, the armed forces entered into agreements with the slaughterers, originally on the basis that for every five cattle slaughtered three would go to the armed forces and two would go to domestic markets.

The inspectors making the selections · of these carcasses, hanging in the coolers, would only take what they deemed grade A-1 meat and in many cases, out of 100 carcasses, would only select 10 or 20, therefore leaving the balance to the descretion of the slaughterer. Their knowledge of prime beef differed from the slaughterer's and left him holding the bag. What was he to do with the 90 or 80 carcasses of beef? Destroy it, by sending it to the rendering vats, or sell it in the domestic markets? And, naturally, he had to sell it in the domestic market in order to keep himself in busines3, and in doing so, he became · a · violator of the War Food Act No. 1 and · the OPA Act.

Reports were filed with both agencies that he failed to live up to his agreement with the armed forces, yet it was not his fault, because in purchasing cattle the little fellow has to take what is left of the run to market of beef on the hoof, and because he was honest in his purchase of live cattle, in his mind, at least, · believing he was purchasing grade A . steers. Those who made the inspection after the slaughter, held they were not, and, therefore, he became a violator of an agreement between the armed forces and himself.

He was punished by a suspension of his license and put out of business, while the · armed forces and civilians were crying for meat. Criminal information was filed against him to further embarrass his reputation and that of his family.

Then the Defense Supplies Corporation stepped in and demanded that reimbusements be made of the subsidies they received, which put many reputable slaughterers, after many years of hard toil, out of business.

Under an order in 1944 licenses were issued to all packers, or any meat distributor who called himself a packerand in many cases small packers never slaughtered anything, but they had to · have the license nevertheless.

Under the recommendation of the War Food Administration to the Defense Supplies Corporation, under the innocent violations of these small packers, subsidies were disallowed and, in the set-aside order, many were compelled to set aside more than others, which, naturally, took away local markets . from these small operators and will put them out of busi-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6519 ness in normal times, for the big packers have been helped by this Government, crushing the little packer by allowing them to supply these local markets.

There are cases before the Defense Supplies Corporation that are denied subsidies and there are others, although they have been. fined for violations in court, had their subsidies paid them, together with the amount withheld. You figm:e that out.

I hope that the President of the United States cleans out some of the incompetent people who are making the public live in a government by injunction.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. AuCHINcLossJ.

Mr. AUCHINCLOSS. Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of the continuation of the OPA Act because I believe it is necessary to carry on with the machinery of price control and regulation. Everything must be done to curb the devastating effects of inflation and the destruction of all values that inevitably follow in its wake. The best and only way to control inflation is by greater production, and everything should be done to stimulate the manufacture of civilian goods as long as it does not interfere with our war effort. The some holds true of food. The present food crisis presumably would not be upon us, it certainly would not be so acute, if the economy of scarcity had not been so ardently preached and practiced in recent years. Tinkering with the inexorable laws of nature can bring only chaos.

So, while I am in favor of the continuation of the OPA for a reasonable period of time, I am at the same time in favor of greater intelligence, greater human understanding, greater plain, common sense being exhibited in its administration. Stupidity and obstinacy have been the great drawbacks in the execution of the functions of this organization and any number of amendments to the bill before the House cannot correct that deficiency. As a matter of fact, in my judgment, the OPA Act could be continued as i~ is at present if there was the slightest assurance that it would be administered with com-

. mon sense and some show of confidence in the patriotic honestly of the American people. The mess of black markets is a national scandal, and this curse can never be corrected by more regulations and more policemen.

To illustrate what I have in mind, I want to tell you a little of history which is probably unknown to many of you. About a year or 18 months ago the Fish Committee of the Republican Congres~;ional Food Study Committee met with a group of party boat fishermen who came to Washington from New Jersey, New York, and Virginia-Mr. BLAND of Virginia, and Mr. PETERSON Of Florida were among those present-to discuss securing additional gasoline so they could carry on their trade and produce !food fish for the American dinner table. These men submitted data which showed that in Cape May County, N.J., in the year 1941, there were 162 party fishing boats with a capacity of 4,271 people

which carried 170,000 passengers during the season. These boats bmught in 6,-050,000 pounds of food fish and every one of these fish was used for food. The people took them home, gave them a way or sold them in the open market, nothing was wasted-nothing was thrown away. Although the OPA representative was present at that meeting and heard this story and although a black market in gasoline was flourishing then, indicating that there was plenty of gasoline, the additiona,l gasoline was allotted at that time to Victory gardeners to raise food whfch would take from 3 weeks to 2 months to produce while no encouragement was given to those who could secure good protein food which was swimming around in the ocean waiting to be caught. It did not make sense. The OPA did nothing to encourage the production of food so badly needed.

Then again this year on April 27 and 28 last, the Fish Subcommittee of the Republican Food Study Committee held meetings at Atlantic City and Toms River, N. J., on the same subject. Each of these meetings was attended by about 70 party boat fishermen who were unable to continue their business because they were allowed only 125 gallons of gasoline for 3 months. Their testimony revealed that a really enormous amount of food could be produced by them if the OPA would give their pleas for additional gas more serious consideration. On the facts and figures submitted, it was pointed out that 50 pounds of foGd fish were produced on half a gallon of motor fuel and that the entire catch of the 471 boats operating along the New Jersey coast during the season would run into impressive figures-estimated to be about 20,000,000 pounds of food fish. Add this to the catch of the party boatmen working off the Virginia, FlO'rida, New York and Maine coasts, not to mention the Gulf and Pacific coasts and the Great Lakes, a great deal of food fish would be made available for the hungry citizens of this country.

On the committee's return to Washington it addressed a letter to Mr. Bowle.s, Administrator of the OPA, dated May 16, calling this state of affairs to his attention and offering to meet with him or his representatives to discuss the matter. We waited over 2 weeks and not hearing a word from him, I telephoned Mr. James G. Rogers, who, I believe, is Mr. Bowles' assistant, and asked what they were going to do about it. The next day, ·June 5, we met with Mr. Youngblood of the OPA and he stated it was the first he had heard of the matter. Such is the efficiency of the OPA.

On June 20 the OPA released a ruling revising the formula for gas for party boatmen which ought to relieve the situation considerably. This time, thanks to our efforts, the OPA is not too late but to complete the fantastic handling of this matter, I received a letter yesterday, dated June 18, acknowledging our letter to Mr. Bowles of May 16, and the letter is unsigned. Such messy muddling and inattention is to be condemned-it is a disgrace to Government service.

So, while I believe we must endure this Government agen<;:y for a while longer,

I wish the Chief Executive would bring about a good house cleaning and throw out the incompetents, replacing them with people who are not interested in making over our American way of life and who have had some real experience and common sense in the management of large affairs.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. SMITH].

Mr. SMITH of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, perhaps nothing so completely shows the inefficiency and bungling by the whole bureaucracy that is e11gaged in controlling the production and rationing of food as the existent shortage of beef and pork.

In 1918, with a population of roundly 103,000,000, the total number of cattle on the farms in the United States was 73,040,000.

On January 1, 1945, with a population of roundly 134,000,000, the total number of cattle on all farms in the United States was 81,760,000.

So that the increase in the number of cattle on all farms in 1945 over that of 1918 is about 11 percent, while the population has increased about 30 percent.

TQere were actually fewer hogs on all farms on January 1, 1945, than in 1918.

These are the facts, notwithstanding the greatly increased facilities for farming now as compared with 1918.

Yet OPA and other Government agencies continue to boast that they have caused a phenomenal· increase in the production of food.

The bare truth is that if none of the bureaucratic controls of farming had been instituted we would in all likelihood have much more food than now exists. The meat situation should be conclusive evidence of this.

The public is fully justified in the severe criticism it is now leveling against OPA and Congress for the grave meat shortage that prevails. Personally, I would lay the entire blame for the mess the OPA has made of things upon Congress, for, after all, OPA is but a creature of this body.

Mr. BUFFET!'. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? -

Mr. SMITH of Ohio. I yield. Mr. BUFFETT. ·Does not the gentle

man feel that one of the most disappointing and discouraging aspects of this whole problem has been the willingness of OPA to present to Congress and to the people carefully selected statistics ~o prove their point without regard to presenting a cross-section of the general picture that would accurately reflect the problem and the situation that we are up against.

Mr. SMITH of Ohio. The gentleman means synthetic statistics? Yes; that is correct.

Mr. BUFFETT. That is a good characterization.

Mr. SMITH of Ohio. That is correct. The meat situation alone should be a

warning to the country of what may be in store for it in the future. If actual starvation does riot in time intervene it surely will not be the fault of the Federal bureaucracy.

I have heard the statement made several -times in connection with this debate·

6520 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 that the only real way to prevent price inflation is to increase production. Only by offsetting the great increase in currency and bank deposits with increased production is it possible to avert price inflation, so the argument runs.

Standing by itself this is the grossest fallacy. ·The only true preventative of. price inflation is to avoid the creation of fiat currency and bank credit. This isso clearly written into history that it would seem to require no special mentioning ..

We have in the United -States at present well in excess of $100,000,000,000 of fiat currency and bank money, and almost daily we add more such fiat to the existing stock. Here is the real threat of price inflation.

0{ course, we must finance the war, which will compel us to increase still further the volume of fiat and consequently the forces of inflation, also. But this· Congress could, if it would, do something to limit the amount of fiat to be produced in the future and thus correspondingly limit the dangers of price inflation. It could do this by cutting to the bone all really needed Government costs, and eliminating altogether unnecessary ones. The Congress is woefully neglectful of this most important problem. ·

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. SAVAGE].

Mr. SAVAGE. Mr. Chairman, I have seen something that has ·not been discussed yet in the House in connection · with this bill. I was in Europe last month, and I saw what the real effect of price control could be. In England, for instance, where they have a very rigid price and rationing control, they have a small amount of food, but it is well divided. You cannot even stay in the hotel or eat at a restaurant more than 3 days without producing your ration book. They have avoided some of the leaks because they have been more strict in some instances than we have. But over in France you may see what we could have in America if we did not have price control and rationing. They are short of food there, as they are in England, yet there is no price control.

I would like to give you three or four examples of prices. I heard there was inflation in France, and I think many of us have, but it is hard to conceive. It passes over without realizing just what the inflation really is. In the first place, there is very little men's clothing, but I can give you some prices on women's clothing in France. There is one item . of men's clothing that I can give. A wool sweater sells for $90. That was the regular price of a wool sweater in France on May 15. A woman's ordinary blouse runs. from $50 to $70. A woman's ordinary nightgown sells for $86.14. Those are the prices in France. I have some others that I will not bother to quote at this time.

111ere are some fur coats over there but they run into the thousands of dollars. It is difficult for people to believe those prices unless they see them first hand. If we had to fight a war and pay the prices tbat they have in France for materials our debt, instead of being $300,-

000,000,000 before the end of the war.would be $1,000.000,000,000. A :Ford truck, for instance, sells for from $5,000 to $7,-000. That is for an ordinary little Ford truck. Our armed services use thousands of trucks.

Mr. Chairman, I have heard some very wonderful speeches made on the floor by Members who support and give exc.ellent reasons for the existence of OPA, and I want to congratulate the gentlemen for the very fine presentations they have made. Those men and women are the patriots of this war. Many of them who made these fine speeches on the floor at· this time were Members when the b'll · was first enacted into law and every time it has been renewed they have taken the position that they were going to do the thing that was best for the country. However, they were able to sell the idea to the people of their districts and, in my opinion, the people in their districts get along better and have a better time un-~ der OPA, and the whole thing operates more smoothly than in some other districts where certain people are sniping OPA all the t ime, trying to stir up trouble and getting the local people to stir up trouble. It would have been much easier for those patriots to have taken a different position in order to win .political favor. They might have taken the position: "Let us destroy this because it restricts your privileges." But they have done the thing they knew was good for the people and I am proud to be associated with those Members of Congress who havetaken such a fine position when it was so badly needed.

It is absurd to say that the OPA causes shortages, without giving specific examples. Occasionally that will happen, but it very often happens due to the individual that is being controlled. I am convinced that with all the cattle we have in the feeding yards now, they are holding cattle, waiting and hoping to see the OPA Act killed immediately or the term shortened to the point where they can hold· their cattle and sell later at a higher price. If this act is extended for a year more I think they will have to loosen up because they cannot hold their beef for a year waiting for a higher price.

The OPA, as I stated before, does not cause shortages. It did not cause the war. It has been brought into existence to help win the war. Let us take sugar for an example. We have a shortage of sugar, but it was not the OPA that caused the drought in the Caribbean area last year and this year, depriving us of over a million tons of sugar and it may deprive us this year of another million and a quarter tons of sugar. It was not the fault of the OPA that we lost the sugar that we used to get from the Philippine Islands, over a million tons a year that we do not get now. Those are shortages that have to be made up. We have lost some of our beet-sugar production on account of a shortage of labor. Beets require a lot of labor to grow, consequently the farmers with less help have gone into the growing of other commodities that take somewhat less labor. I think we are fortunate that we have been able to supply our home front a's well as we have with the great amount

of sugar that is used in explosives and in alcohol, synthetic rubber, and so forth.

The administrators of this law can change certain regulations without the law being changed. The implication has been given in debate that if we do not change it here we have to go on with every regulation as it is. But the administration has the authority to change the regulations as experience shows they can be ·changed for betterment and they have the authority to amend and improve the regulations, which we know they will do.

They cannot do a perfect job of administration unless they deal with perfect people. If' the 140,0oo·,ooo of the 'Q'nited States were perfect it would be easy to do a perfect job of administration, but there are leaks, there are individuals who will take advantage of every opportunity to make money and so forth and no one can do a perfect job of administration as long as we have so many individuals who can think of so many different angles from which to make money.

Grant it that small concerns have gone out of business. I know of many small businesses that have gone out where the owner went into a war industry or he closed up shop and went to war; so it was not the OPA that threw out all the small businesses.

The gentleman from Indiana brought politics into the picture and said that the Republicans had been trying to throw this out or amend it for a long time. It is not really a political matter. It should not be. I think it is a war program and we should all be supporting it and we should support it wholeheartedly and subsequent to the war, if that is necessary. Let us not kick about it and object, but let us go forward and make it operate. All the people have to cooperate to make it operate efficiently. If pulitics must be brought into it, certainly we can say that the voters had it brought to their attention last fall, and they were not convinced that the Democrats could not administer this law as well as theRepublicans, and they returned those to office who had administered it with confidence and they knew . themselves that this should be continued. I have a great many letters supporting this legislation and asking for its extension and I am surprised to find that most of the letters came from women, women who do the buying, who appreciate what price control has done for the home economy. They want it continued. I congratulate those people throughout the country that have been writing to their Congressman ·and telling them to continue this important Iegislfl,tion.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Massachusetts EMr. MARTIN].

OPA BUNGLING

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, the Committee on Banking and Currency in its report urging the continuance of the OPA, says all criticism can · well be satisfied within the framework of the present laws. This statement clearly establishes the responsibility of all the · confusion, chaos, ~nd

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6521 distress. · If the law is all right as the Democratic-dominated committee de-· clares, then the people have no alterna;_ tive but to place the blame squarely upon those who are administering the k~ .

The committee confirms the allegations that bungling and 'inefficiency have brought the· American people an acute shortage of food and to the brink' of want.

The OPA, with its vast army of employees, easily submits statistics and tables about ceiling prices. The American people are learning you cannot eat·

· either statistics or ceiling prices. These· are poor substitutes for meat and sugar.:

The public relations experts of OPA: have often called our attention to the privations endured by other countries. They have compared the rationed allot-· ments here with some of those of our· allies. Let me point out a fact that the women of America have discovered. In· England the rations are smaller but the people ·get them. Over here we get OPA points, but not necessarily the food~· Paper coupons are not recommended as a diet either for infants or adults. Many· of our people are finding this out, and when our food diet is compared to that· in effect in Canada, there is no occasion to cheer the OPA. ·

If the law is all right, then I have a right to demand that we put into its ad

- ministration men who are practical enough to make it work.

In case there is any doubt about the efficiency of the present administration, let me recite a few well-known facts.

Right from the very beginning this · agency has been run by crack-pot thea'"' rists, and I am not referring to the head man. You. cannot feed people on theories and paper points. Nature-and not political experimenters-produces food. . · The meat shortage has been placed

right on the door step of this agency and. has been called one of the outstandingly disgraceful failures of this war. The· OPA says there is no food shortage; they. say there is only a11 increase in demand .. What a silly and preposterous fraud that statement is. Who cares what it is called? The fact remains that when a housewife goes to a butcher shop to buy meat, there is no meat. The situation is such that instances have been reported of people tipping to get a place in line for the privilege of buying the little meat available. If the OPA public relations prefer, I will say that there is no shortage. There just is not meat for an ..

Wives who must feed their husbands, mothers who must feed their growing children want to know why. They will not be put off by trick arguments. I say that the OPA is responsible for this condition and they cannot dodge it with catchy comebacks. They did it.

Everybody knows by now that the OPA pricing policies on feed and livestock have stopped the flow of beef and hogs · from the feeder lots and pens to the butcher shops.

The OPA says there is plenty of beef on the hoof. It is futile to talk about meat on the hoof. It is meat in the . stomach that counts.

XCI----411

If there is plenty of meat, as Hie OPA: says, where is it? .

It is on the hoof. While families all over the United States are deprived of meat, cattlemen in the West are worried. about an excess of 10,000,000 head on the hoof. These cattle should have been fattened and slaughtered and sent to the butcher shops. The trouble is that the: OPA tried to set aside the laws of nature, the laws of supply and demand, and substitute illusory reform tl_leories.. We needed and still need intelligent price control, but OPA gave us price paralysis. Price does not propagate cattle but cer-, tainly · moves them to market. · But it· isn't meat alone. Take the handling of the blue and · red points. Late last summer and early (all the OPA promised to release the rigors of rationing. I might, in passing, remark that an election was in prospect at that time. · Then the OPA announced that blue and red ·points would be good indefinitely. Many . people saved their · points-=-saved them, in many cases, so. they might buy extra delicacies 3tnd meat. for their' men in the service, when they came home. Suddenly, without any warning, the OPA. announced around Christmas time that these accumulated. points -were to be rescinded. · This bald and shameless reversal in a matter concerning the necessities of life did more to undermine faith in this Gov- · ernment than any other act in recent years.

Governments cannot wantonly play with the lives of citizens. The American people do not live at the mercy of some visionary bureaucrat. They do not qepend for their existence upon his whim or fancy. They have . voluntarily subjected themselves to controls which will, enable the military leaders of this Nation

· to win the war. They will continue to give full support and make every necessary sacrifice to win the. Pacific war, but. they have a right to insist their government gives them a square deal.

I certainly am not opposed to wartime rationing. · Rationing and price con- . trois are necessary in wartime, but to be effective they must be administered with the cooperation of the public. If We continue to allow these crack-pot experimenters · to bungle the job, the whole . purpose of rationing and price control may be defeated in a wave of public in- · -dignation.

For example, houeswives are complaining bitterly all over the country about the sugar shortage. We lack sugar now because last year the OPA blithely permitted the people to use canning sugar for any purpose. Naturally, the people took the sugar. Many of them did not use it for canning. They had no idea they were usin'g up reserves of sugar · that could not be replaced. They had no way of knowing. The OPA did not · tell them. So now the War Food Ad~ ministration is urging everybody to do an extra amount of canning this summer and housewives cannot get the suga.r to ~ do it. : How ·can we expect the people to believe that what the OPA says today will": l5e true tomorrow?

··see how they liave handled red points. They lumped tog.ether butter, condensed milk, oils, fats, and cheese altogether with meat. This is a fine system for those in the OPA who would confuse the public, but where does this leave the housewife? She must struggle in a sea of uncertainty.

Everybody is familiar with the tremendous· confusion under which the rationing of individuals has been conducted. Everybody is familiar with the harassments and the problems of local rationing boards-powerless as they have been to conform with all the red tape and ·the countless changes issued from Washington. Everybody knows what great injustices have been perpetrated by this bungling policy in the cases of the aged, the infirm, the urgently sick, and in the emergencies which will arise in normal life both with children and adults.

Basically the men in the. OPA -seemed to have ·no other idea but to increase their own personal powers regardless of the consequences to the public. They always reach out for more, just as they would have rationed clothing, if Donald Nelson of the WPB had not blocked it by public statement that rationing of clothing was unnecessary.

Yet as they reach out for more and · more power, the controls which they exercise become more and more confused. They issue hundreds and hundreds of lengthy and confused regulations which confound the small businessmen of America. These small businessmen are forced to file inventory reports, and price ·reports, and dozens of other complicated reports. They do not have the staff to handle all this bookkeeping with the result that small business owners devote most of their time to reports and little to their businesses. ·

Price controls are set up in a mamier so badly coordinated that prices within the same industry may be set by different units of OPA, none of which know what the other units are doing. The result is that price ceilings on some products allow a profit for the manufacturer. The price ceilings on others made by this same manufacturer are so low that he cannot afford to produce them. · · The public suffers from this confusion.

Storekeepers serve their customers. If they must devote most of their time to red tape, they cannot run their businesses in the best interests of those customers. Manufacturers make products for the people to use. If the manufacturers cannot afford to make these products, the people cannot get them. ' I have no intention of reciting case

after case after case of mismanagement, bungling, and confusion which have so consistently characterized this agency from the moment it began. I will say this, however, the situation has gone far enough. Congress has pei·mitted this agency a free hand in the adoption of its regulations. The OPA-and not Congress-has been responsible for the details of regulations. We have given it every opportunity to order its affairs and to create ·a stable and sane method of operation which would guarantee to our

'6522 'CONGRESSIONA:L RECORD'-HOUSE JUNE 21 people at least a minimum of the necessities of life. If the agency will not function the right way the people do expect Congress to provide sensible directions. We know our men on the battle fronts have faced far greater privations than we can ever imagine here at home. We are not idly complaining about minor

· discomforts of war. We are not softening on the home front. No sacrifice is too great and every sacrifice will be willingly made, but let us not overlook our responsibilities to coming generations. There are small children in these United States who must grow to manhood and womanhood in health and vigor. It takes food-and nutritious food-for these growing children. It is time that we in this Congress took the proper steps to insure the fact that the children of America-for whom our servicemen now fight-are properly fed.

Mr. BROWN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. STEWART].

Mr. STEWART. Mr. Chairman, first I want to say I believe that price control is necessary, but I think in view of present-day conditions Congress should take the responsibility and see that justice and equity prevail.

I have some first-hand experience which was not taken from statistics. Neither was it acquired from the committee which deals with the meat control in the OPA as to the cattle business.

Last fall when I sold my small calves I kept an average calf out to feed 150 days. I sold them for $42 a head. This calf was put on feed immediately for 150 days. He ate $118 worth of feed; or '18 cents a day. This did not include the labor in the cost of feeding him and the attention he received otherwise. But when he was rounded out I could have sold him at a ceiling price of $144. Taking the $42 I could have sold him for and the $118 feed bill makes $160. Therefore, there was a loss of $16, with added transportation to Oklahoma City stockyards plus the livestock commission merchant's commission for handling. That would have been the loss on feeding out this calf on protein feed.

Take the loss on protein feeds in rouncqng out the best beef and compare it with processed feed that has no ·ceiling wice. You can see why the farmer of America has failed to round out beef for the American table. He cannot stand the loss.

The group that figures ceilings on meat and ceilings on feed should get together.

To add confusion to existing conditions, recently I am told the OPA canceled 26,000 slaughtering permits.

I live in an agricultural county, where cattle go to the market every day by the truckload. During my last week there, there was only one day when there was any meat on any of the meat counters or butcher shops or markets, when we were sending possibly 25 to 50 head to 'the market for every head that we consumed.

Just how long the public will put up with such regulations without open defiance is not known, but there is an end to such abuses. If this had happened tn an industrial plant, there would have been a strike, but the farmer has no way of striking. Usually he has a mortgage

to pay; and if he does not go to market in season, the man who holds the lien forecloses. I am going to support an amendment that will guarantee a profit to the producer. I do not believe Congress should bypass taking the responsibility of guaranteeing a profit to the producer when OPA has miserably failed; yet we cannot let things go wild. We must have price control. But we should sit down here as we would operate our own private business and work out a system whereby we could guarantee the same profit to the producer and the farmer as we guarantee to everyone else. The Government thinks it is good business that the utilities receive a reasonable return ·upon their investment; organized labor sees to it, themselves, that they receive a reasonable return upon their labor. Agriculture is an entirely different problem when it comes to the statisticians and the actuaries in OPA and certain other groups here in Washington.

Too much time is lost by the average person in buying the nece·ssities of life. If OPA would use some of the time it spends piling up rules and regulations to doing a little simplification whereby there could be proper distribution of that which each one of us has coming to us, we would save millions of hours of valuable time which is now spent standing in line only to be disappointed in the end.

A system should be devis.ed whereby every individual receives what he is allotted whether he uses it in his home or in a restaurant, or wherever it may be. It should be regulated in this respect, but as we go down the line, we find they have regulated just such things as apparently suit their fancy.

What we need is to get rid of the ideology that gave birth to OPA-l mean the first head of OPA-:-and get some twofisted businessmen in who have some practical sense who are not hobbled and hog-tied by a bunch of-whatever you call them-a little group of professors from Harvard who tell the heads of the OPA organizations what they have to do. I will not let you name them, since they have so many appellations I cannot keep up with them.

For 78 days I have been absent from Congress. I went home on the 28th of March, during the Easter recess. On the 12th of April my town was blown away by a tornado and I did riot return until last . Sunday; so I am fresh . from the arms of the people. Not only does the busines·sman have a grievance, but every individual you meet on the street and on the roadside has a common complaint. They are all fed up with the cancellation of all the local slaughterers' licenses which compels them to send their cattle to market and pay transportation to market on them and a commission to the livestock merchant, the Government having to pay a subsidy, and then the consumer having to pay transportation back home to get their own meat to eat. Why crowd transportation on our highly congested facilities throughout the Nation?

Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. And getting no meat.

Mr. STEWART. And then gettin__'\ no meat.

A law is no stronger than the police power to enfor.ce it. The OPA should have an organization with the money they spend in each county sufficient to check a slaughtering plant in sh(}rt order without any extra appropriation from Congress. It is simple to the ~verage citizen. But, no, Washington speaks; then you have to go through the State and purify and cleanse some previously bad records which some fellow has made in another State and the entire burden is to put on all the people. Of course, I am going to -vote for the amendments to guarantee a profit to the producers. We are willing to divide our livestock, hogs and cattle, with the rest of the United States of America, but we should be treated right. We want to be brought in the same category of justice that big business and organized labor of America enjoy. We are going to vote for any sensible amendments which are proposed, such as the Thomas amendment which was presented in the Senate. I am for guaranteeing cost of production to the farmers of America, which, in my opinion, will cost less than the subsidy to the packers we now pay.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Oklahoma has expired.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. HoEVENJ.

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. Chairman, full production is the major weapon for controlling inflation. The program of the administration to limit and control production has never worked, and in my judgment will never work. The law of supply and demand cannot be supplapted by the rules and regulations of an arbitrary OPA. If the supply is limited, the demand simply increases and as a result the black market flourishes.

Most everyone agrees that price control is necessary during the war eme,rgency. The intent of the original law was that there might be a fair and equitable distribution of civilian commodities. However, we have all learned to our sorrow that often the regulations under which OPA has been operating are unfair and poorly administered and that a fair distribution of commodities is not always being made.

For instance, it has been well established by testimony before the House Food Investigating Committee that the regulations on meat have not been fairly and equitably -written and also that the enforcement and administration of the regulations have not been equitable or impartial in practical application.

Practically all of the criticism of OPA has been against the administration of its regulations and the failure of those in authority to listen to sound advice and suggestions from consultant groups of producers and processors. People in business throughout the country have cooperated wholeheartedly with OPA. They feel that the fundamental theories upon which the Price Control Act are based are sound and they realize that it is for the best interests of the country that the act be extended until the war emergency ends. They do, however, plead for .the elimination of the aggravating, silly, and stupid things which are done in administering the act. Certainly

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6523

they cannot be criticized for asking for common-sense administration.

Many suggestions for the improvement in the administration of the Price Control Act have been made during the course of this debate. It is hoped that Chester Bowles and his assistants will lend an .attentive ear and that the many abuses pointed out in the administration of the act will be remedied without delay. The people of the country are patriotic and are cooperating in every way to end the war. They will wholeheartedly obey any law which is fairly administered, and this is particularly true as far as the Price Control Act is concerned. They can be led but cannot be driven. If the Price Control Act is to bring about the results which it was intended it should do, it will have to be ad ... ministered in such a way as to gain the confidence and support of the people.

'The criticism of the law which is prevalent throughout the country today is not the fault of the law itself but of the way in which it has been administered.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. LEMKE].

Mr. LEMKE. Mr. Chairman, this is not a partisan issue. It is an American issue. We are dealing here with an octopus whose tentacles reach into the very heart of the people in every part of the Nation. We are dealing with an

- octopus that has no conscience, and whose prey has been millions, with an octopus that has been guilty of every conceivable omission and commission.

Mr. Chairman, I am for the Senate resolution with Barkley and Wherry amendments. If the -Senate resolution is substituted for the House resolution, then the small processor will be able to remain in business under the Barkley amendment, and the farmer will get cost of production under the Wherry amendment. No honest person wants the processors of livestock to do business at less than cost. No honest person wants to eat that which the farmer produces for less than cost.

Few Members of Congress know the hardships through which the farmers have gone. Their sons, and other irreplaceable and essential help have been drafted into the armed forces. Old men and women, as well as children in the teen years, have to work from 14 to 18 hours a da1 to feed our Nation. and our armies. In addition, they help feed the civilians and armies of the United Nations. ·

There is no 48-hour week on the farm. It is a 14- to 18-hour day. Children, who it would be unlawful to permit to work in cities under the child labor laws, are working in the fields to keep the Nation's food supply lines going. This without sufficient farm implements and equip.:. ment, and without sufficient wearing apparel-denied to them, but allotted by the OPA and other alphabetical set-ups to foreign civilians. ·

These old men and women, and these children, have done a remarkable job~ They are entitled to the everlasting gratitude of our Nation. Surely under these conditions, we, who know the facts, should be willing from 'now on to give

them the Wherry amendment-cost of production.

How much longer will the farmer be discriminated against? Let us discuss the much misrepresented Senator Wherry amendment to the OPA. This amendment in language is similar to Senator BARKLEY's amendment. The Barkley amendment provides a profit for the processing industry. The Wherry amendment gives to the farmer that which the Barkley amendment gives to the processor.

Just why we should be so forgetful of the farmer and so solicitous of the processor I cannot understand. I am for both amendments, together they do justice to the processor and· the producer. The Wherry amendment reads:

It shall be unlawful to establish or maintain against the producers of any livestock, grain, or any other agricultural commodity a maximum price for such commodity which does not equal all cost and expenses (including all overhead expenses, a return on capital, and an allowance for the labor of the producer and his family) incurred in the production of such commodity, plus a re:rsonable profit thereon. .

The Barkley amendment reads: Provided further, That on and after the

day of the enactment o( this proviso, no maximum prices shall be established or maintained on products resulting from the processing of cattle and calves, lambs and sheep, and hogs, the processing of each species being. separately considered, which, taken together, do not allow for a reasonable margin of profit to the . processing industry as a group on each such species.

While nothing has been said against the Barkley amendment, a howl has gone up that the Wherry amendment is unworkable. If that is true, ' then the Barkley amendment is also unworkable. The statements made that under the Wherry amendment you would have to find the cost of production of every individual farm and every farm product are inaccurate and false. The amendment says "of such commodity."

A commodity means not individual units of a product, such as cattle, sheep, hogs, apples, or grain. It means these individual items taken together as a whole. All the apples together are a commodity. All the cattle taken together are a commodity. All the hogs taken together are a commodity, and so forth.

Let us consider the cost of production of beef. Under the Wherry amendment the farmer would get for choice and prime finished beef steers $22.61 per hundred pounds, for veal calves $19.20, for lambs $22, hogs $22.25, milk $5, and sq forth. There is nothing confusing about this. That does not mean a different price for individual farms or individual steers. It means cost plus a reasonable profit on cattle as a whole. A choice steer is a choice steer in Texas, North Dakota, or Ohio. The price is the same, plus freight differentials.

The same is true of processors under the Barkley amendment. But no one contends under that amendment that you would have to make a different price for every processor. Therefore, only those who are misinformed will contend

that it is necessary under the Wherry amendment.

The Wherry amendment does not affect at all products that are now selling for cost of production. It affects only those that fall below. Why not meet the issue honestly and say that you are against the farmer getting what it costs him to feed you? Then add that, for some strange reason, you are trying to wreck the Nation's food supply and bring about chaos.

Ninety percent of the farmers of this Nation want the Wherry amendment. While the heads of two farm organizations are opposed to the Wherry amendment, they do not necessarily represent the membership of their organizations. That is their personal opposition. On the other hand, the heads of other farm organizations are for the amendment.

A few of these are the Ohio Marketing Quota Protest Association with some 20,000 members, the Farmers Guild with membership in a number of States, the United Farmers of Illinois, and the United Dairymen.

It is equally untrue to say that the heads of all labor organizations are against this amendment. The United Railway · Brotherhood's paper Labor says:

The Shipstead-Wherry proposal, as has been stated, gives farmers something politicians have long been promising but never delivered.

The United Mine Workers, District No. 50, have gone on record favoring cost of production for the farmer.

Let us keep the record straight. Honest ana intelligent laboring men and women do not wish to consume the farmer's products for less than it cost him to produce. Honest and intelligent business and professional men and women do not wish to have the farmer feed them for less than cost.

The Senate resolution, if it is substituted for the House resolution, will S'ave the OPA from many headaches. It will again restore to the OPA confidence and respectability.

We are talking today about a system of government-government by bureaucracy. I am not interested in individuals. I shall not criticize persons, but institutions. Scores of bureaucratic institutions that have been brought into existence_in the name of war, but that do not assist in the war effort, but hinder it. Government by bureaucracy must be abolished if our Republic is to survive.

Today the question is: Should the OPA be continued without change? My answer is that it never ·should have been

. created. It is an un-American, illegitimate child. It was born of foreign parentage. It was adopted by an official clique here in Washington that thinks more of foreign institutions than of our own. It is only one of scores of alphabetical set-ups of foreign origin. It is incompatible with our American way of life.

Let us become realistic and . deal with the situation as we find it. Of course, we should never have created this octopusthe OPA-that is sucking the lifeblood

/

6524 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 out of our liberty. In place of it, Congress should have fixed a ceiling and a fioor on all commodities on the day that war was declared. It should then have appointed a committee to make adjustments where it was necessary. But since Congress failed to do that, let us now pass the Senate resolution. Let us protect the Nation's food supply that has been all but wrecked by the OPA and other alphabetical set-ups.

Let us stop the growth of this octopus. The first appropriation in 1942 for the OPA was four and a half million dollars. By May 1944 there were 63,873 employees on the OPA pay roll. In that year it spent $171,500,000. It is now asking $192,000,000 for 1945. It has used some of these funds illegally.

It has printed self-serving books and pamphlets and distributed them to Members of Congress to influence their vote. It has distributed them to the people of this Nation in order to fool them. I challenge the accuracy of a great majority of the statements made in those books and pamphlets. It is a deliberate attempt to fool the people and make them believe that the OPA is not only necessary but essential.

I feel that Congress should put a stop to this false propaganda and make it a felony for any bureau to put · out selfserving, false statements with the taxpayers' money. That practice has become altogether too prevalent not only · in the Federal Government but · in State governments. It is dishonest and inconsistent with our system of government. Its object is to perpetuate unworthy omcials in ofiice.

The OPA got off on the wrong foot to start with. Its first Administrator lost his head. Like all bureaucrats, he started out by blufiing and blustering. He threatened to "crack dQwn" on the people-to get tough. "When there are no tigers in the mountains, even monkeys proclaim themselves kings"-Confucius. This OPA Administrator had his picture t~ken riding through Washington . on a bicycle with a lady sitting on the handle-

. bars. The people smiled in astonishment at such childlike pranks.

The object was to make the public believe that the Administrator of the OPA was conserving gasoline and manpowerif not lady power. The truth is, that the OPA has not conserved, and is not conserving, either manpower or gasoline. It has, and is, wasting both. The trouble with the OPA is that it is top-heavy with book knowledge-crammed full of inexperienced, book-wise New York youngsters-who do not know whether they are coming or going.

It has spent millions of dollars of the taxpayers' money without any real accomplishments. It employs hundreds of supersnoopers chasing around the country spying on and interfering with the people who transact the Nation's business, and who do the Nation's work. It insults the small businessman and challenges the farmer and the workingman's integrity. It adds confusion upon confusion, issues edict after edict, each one contradicting the . other. ·

It takes a Philadelphia lawyer to figure out what it is all about. It may truly be said that the right hand of the OPA

never knows what the left hand is doing. The people are bewildered and angered.

Any businessman can tell you that, at least, one-fifth of his time is wasted in trying to keep up with the red tape and confusion of the OPA. Any farmer can tell you that a great deal of his time is wasted in trying to comply with the contradictory rules and regulations of the OPA. He can tell you he has made countless trips, burned up gas, and wore out his old tires trying to get a new inner tube or other necessary farm equipment.

Go into any-store and purchase a few cents' worth of goods and you will stand in a line and wait while the seller and the purchaser count points-wasted manpower-losing tempers and wrecking nerves. Then I think of the thousands of employees of the OPA wasting not only their own time but our time. Some of these pencil pushers lie awake nights figuring out new rules and regulationsmore red tape and confusion. · Others are just plain loafers-with a pull-who do not earn their salt. About a year ago a casual walk through the Federal omce Building No. 1, a few blocks from the Nation's Capital, would have confirmed tliis statement. There

. you would have observed women knitting and making dresses-men and women gathered in groups playing games and discussing the topics of the day while others were engaged in an attempt to write poetry. Then think of the thousands of dollars of paper and material wa..sted in printing and manufacturing and distributing regulations and points. I repeat the OPA has not aided the war effort, but, has hampered it. It_ has wasted manpower, interfered with pro-duction, and caused disunity. -· The OPA has not decreased the cost of living but· increased it. It has muddled production and caused shortages. It has been guilty of gross discrimination in ceiling prices. It sets a ceiling price on a loaf of bread in one city and a lower ceiling price on the same loaf in an adjoinipg city. It has a ceiling price on eggs in one locality and a lower ceiling price in another locality. In many cases . it fixed the ceiling price on fruit and vegetables below the cost of harvesting so th-at the producer was ·compelled to plow under, or permit to rot, millions of dollars' worth of fruit and vegetables. It has created shortages and boosted prices.

In the fall of 1942 the farmers in ·North Dakota sold their potatoes for $1 per hundred pounds. Less ·than 6 months later potatoes that were unfit for human consumption cost $10 a hun· dred in Washington. Who got the other '$9? Surely not the farmer, nor the consumer who paid the $10. Is it possible . that there was a leak by someone in the OPA to the potato brokers? Later it developed that there never was a shortage of potatoes. Millions of bushels were later dumped into gutters and permitted to rot.

When this matter was brought to the attention of the OPA they informed us that the ceiling prices on potatoes in Washington was $3.50 a hundred, but t:tiey immediately qualified that statement and said that there was no ceiling price at all on Maryland, Pennsylvania, or Virginia potatoes. Is it possible that

.the OPA ofiicials did -not know that under these conditions all potatoes in the Nation would overnight become citizens of these three States?

Again, in the fall of 1943, the farmers in my State were urged to harvest their onions in August and September. They were threatened by the OPA with lower prices if they did not comply. Of course, the OPA did not know that these onions should have been harvested in late October. For these onions the farmer received about $1.70 a hundred pounds. Then a few months later there were .no onions in many of the Eastern States. In some markets they sold as high as $15 a hundred. The consumer paid $15; the farmer got $1.70. Who, ·we repeat, got the other $13.30?

Then the OPA began to muddle the hog market. It plastered its points and ceilings all over pork. But it forgot to fix a floor. The farmer and consumer again took the rap. The farmer was 'docked for overweight and for underweight. He received from 7 to 13¥2 cents a pound. In many cases he was not able to sell his h(>gs at any price.

He was compelled to feed these hogs long after they should have been slaughtered. Every pound of feed they consumed after they were ready for market ·was wasted. This at a time when the Eastern States were in great want of feed. The farmer, of course, cannot' be blamed when now there is a pork shortage. He could not be expected to continue to produce pork at a loss.

Then, in the spring and summer of 1944, we had an egg crisis. The farmer in the midwestern States received as low as 14 cents a dozen, while in WashiP~ton the ceilin·g was still 50 cents a dozen. ·where was the OPA? A ceiling of 50 cents a dozen in one place, a market of 14 cents a dozen in another place.

Another example is the berry and fruit industry. In 1943 the OPA fixed a ceil·ing of 18 cents a quart on raspberries. It cost the growers about 22 cents to get _them picked and crated. The result was that they plowed them under. Then, after they were destroyed, there was a shortage. The ceiling went up and you could not buy raspberries for any price.

We come now to the sugar headache. A few years ago, under the Sugar Act, our sugar producers were limited to 27 ,percent of the domestic consumption. The other 73 percent was given to foreign producers. ~hat was part of the _"good neighbor" scheme, and of "the abundant life by scarcity." . Last year the OPA, and other alphabetical set-ups, tried to get the Cuban ·producers to raise sugar for us below cost .of production. They offered the Cubans less than 3 cents a pound. The Cubans refused to produce sugar for us at a loss, and what sugar they had they sold to other nations. The American housewives aKd the American manufacturers are now left to hold the bag because of this bureaucratic blundering. The OPA now :tells you that it is short of sugar, but it is too dishonest to tell you why. · The beef shortage has Leen ignorantly or deliberately created by the OPA. There are more beef cattle in the country than ever before. Why is there a shortage? Here again, as with the hog

1945 CONGRESSION-AL RECORD--HOUSE 6525

situation over a year ago, the OPA is preventing the slaughtering of cattle. It is attempting to destroy the No. 2 slaughterers so that the big packers may have a complete monopoly.

It has a $1-a-year man in the meat di· vision-a big packer. This $1-a-year man, by· allotment, prevents the small processor from s~aughtering cattle, but for the big packers the sky is the limit. By this method he has already put out of business 90 p~rcent of the small processors-enough said.

The OPA has set a ceiling of 18 cents a pound on prime beef. Under the present prices of corn · and other feed, a feeder loses $29 on every 800-pound steer that he buys and feeds until it weighs 1,200. Tht result is that most of the cattle are slaughtered at 800 pounds in place of 1,200 to 1,400 pounds. At 800 pounds a steer produces only 4.5 percent edible meat. At 1,200 to 1,400 pounds that same steer dresses or produces 60 percent edible ·meat. So here is a loss not only of 600 pounds in live weight, but 15 percent wore edible ·meat.

In Dayton, Ohio, where there were 20 No. 2 slaughterers, only two survived. Every Congressman knows that that is equally true in the cities and fowns . of his own State. Now that the OPA has wrecked the beef niarket, the same as the

· 'hog market, it is going· to put a ceiling and rationing on chickens . and eggs. First, it compels the people to eat the chicken ·with the egg, and after the chicken is gone it raises the price and rations it.

How much longer will Congress permit this un-American institution to destroy the initiative-the will to do-that has mE. de us the most powerful ·nation on earth. The time for action is here. Let us at least get a toehold by substituting the Senate resolution for the House res-olution. ·

What is true of food products is true <>f many other products. President Philip Murray of the CIO recently shocked the committee by showing that, i.mder the OPA regulations, profits were ranging as high as 5,404 percent. He set the items forth iil detail on which extortion profiteering prices were charged to the consumer. The time · has arrived when Congress must not permit the governmental agencies to use the taxpayers' money in preparing false propaganda with which to deceive not only Congress but the people of the Nation.

My colleague· the gentleman from California LMr. OuTLAND] was so carried away with this false propaganda that the other night he stated over the radio that there was little if any black marketing in California. To set the gentleman right, let me quote here briefly from a reprint from the California Independent:

"We have to eat out two or three times a week if we are to get meat" is beard on every hand. The ridiculous part of it is that while you can't get meat to feed your family at home, you can get all you wish by going to any of a dozen different restaurants. The 11

·meat points a week allowed each person would not pay for the single steak you buy in many restaurants.

Two-thirds or more of the butchers cannot get meat to supply the people 'who h.ave points. But a few markets seem to have all

the meat they can sell. In some localities evidence has been shown that 90 percent of all meat goes through the black market.

Butchers tell us they can only get meat and poultry pro'liding they pay black-market prices. Now eggs are hard to find. You can get cigarettes if you know the right people and pay 40 perc.ent to 100 percent extra. for them. Gasoline stamps can be had in any quantity at 20 cents a stamp.

We are told by the OPA that prices have been held down much better than they were during and after World War ·I. That 'is true as far as published prices are concerned, but who pays published prices today?

These are · just a few of the hundreds of blunders of the OPA. Just a few of the unnecessary hardships placed upon us. Just a few examples of the confusion caused by the OPA. It should be abolished, and its worth-while functions transferred to the Department of Agriculture and the WPB, and the enforcement thereof to the Department of Justice where it belongs.

The people a·re getting tired of being bossed and bulldozed by the little autocrats in the various set-ups throughout the Nation. Many of these act not only without authority of law, but, in violation of the law and the Co-nstitution. Unfortunately, the OPA refused to trust the people-to have confidence. in them. In turn, the people have not only lost confidence but also respect for the OPA and its bureaucrats. Thtl result has been black markets ·_ galore.

We all know that in time of war the military arm must have full and complete control of military operations, but, a declaration of war does not abolish Congrest-nor abrogate the Nation's laws. Congress should still shape the policies that govern the civilian population. The people demand that Congress accept its responsibilities-that it once more write the Nation's laws.

I repeat that in place of creating the OPA, Congress should have, on th~ day that it declared war, fixed a floor and a ceiling price on all commercial commodities. Then, it should have appointed a committee to make adjustments where adjustments were necessary. Congress can and should still do this.

It is not necessary to further surrender our intellect in order to win the war with Japan. It is not necessary to become regimented serfs in order to win. We must forever be on our guard. The greed for power-bureaucracy-is more dangerous than the greed for money. ·we must never surrender the right to think out loud. In spite of the fact that all of our avenues of publicity are now more or lese under the control of official Washington, we must insist upon freedom of speech and press-freedom of conscience. We must give constructive criticism whenever and wherever it

.is needed. There has been too much concentra ..

tion of power in Washington. The bureaucrats not only wish to control the Nation's industrial activities, but insist upon doing the thinking for all of . us. Many of these are incompetent to do their own thinking, let alone the Nation's. Congress must stop this non· sense-:-it is dangerous.

Congress has given too many blank Checks to the bureaucracY:· The chick•.

ens of this legislation . have now come home to roost. The one-man made laws made under. these blanlt -checks by ad .. ministrative edicts far exceed the number enacted by Congress for the same period. .~he time has arrived for this .congress to abolish this unconstitutional method) of gove:rnment. ••

This is not a partisan issue. It is an American issue. We are dealing here with an octopus whose ·tentacles have reached into the very heart of our people in. every part ,of the Nation. We are dealing with an octopus that has no con-· science, and whose prey have been millions-with an octopus that has been guilty of every conceivable omission and commission. . .

We have now witnessed 3 years of law defiance by the OPA. Congress now knows that the trouble in the OPA is the ·personnel. We know that no change in the law can overcome deliberate insubordination and law violation unless there is a change in th~ personnel.

N<tw that the question of continuing the ·oPA is up, Members of Congress who have made complaints on behalf of their constituents are suddenly called up and told that a ruling had been or would be made to satisfy these constituents. If that is not the cheapest kind of bribery to get votes to pass the resolutions, then I do not know the meaning .of bribery.

Even Chester Bowles wrote us a letter enclosing a copy of a speech he mad.e. I want to be fair to Chester Bowles, but I am informed that he is just a puppet in the OPA, that he himself is being manipulated by a little clique in the OPA-the same clique that finally railroaded Prentiss Brown. out of -that organization. I am informed that this same clique has ·the skids ready for Chester Bowles if he becomes too independent. There is only ·one solution for Chester, and that is to clean house and let the world know that the abuses o! the past have ended and that they will not be revived.

GRANITE CITY, ILL., June 16, 1945. Ron. WILLIAM LEMKE, ·

House Office Building, Washington, D. C .: Please accept this wire in support of the

Senate bill with the Wherry amendment. -Without a profit to farmers our grocery shelves and meat counters cannot be supplied. Our Nation cannot remain prosper• ous without a prosperous agriculture .

}.-1:ICHEL BROS. GROCERY, ALBERT MICHEL.

GRANITE CITY, ILL., June 16, 1945, Hon. WILLIAM LEMKE,

House Office Building, Washington, D. f?.: Hon. CoNGRESSJVrAN LEr,1KE, I have read in

the papers where Ed O'Neal, president of the Farm Bureau, and Albert Goss, master o! the Grange, are opposing the Wherry amen~ment which gives the farmer cost for thelr products. As a member in good standing of the Farm Bureau for the past· 20 years, I can say that we as farmers and members of the Farm Bureau and Grange do want a b3ttzr ·price for our products so as to cover our present costs .. We cannot pay 1g.15 expens~3 and taxes with 1909-14 income and rema1n in business. Your support of this Senate bill with the Wherry amendment will be appreciated by myself and my neighbors who will produce if they can be assured of a profit.

Yours sincerely, EDWARD T. WEIN.

RuRAL RoUTE No. l,

6526 . -· CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOlJSE JUNE 21

COLLINSVILLE, ILL., June 16, 1945, Congressman WILLIAM LEMKE,

House Office Building, Washington, D . C.: The farmers desire fair and equitable re•

turn for their products, labor, and invest• ment. Time will come when :farm account books shall tell the truth. Crop reduction and restrictions of the AAA have augmented and supplemented the destructive forces of drought. Let's get away from this economic fallacy. The interest on our three hundred billion will have to be paid. This cannot be done unless the basic industry, agriculture, is prosperous. Already twenty-two billion of new currency has been printed, and deflation and destructive forces will bring. about another collapse. The commonly known "cost of production" bill is up for consideration in the House of Representatives which will provide a permanent farm inc_ome for future and will taper off inflation. A supplement bill known as Wherry-Shipstead-amendment has passed in Senate and your support on this vital measure we ask. I am secretary of farm cooperative of 3,200 members in 10 counties of southern Illinois, and again ask for your cooperation. You know above bill was passed by both Houses in 1928. Twice the judgment of so many men surely must be sound.

HARRY KLEINERT. ST. JACOB, ILL.

SHELBY, OHIO, June 13, 1945. To the Honorable Members of Congress,

Washington, D. C.: We have within the past week observed

With much concern the -progress of legislation now pending before the Congress of the United States pertaining to the continuance of the OPA for another year, and are vitally interested in the final analysis of the same.

It is our opinion that the Barkley and Wherry amendments as applied to this legislation in the Senate are very practicable and beneficial to not only the farmer and pro:. ducer, but to the entire population of our entire Nation for the reason it will have a tendency to eventually create a more stable .and equitable supply of vitally needed food; also to have a tendency to eliminate the black market.

We have been informed over the radio and Associated Press that Mr. O'Neal, representing the Farm Bureau, and Mr. Goss, representing the National Grange, have made the joint statement that the legislation as passed by the Senate with the above amendments would be impracticable and would ha:ve a tendency to hinder and disrupt the progress of the OPA.

We sincerely and earnestly disapprove and disagree with this statement. It is our sincere opinion that these men do not speak for the majority of their membership. ·

In our daily contact and association with our membership locally we can very conscientiously say that it ... is the unanimous opinion of every member, as well as every ,;;ood, honest, American farmer, that this legislation as recently passed by the Senate with above-referred-to amendments should be earnestly and conscientiously considered and p~ssed by the Congress of the United States.

CHAS G. WALKER, ll1aster, Olivesburg Grange No. 2461 (Mem

bers 67). SAM BERTSCH,

1/Iaster, Roseland Grange 2668 (Members 278).

Mr. 'WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. BRUMBAUGH].

Mr. BRUMBAUGH. Mr. Chairman, serious consideration should be given to the recommendation of the House Banking and Currency Committee that in extending the Price Control Act for the period· of 1 year, the administration of the law should be made more flexible bY.

OPA officials so that manufacturers may be_ permitted to sell their products at a price above the cost of production and administrative expenses thus assuring a reasonable profit so essential to the preservation of American business and -in-dustry. . _

At the present time there are thousands of small business concerns engaged in production of consumer goods. These firms have no war contracts and must depend wholly on the civilian market for

. disposal of their commodities. As a result of being forced to operate at a loss these firms are traveling down the road to certain ruin and bankruptcy. This appalling situation principally affects the smaller industries which are recognized as the lifeblood of American business life.

Many of the larger industries are enjoying war contracts and at the same time are manufacturing their products for civilian consumption. It was admitted .during the hearings on the extension ·of the OPA that the profits on war contracts were used as a cushion in absorbing the losses on items channeled to the civilian market. . · You will recall the testimony of Mr. Eric Johnston, president of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States on this particular point. Mr. Johnston is revealed as being president of four industries engaged in the manufacture of clay products. He stated that his firms suffered a loss of $2.50 per thousand on building bricks because of the prevailing price schedules -on that particular item. However, his firms were able to show an over-all profit due to the fact that a percentage of their business represented war contracts and to use a trite expression they :'robbed Peter to pay Paul." Without the war contracts it is evident that these firms could not continue operation. It is not difficult in the ·light of Mr. Johnston's testimony to realize the serious plight of smaller firms that are without the benefit of profit income from war contracts.

This week I had a forcible example of the distress faced by small businessmen in my congressioncJ district when a small manufacturer visited my office seeking relief from a situation that has caused him to operate at a loss 'of $130,000 the past 11 months. On March 1 this firm was granted permission for an 11-percent increase in the sale price of their product only to find that its competitor with war contracts elected to sell his products at the previous price by using the profits from war contracts to absorb the difference and informing purchasers that he was a generous soul and passing on his earnings to the benefit of the buying public. .

My constituent is faced with bankruptcy unless he can secure price relief -and operate his business at a profit. He is dependent at this moment upon approval of an ·application for an RFC loan which naturally will not be granted to a firm whose losses totaled $130,000 the past 11 months.

Some industries are reported to be manufacturing items at a distinct loss and using the profit from other com-' modities t_o offset the loss. l'his pra~t~~

is not a healthy index of. business conditions and is certain to prove disastrous to the economy of business arid industry. It · is a poiicy that cannot be followed by small businessmen thousands of whom ·manufacture only one item and for whom it is sounding the death knell. We are going to face insurmountable obstacles to an orderly reconversion of industry unless OPA officials move promptly to assure business and industry of a legitimate profit because if such action is not promptly t:1ken I fear to contemplate the disastrous results that are bound to follow and which are certain to prove the ruination of small business enterprises.

Another compelling thought that confronts us in considering extension of the OPA law is-the realization of the imperative need for immediate and practical relief as a result of the acute meat shortage. ·

I am unable to agree with the rosy predictions voiced concerning the beneficial results that are expected to flow from thE! OPA Control Order No. 1 on the subject of meat. I am firmly of the opinion that this directive penalizes the farmers and small slaughterers and _defeats its intended purpose to increase the supply of meat products.

For example, in my congressional district where there are approximately 300,000 people we have a fine farming area and many modern farms that are models of efficiency and correct management. In addition my district is composed of diversified industries employing thousands of workmen who perform manual tasks that exact the ultimate in strength and endurance.

There are no federally inspected meat plants in my congressional district and a farmer in order to slaughter meat must secure a license and-unless he slaughtered for sale last year and took red points for the meat he is restricted to slaughtering only 400 pounds of meat this year-, an amount that does not meet the annual requirements of the average farm family.

The local packers are reduced to 75 percent of the amount they slaughtered in 1944 and for which they received red points. Thus we have the spectacle of meat on the hoof but no available market for its disposal because the slaughterers are restricted by quota from purchasing it.

This condition could be corrected by placing Federal inspectors in our local meat plants and thus permit the purchase of meat that is available but cannot be purchased for slaughter under the present OPA restrictions.

The irony of the situation lies in the fact that federally inspected meat must be shipped into my district thus depriv·ing other sections of the country of a larger quota if we were enabled to correct conditions and slaughter meat that is available in our own backyard.

How long OP A officials will pursue this senseless policy is hard to estimate but I am hopeful that the fallacy of the present policy will be forcibly brought to mind during the discussion of this bill and that prompt action will be taken to provide a sane and sensible solution to the meat problem of the Nation which has become a national disgrace.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6527

Mr. GAMBLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. GoonWIN].

Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Chairman, from letters which are coming to my desk in every mail, editorials in the independent newspapers in my district, and from many conversations with constituents when I have recently been back home, I am convinced that one theme is uppermost in the thinking of the people today, and that is dissatisfact:on with the operation of OPA.

I could fill many pages of the CoNGRESSIONAL REcORD with letters from responsible and patriotic citizens giving eloquent expression to the contempt in which the current administration of price control is held. When the operation of a law has proved to be so unpopular with the most sensible and patriotic elements of every community, then certainly something if wrong. My people cannot get enough meat, eggs, sugar, and some other food products to satisfy the minimum requirements of health. ·They · believe the present food shortage might have been avoided if OPA had exercised ordinary judgment and common sense in the administration of the act.

I am repeatedly asked "What are you going to do about it?" This is a clear indication that my constitutents, either justifiably or otherwise, feel that Congress is responsible for the continued nlistakes of OPA. I am satisfied that unless Congress is willing to be held responsible by an outraged· and rebellious constituency, Congress must act and act now and act vigorously.

I have deliberated long and earnestly on my duty to my people. I believe some neasure of price control is necessary, but I am also convinced that the administration of price control has been most atrociously handled.

There are two things I can do: I can keep on bringing to the attention of OPA by letter or personal contact with officials, specific cases of injustice, unfair_ness, or otherwise which affect my constituents. There is one other thing "I can do about it" and that is to vote today for amendments which I believe are in the interests of an improved administration of this law.

I will vote for an amendment to take away from OPA all control over food and place it in the Department of Agriculture which is shortly to be presided over by the distinguished gentleman from New Mexico [Mr. ANDERSON], whose personal familiarity with all phases of the food situation, especially production and distribution, will certainly be a refreshing and encouraging variation from the distressing lack of expert knowledge thus far evidenced by OPA officials on the subject. If Congress will do no more than to authorize and empower at this time, a single food administrator, I am sure this action would be hailed with delight and encouragement by a harassed and confused public.

I will vote for an amendment to extend the law for 6 months. Within that period OPA will have an opportunity to demonstrate whether it will seriously attempt to put into efiect· policies calculated to

increase production, improve distribution, and put in force a more intelligent system of point allocation.

I will vote for an amendment 'which will make it plain by declaration that Congress never intended that OPA should have the power to fix profits as well as prices. One of the many tragic consequences of the bungled administration of price control is the long list of firms and individuals forced out of business because OPA decreed that it was all right to expect businessmen and farmers to operate at a loss.

Congress being responsible for passing the price-control law, has a responsibility to demand that the act be efficiently administered. Up to now administration has been anything but efficient. It has been disastrous to the businessman, to the farmer, and to the consumer; it has caused confusion and chaos for everybody. It has brought about a food shortage which is rapidly bringing our people to actual want.

Contempt for one law tends to breed contempt for all law. Unless OPA can so act in the early future that confidence in price-control procedure and practice may be restored, then something will be destroyed in the · spirit of the people which will be increasingly essential to American living in the critical years ahead.

Mr. GAMBLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. HAND].

Mr. HAND. Mr. Chairman, the pre .. vention of serious inflation is necessary for the welfare of all classes in this country. The laboring man, with his wages frozen, the office worker, and those on fixed incomes are united in their need to prevent unreasonable price advances. I shall, therefore, vote for a 1-year extension of price control, with the hope that the time is near when this artificial and extra-legal act can be repealed.

This is not to say that I approve of the administration of this agency. Too many serious mistakes are being made, and those mistakes are imposing unnecessary hardships on the American people. The agency has lost sight of some of the fundamental purposes of the act of Congress under which it operates.

An examination of the act reveals that Congress sought to prevent abnormal increases in prices, not any increase; "to prevent hardships to persons engaged in business,''; not to ruin business; and "to assist-adequate production-,'' not to stifle it.

It is abundantly evident that the intent of the law has not been obeyed.

In section 2 (a) of the original act, it is provided that the Administrator shali establish such maximum prices as will be "generally fair and equitable." To this we should add a guaranty of fair and reasonable profits. Production and distribution must be encouraged, if Americans are to be fed and clothed.

I select just a few of many cases in my district, evidencing the ruinous effect of the present Administration:

First. A dairy )obber in Atlantic City buys butter free on board that city at 44% cents per pound. Its sales ceiling is 45¥2 cents. J;ts gross proftt is three-quarters

cent per pound. Is it remarkable that there is no butter?

Second. Strawberry growers in New Jersey were producing this season at an estimated cost of $10.94 per crate plus. At a ceiling pr.ice of $7.80 per crate, are you surprised that strawberries are not being grown?

Third. An owner of real estate, facing rising costs and rising taxes, ·is held to a rental of $21 per month. Daes OPA re

·ueve him? He is summoned to explain why he does not make elaborate repairs.

Fourth. A baker is unable to get a fraction of his needs because his predecessor in business producing a third as much, did not need it.

Fifth. The Atlantic City Restaurant Association, and other restaurants in South Jersey, preparing to feed hundreds of thousands of summer residents, are hampered by price squeezes and cut allotments.

Manifestly, OPA has a difficult job. Manifestly they have not been equal to it.

Amendments will be offered, some of which should greatly improve this black picture. I call on the majority party to help pass them. If they are not passed, let the blame for our troubles fall where it belongs.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to extend my own remarks at this point in the RECORD.

The CHAffiMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection. EXPLANATION OF COLLOQUY DURING SPEECH OF

THE GENTLEMAN -FROM SOUTH CAROLINA (MR.

RILEY j CONCERNING BUSINESSES CLOSING BE• CAUSE PRICES TOO LOW

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Chairman, in the colloquy with the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KEEFE] in the time of the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. RILEY] the inference in my statement was to the efiect that I did not know of any businesses closing because of OP A or WPB order and regulations. That was not exactly what I bad in mind. The subject being discussed was profits to business, and I had in mind that no OPA or WPB orders had closed any businesses because the businesses were being prohibited from making sufficient profits by reason of such orders.

Certainly many businesses, especially slaughterers, have closed because of the meat situation during this war, and it cannot be denied that OPA orders and regulations along with WFA orders have contributed to their closing. However, they we.re not closed because they did not have a sufficient maximum price on their products.

Most businesses have closed during this war for the following reasons:

First. ·Because the owner or operator has gone to war. About 13,000,000 men have entered the armed services, and necessarily many of them closed their businesses.

Second. Many owners and operators closed places of business in order to accept high-paid jobs in war and other defense plants.

Third. Many businesses were closed · because they were engaged in wholly

6528 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 nonessential busirless and it was impossible to get the materials and employees to operate them. These included businesses dependent upon motor-vehicle transportation and they could get neither the tires nor the gasoline to

_ operate such wholly unnecessary and nonessential businesses.

Fourth. Some have gone into bankruptcy. The number of such failures, however, for the year 1944 at an all-time low was only 1,224, which shows that very few closed because of anything connected with a failure to get a sufficient profit.

Oftentimes in debate in view of limited time we do not elaborate on our answers sufficiently to make clear what we have in mind.

This is what occurred in this colloquy. I was presuming that the question of profits for business was the subject and I failed to state specifically that my reference to closing businessses because of Government agency orders related to profits only.

The gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KEEFE] did not understand my statement as I intended it, therefore I cannot change ,my remarks without causing his remarks to appear unresponsive and different from what he intended which would ·be unfair to him.

Therefore I have used this method of stating and making plain what I really meant.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. RAMEY]. -

Mr. RAMEY. Mr. Chairman, the peo:. ple of these United States should be respected, .not inspected. I want to be as dispassionate as possible. Let us have things confirmed by the facts. A great many in the OPA are doing good work and many of the best workers are the volunteers. Approximately 15,000 veterans returning to our district are· going to be assisted by voluntary workers. Voluntary workers for soldiers' rationing will be recruited by the Lucas County Council of American Legion auxiliaries. Chair~ man of the project is Mrs. Helen R. McNeil, council _president. ·

A great many in the district OPA should be commended. · However, certain remarks that have been made in this debate are indeed disheartening. I do not like the words "for the future." "We made blunders in the OPA and we intend to continue, but we will continue to do so.'-' .

Mr. Chairman, can you not say we have made mistakes and that we will replace competent men in place of those who blunder? Let us replace the incompetent folks who have blundered with the peo~ pie's money and who stabbed every boy at the fighting front in the back to get out of there and we will put honest men in the places of those who have blundered and insulted the people, the fathers, mothers, and veterans, again and again.

Mr. Chairman, this· law is all right. I regret that the gentleman from Wash: ington made two statements today. He used the word "sniper." The constructive criticism of men trying to correct wrongs is not sniping. I regret another statement he made. He .stated that we

· have the OPA and the people at the last election said it was all right. During the

. last election you will remember they released rationing. If you should buy votes with your own money you would go to the penitentiary, as you should, but, by this act when you buy the votes of the American people by betraying them it is worse.

How much worse it is to buy votes with the taxpayers' money than it would be to buy them out of your own pocket. When our conquering heroes come home and the weakling, Mr. Biddle, is thrown out· of the Attorney General's office and a new Attorney General is appointed, they are going to demand that each one of ' these folks who had a part in that vote-buying shall be headed toward Leavenworth and Atlanta where they belong. Yes; the law is an ·right. But it is not sniping when you criticize and condemn the corruption that bought your last election. Is it sniping to call attention to gross betrayal? To the good men in the OPA I have nothing but the greatest of praise, but there is an opportunity here to correct evil with constructive criticism and today you have the power, acting in good faith, to demand that these culprits be punished. Do not brag about an election that was bought. .

Mr. HOOK. Will the gentleman yield.

Mr. RAMEY. Certainly. Mr. HOOK. I am surprised at the

gentleman's statement. Burkett Williams is a Republican.

Mr. RAMEY. Burkett Williams lives in Cleveland, Ohio, and for Mr. Williams I have the highest regard. Mr. Williams was not the man who took off rationing points temporarily to betray the American people and later to deceive every housewife in the United States of Amer-ica. That was not Burkett Williams. · Mr. HOOK~ Burkett Williams was the man who played politics with the OPA in every section ot Michigan.

Mr. RAMEY. That is a gross misstateF.lent of the facts.

Mr. HOOK. It certainly is not. I know it by personal experience. · Mr. RAMEY. That is a gross mis·statement of the facts.

Mr. HOOK. He has; in practically every section of Michigan. - Mr. RAMEY. You will concede that it

fs the function of the Attorney General of the United States· to see that those folks are punished. I agree with this and agree with everyone that- the law is all right, as it states there shall be correct adjustments as to food, but those who have gone bzyond the law with an imperious voice and have cruelly put people

· out of work and out of business, the fathers of our veterans, are the culprits that must be punished. This law is going to pass, and it is your duty and it is mine to call attention to each and every wrong you see right here in the well of this House if the Attorney General or the law enforcement offices of our coun.:. try will not do it, with a view that proper punishment will be meted out. I balieve you agree to that. If there was any specific act of wrongdoing on the part of Mr. Williams, I would be the first one to see him brought to justice. I k..11ow him to be very fair. I know of men that worked under him in certain places that put good . men out of business, fathers ·

with sons in the armed services, veterans . I know of a case on Monroe Street not so long ago where one of these men went to a certain slaughterhouse and said, "Because they did not slaughter last year, you cannot slaughter this ye~r," and he said it in an imperious voice. I think Mr. Williams should see that that man is summarily dismissed.

I believe it is our duty to offer constructive criticism. You are not slow to criticize the Congress-and by you; I mean the public. Why do we not have the right to criticize wrongs?

Mr. HOOK. Does the gentleman think that this man carried out Mr. Williams' orders?

Mr. RAMEY. No. Mr. HOOK. Is he still on the pay roll? Mr. RAMEY. He is today, but he will

not likely be by the 1st of July. The results of this debate has brought the ·light of day to many of these dark wrongs and from now on those who work for OPA must serve the purpose of the law. They must treat the American public as the Member of Congress treats a constituent. Serve them-not master them.

What would happen to a Member of Congress if he ordered a constituent around? What would happen to a Member of Congress if he required con'stituents to fill cmt form after form and ·gave the constituent the "Washington push around" or the Washington "refer to?" · Mr. HOOK. If Mr. Williams knew

that, and he knew it to be done wrongfully, why has he not been removed?

Mr. RAMEY. He is trying to correct the mistakes and will no doubt remove those who willfully mistreat or exploit those whom they should help. The ·wrongs are done as much by voice as anything else. Think of the folks that abuse it. You have seen some of the abuse, that imperiousness of voice, when women having broken arches come down standing in line and then some inspector ·comes in and gives them a lecture. You know it is done just the same in northern Michigan as it is done in Ohio. Those ·are things that should be corrected. · I will go along with you and support the law. I will do everything to prevent skyrocketing inflation, but in God's name when we try to correct an evil, do not call that sniping. Several folks have said that. I have never called a man a sniper in my life, and I do not believe there is a sniper in the entire House of Representatives.

Mr. HOOK. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, may I say to the gentleman that I have never heard him snipe about anything, and when he criticizes something he criticizes it honestly.

Mr. R.t}MEY. I thank the gentleman, and I will say the same for him. · Mr. HOOK. May I say this· further that I have griped against the OPA. I think we all have legitimate gripes against it, but when we charge the whole OPA with a program of buying votes, I just cannot see it, because some of the finest ·Republicans in this country are some of -the Administrators of the OPA.

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6529 Mr. RAMEY. We are not charging

the whole OPA. We do say that the action last fall in regard to ration vote buying, then the about-face point betrayal after the election, was the greatest fraud ever perpetrated . on the people of our country. And to do it at. the time of a world blood bath is the most outrageous public crime by those holding positions of trust that is known in the history of our country.

Again let me say as I have said in nearly every public utterance-: The American people must be respected by their Government-.-not inspected. You can trust our people. Let every public official-appointive as well as electiveset an example. We all represent ' and must serve and not master "We the people."

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Ohio has expired.

Mr. BROWN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. WEtssJ.

"TRIFLING WITH INP'LATION''

Mr. WEISS. Mr. Chairman, we may not know it, but in debating .this vital issue, the extension of the price-control law, we are trifling with inflation.

Since I first came to Congress in 1941 / I have supported the OPA program. · It is a good law, I might say a necessary evil in time of war. While it has not prevented black markets, it has controlled inflation.

All we have to do is compare the present-day prices with prices in World War I and one readily is convinced of the value and need for OPA now.

There have been isolated instances of maladministration, but Members of Congress know that we are not going to indict the whole OPA administration because of an isolated instance or two of bad administration any more than we would indict the entire law profession because of a few shysters, or any more than we would indict the medical profession because of a few quacks. The job for Congress is to strengthen and perfect the legislation; The press of the ·Nation is unanimous in its condemnation that the Wherry amendment would skyrocket the cost of living in America by guaranteeing farmers a profit above all production costs. The parade of the veterans of World War I to Washington for their bonus would b~ nothing compared to the parade of housewiveswives of soldiers-if we were to reenact the present bill with the Wherry inflationary amendment tacked on.

It appears to me to be another instance where the well-organized pressure groups are getting away with murder at the expense of the bulk of the people who naively expect their Representatives rather than lobbyists to look after their interests. .

It is surprising but the major farm organizations in the Nation are unalterably opposed to the Wherry amendment. There is no denying the fact that over a period of years the farmers had a grievance. Their income did not keep pace with that of many other sectors of the population. That resulted in the farm parity legislation which seemed to meet the situation . and t~e demands of the

farm bloc. This new amendment to the Price Control Act would change the whole basis of fixing farmers' price ceilings from parity levels to a cost-of,. production basis. The farmers have been doing rather well of late, according to their own statistics. If there is any justification for reexamining their position, it should be done only after careful study, analysis, and debate and not by haphazard, ill-considered, and impulsive action as was evidenced in the debate on this measure in the Senate. Many of the Senators do not like the OPA and neither do many Members of the House. These Senators felt this was the golden · opportunity to show this agency where to head in. But the blow will not fall on the OPA, even though it may have been aimed in that direction.

OPA is the Il)Ost thankless job in the war effort. It catches hell if it does and hell if it does not. It steps on more toes and draws more screams of "murder" than any other agency.

But OPA-or at least the principle for which it stands-has done an immense amount of good in this war.

If it had not been for OPA, we already would have been in the throes of tragic inflation. That is made plain by what has happened in instances where OPA was not on the job, either because it lacked authority, or of its own shortcomings.

We do not like the way OPA has done, or failed to do, a lot of things either. But the answer lies in improving it, not in weakening it, or getting rid of it.

This game of chipping away at price controls and encouraging the inflationary spiral is highly dangerous. It is not yet too late to let loose the hounds of inflation. If OPA, or a program like it, is not continued until the postwar period of adjustment is ended, inflation will be on us, and it will be worse than anything that happened after the last war. The answer then is not to abolish OPA or to reenact it with crippling and inflationary amendments but to make it work, to give it a law which will enable it to operate effectively.

The day will come when OPA should be abolished. But that day is not here. Until then, I urge the House today to rise to its responsibility by keeping a firm hand on inflatiQnary controls, and that can be fully accomplished by deleting the Wherry provisions and defeating all crippling amendments offered, and by reenacting this vital measure for another year. ·

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey rMr. HARTLEY].

Mr. HARTLEY. Mr. Chairman, as Price Administrator, Mr. Chester Bowles has proved he is a great advertising agent and a fine public-relations man.

Anyone who has read this book containing the charts and arguments in defense of OPA would obtain the impression that OPA has done a remarkably efficient job in the administration of price control and rationing. . How:ever, anyone who has had an op

portunity to examine the facts knows that there is much inefficiency and much incompetence in the administration of the entire program.

I recognize there are some of the officials in OPA who ·ate trying to do a good job, but. on the other hand, there are many who are totally incompetent and others who are using their position to try to change our economy and who, in my opinion, should have no place on the pay rolls of the Government of the United States.

It has been proved beyond any · doubt that the chaotic food sit-qation, particularly as it pertains to meats, is the result of maladministration, primarily on the part of OPA but also contributed to by WFA.

We have a meat famine and we all know that there is a tremendous black market in that product. I am now going to predict that unless we tie the hands of these meddlers and muddlers in OPA a similar condition will prevail with reference to textiles. The same shortage that we have in meats will be matched

· by a similar shortage in clothing. The black market in meats is already

being rivaled by the black market in garments.

I wish to address myself particularly to the textile field. At the outset, I want to say that any regulation or any price ceiling which has the effect of curtailing production is just as inflationary, if not more so, than an increase in. prices.

The Price Administrator, by using regulations which provide no incentive whatsoever to producers, processors and manufacturers, has forced low-priced goods off the market, forced deterioration of quality and has caused an unwarranted increase in the cost of living, particularly in the case of consumers of the moderate and low-income groups.

The purpose of the Emergency Price Control Act is defined clearly as an act to stabilize prices and to prevent abnormal increases. Nowhere in the act is the word "freeze" used, nor do I believe Congress ever intended that certain parts of our economy be frozen. Further, it is quite obvious that it would be completely impossible to freeze the price of ·an item and not freee the cost of its component parts.

Nevertheless, the Price Administrator, particularly since the issuance of the "hold · the line" order, has arbitrarily, stubbornly and unreasonably made sort of a fetish of the freeze technique, and by so doing has caused immeasurable harm to our production and to our economy in general. This type of act ion on their part has literally caused. black markets to exist, and has enabled many thousands of unscrupulous and illegit~mate operators to enter manufacturing and distributive channels.

To be specific, a legitimate producer or manufacturer cannot, because of the hold-the-line "freeze" policy, obtain an increase in his price sufficient to enable him to pay increased cost in raw materials or an increased cost in labor. OPA officials tell him that under their mandate they are not permitted to grant such an increase, and they quote the hold-the-line order, · or the decision of the Emergency Court of Appeals in the case of the Philadelphia Coke Co., and they stand their ground arbitrarily and unreasonably even though they know

6530 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 'JUNE 21 that by doing so they are forcing a legitimate manufacturer to discontinue production of an essential item.

At the same time, any unscrupulous fly-by-night operator can go into Washington with a completely phony set of figures and obtain from a thoroughly inexperienced section head, who quite Ukely knows nothing whatever about the product, just about any price he wants.

Every retailer in the country knows this is happening in the case of countless thousands of items all the time. The retailer, unable to buy his essential requirements from his legitimate resources, is forced to deal with the illegitimate profiteers that OPA legalizes.

Price indices, as we all know, are completely meaningless in that they fail to give any consideration whatsoever to changes in construction or deterioration of quality of the products involved. But notwithstanding this, OPA is much more concerned with a price index number than in what the consumer will have to pay for a specific article.

Unless the Administrator is forced immediately to give adequate consideration to the ine&~eased costs of material and labor, which have been incurred by producers in establishing selling prices, we are bound to experience the continuance of the unsatisfactory situation which has existed during recent years. i. e., an abundance of production of high-priced, high-profit items and a diverting of ~he bulk of low-priced essentials into illegitimate channels. It is extremely important that immediate action be taken on this matter. As we all know, increased production is the real answer to price stabilization. It is well known at the moment that at least four of the largest producers of knitted cotton and woolen underwear have gone definitely on record that they cannot possibly operate under the recent MAP order and that they are immediately discontinuing civilian production completely.

In this connection, I read the following newspaper article: UNDERWEAR MILLS TO CUT OPERATIONS-FOUR TO

DROP HEAVY-WEIGHT LINES FOR CIVILIANS,

CHENEY SAY5-TO CONTINUE WAR ORDERS

Four of the largest mills producing men's heavy-weight underwear will discon,tinue civilian production of that item by June 1, Roy Cheney, president of the Underwear Institute, announced yesterday. The stoppage will mean a loss of 8,500,000 garments annually, or 25 percent of production in 1944.

Each of the mills reached a decision independently, Mr. Cheney said, that they could not continue to produce the garments under present ceiling prices in face of the wage increase recently granted textile and underwear m1lls. Cost figures on the item, computed on the basis of the old wage scales, indicate that the mills do not break even, and with the wage increase the four mills in question would stand to lose close to $1,000,000 an-nually, he said. ·

The mills will continue to make heavyweight garments for the Army and Navy, it was emphasized, and will also produce for the Treasury Department and other Government agencies to the full extent of their"' capacity.

Questioned as to why the mills had not applied for relief under the Vinson formula, Mr. Cheney said that operation at 2 percent gross was unfeasible, as the mills were not permitted to include such items as overhead and sales costs.

With light-weight underwear ceiling prices giving little more margin than the heavyweight category, the production of men's athletic shirts and knitted shorts will also fall off, it was predicted. Requests for price relief on both light-weight and heavyweight garments to compensate for wage increases have been unavailing, Mr. Cheney said.

While a 5-cent per hour rise to bring minimum wages to 55 cents might have been handled, the increase actually raises labor costs to a much greater extent, it was indicated. In computing overtime, vacations with pay, and rises all along the line, the mills have reached the conclusion that the loss was too great to be absorbed on iteins which provided no margin of profit, according to M:r. Cheney.

It is a fine thing to have a low price on underwear, but it would be a whole lot better to have a slightly higher price of underwear and have some underwear. I want to read what a very impartial observer, the business editor of the New York Times, Mr. C. F. Hughes, had to say. This order, incidentally, is part of a combination of orders: MAP from the OPA and M-388 from the War Production Board.

Here is what Mr. Hughes had to say about this combination of order:

THE MERCHANT'S POINT OF VIEW

(By C. F. Hughes) Across the line in Canada last week a

big Montreal store opened its season with hundreds of women's wash dresses on sale at $3.94 each. A retiring merchant said that style, fabric, and size ranges were as comprehensive as anything he had seen in prewar days. The fabrics were made, of course, by American mills. In the same store were sheets and pillow cases galore and men's shirts and shorts in profusion. And at the butcher's the_re was meat and plenty of steak.

In contrast, the meat shortage here grows more serious daily and on top of this the textile and apparel shortage may soon keep it company on the front pages of newspapers.

What will put it there in the end, trade interests are convinced, is the stubborn decision of WPB and OPA to carry out the low-cost textile-apparel program inaugura:ted some weeks ago with the issuing of M-388 and MAP (maximum average price) regulations. These devices for curing the scarcities of low-price apparel are represented as little more than "jumping from the fying pan into the fire."

To relieve shortages caused by artificial upgrading and use of the other loopholes in the original price order, MPR, the war agencies seem determined to run smack into reduced production and price chaos all along the line, if reliable authorities are to be believed.

Having launched the program, however, and thereby piled mountains of paper work upon affected industries, the textile bureau of WPB is described as unwilling to scrap the plan because it would mean so much lost work. In short, the Bureau appears to prefer having two black eyes instead of one. What the industries hope is that high administration officials (and Messrs. Vinson and Davis have already interested themselves in the matter) will countermand the order for a full black-out and keep the apparel crisis from joining the meat crisis on the front pages. Meat stores are closing now and the same fate is held to be in store for clothiers and apparel shops within a few months.

M-388 channels cotton goods, rayons, and woolens to apparel manufacturers on the basis of certain percentages of supplies they used in 1943. With the filing of the required reports they automatically receive

priorities upon what is left of the fabric supply after military and other essential needs are filled. These priorities have been called "hunting licenses," and, while the apparel manufacturer is required to distribute hiS product equitably among his 1943 customers, there is no obligation upon fabric suppliers to do the same thing.

MAP, the maximum average price regulation, is the roll-back feature of apparel control and presents a complicated scheme for marketing goods at the 1943 averages. If the manufacturer exceeds his average, he will be given 30 days to get back into balance on his deliveries. His pricing records must be acknowledged by OPA by June 18 or his deliveries are stopped.

To these complicated and confusing means of attempting to deal with low-cost apparel shortages, trade leaders have repeatedly offered an alternative ever since M-388 and MAP were first unveiled as pseudo-masterpieces of war agency planning and manufacturers called in "to look but not to touch." The suggestion was merely that "set aside" orders be invoked similar to M-328B, which was issued last fall on snow suits and other children's garments. So much fabric waa earma.rked for so many items and everything was taken in stride. Industry cooperated to a man·, according to all reports.

The notion that scheduled production of essential and low-cost items might accelerate price inflation in the "free market" is one to which merchants and manufacturers alike offer sharp objection. They point out that prices on "scheduled products" will in fact serve as a yardstick for other values. There cannot be wide spreads between rrice ranges, they add, unless retailers want their customers to draw some obvious conclusions.

At the close of the week Harold Boeschenstein, WPB vice chairman in charge of operations, asserted that agep.cy officials had no intention of abandoning the program and that it was "making good progress." In trade quarters it was indicated that the directinn and extent of this "progress" can already be observed, and it is all backward and toward reduced rather than expanded production, with all signs pointing clearly to further deterioration and crisis.

Once high administration ofV,cials come to grips with the growing emergency and review the facts put before them by men who want to see the right solution applied, then perhaps set-aside orders will be substituted for the present tangle, to the great relief of the industries involved and to the welfare of the public at large.

In the past these officials may have been impressed by the "united front" of the war agencies as against the jumbled criticism and numerous objections of industry representatives. This is always a natural reaction. But if they don't step in, barring an immediate and drastic reduction in military requirements, stores will close next autumn and public clamor mount. This is the considered judgment of trade leaders who don't usually go v.rong in their forecasts and are not trying now to manufacture a phon~ emergency.

In order to understand the Maximum Average Price Order SO 108, recently issued by the Office of Price Administration, and known in the trade as MAP, it is necessary to go into the background just a bit. OPA issues, generally, three types of orders in the garment-manufacturing industry's field.

First. General price-freeze·orders. Second. Marginal freeze orders. Third. Specific dollar-and-cents prices

on specific commodities. The first type provides that any ar

ticle which is the same or similar to an article which was sold in March 1942, or any other base period, must be sold cur-

. rently at the same price. This is gen-

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6531 erally conceded to be a very loose form of price control, as it is a relatively simple matter for a manufacturer to price his product in a manner advantageous to him through a judicious choice of a same or similar article manufactured by a competitor.

Type 2, the marginal freeze, may take various forms. One of the best known regulations of this kind is Revised Maximum Price Regulation 287, under which all manufacturers of women's misses' girls', and toddlers' outerwear garment~ must operate. RMPR 287 provides that a manufacturer may add his historical margin of mark-up to the current cost of materials and to the direct labor cost figured on the basis of 1942 labor rates. It is necessary, here, to call attention to the fact that, in this regulation, OPA-not only defines those labor operations which may be considered direct labor but requires that the manufacturer' include them in his cost calculation at the rate he would have paid in 1942· · he is not permitted to use the rate h~ must pay curre_ntly. All operations and expenses not listed by OPA as direct labor must be paid by the manufacturer from his allowable margin of mark-up.

The third broad type of regulation, the dollars-and-cents type, is thought by many to be the tightest form of price control. Its use has been very limited, ~nd OPA has put it on very few apparel Items.

The MAP order cuts across the entire garment manufacturing field and all these ~ypes of regulations, with very few exceptiOns. It provides that all garments sha!l be classified into groups, or categones, as set up by the OPA. Each manufacturer must examine his complete records for the year 1943, and determine what his total dollar sales were in each group. Then he finds the total number of garments he sold in each group. For each category, then, he divides the total dollar sales by the total number of pieces sold, in order t~? find his a ve.rage price for the category. This figure then becomes his maximum average price for the category. The manufactw·er is required by SO 108 to so schedule his produc~ion i~ each quarter of the year that the total dollar sales divided by the total number of pieces sold in a specific cate~ gory does not exceed his "maximum average price" for the category, as outlined before.

In the event that the manufacturer exceeds his MAP at the end of the quarter the maximum average price for the cate~ gory automatically becomes the highest price at which he may sell any garment in the category, or he is subject to a fine of three times the amount by which he exceeds the maximum average price.

The Office of Price Administration realized that manufacturers could not comply with this regulation at once, because they allowed them the period June through October as the period for the first quarter.

It is my contention that the MAP order will not work at all. Instead of reducing the prices of apparel, it may even cause them to increase.

In order for MAP to work, three things are necessary:

First. Materials must be available in the same supply, and at the same prices as in 1943. · '

Second. Labor rates must be the same as in 1943.

Third. The sales volume of the manufacturer must be relatively the same as in 1943.

Not one of these conditions can be met currently. Materials are in ·the shortest supply in the history of the needle industry and those materials which are available are much higher in price. The Bureau of Labor Statistics figures on labor rates and take-home pay in the women's and children's outerwear apparel industries, alone, show an increase of roughly 35 percent since 1943. No one is quarreling about that, but the condition does exist and should be recognized. As far as volume of sales is concerned, with the textile supply situation• as critical as it is, it stands to reason that a manufacturer cannot currently produce as many garments as he did in 1943, because he does not have the fabric with which to make them.

It is my intention tomorrow, when we read the bill under the 5-minute rule, to offer an amendment which will prohibit the continuation of present MAP orders or the issuance of any such orders in the future.

I also propose to offer an amendment which will permit the industry the right to the same percentage mark-up that it had during thE: 12 months prior to price control. I can readily understand that opponents of this proposal are going tp harp about profits, but in answer let me say that OPA has no business in using its powers to control a man's profits.

We have tax laws to take care of that situation.

I noticed in the morning paper that Mr. Davis, Director of Economic Stabili:. zation; recognizing the ·need for increased production in textiles, has urged an increase ~n wages. I challenge anyone to tell me how the textile industry can increase wages and increase production particularly in the low-priced garments: when OPA by regulation prohibits consideration of increased wages since 1942 in determining price ceilings. ·

In my humble opinion the way to get those increased wages and to provide the incentive for increased production will be by · the adoption of an amendment such as I propose to offer.

You and I know that no agency of the Government has stirred up anywhere near the criticism, and, may I add, justi-fiable criticism, Its the OPA. . · We ha·.·e an obligation to do more

than merely talk about it; it is our duty to act. ·

Let us amend this bill to make price control a fact and not a fancy. Let us put an end to the administrative muscle dancing that we have been witnessing, to the end that your constituents and mine may be relieved of the hardships and inefficiency by blundering bureaucrats.

T:1e two amendments I will propose follow: ·

No maximum price order shall be issued or continued in effect requiring any seller to ~1mit his sales by any weighted average price limitation based on his previous sales.

No maximum price shall be established or maintained for. any commodity (other than agricultural commodities, the price of which is governed by section 3 (a) of the Emergen~y Price Act of 1942, as amended) below a pnce which returns to the producer, miner, processor, manufacturer, or distributor there- . of a percentage margin over cost le.ss than he received with respect to such commodities during the 12 months immediately preceding the passage of the Emergency Pric·e Control Act of 1942. For the purpose of dete;mining such margin, "cost" shall include all expenses allowed as deductions by the Federal income-tax laws.

Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. ·chairman I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman f1:om Oregon [Mr. MoTT].

Mr. MOTT. Mr. Chairman, throughout this debate it has been repeatedly stated by Members, Republicans . and Democrats alike, that so far as legislation is concerned, the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, is a good law. Some have expressed the opinion that the Emergency Price Control Act, as it now stands, provided it is properly administered, is perhaps as good a law as could be written on the subject of price control. This seems to be the almost universal opinion of everyone who has studied it.

Under the Price Control Act the Administrator has been given all the authority he needs, and all he has ever suggested to enable him effectively to control prices of commodities and to effectuate the plain and simple purposes of the act. He has been given all the money he has ever asked for, and ·the personnel of his organization has been increased until it is one of the largest and most far-reaching regulatory establishments of our Government.

Why, in the face of all this, then, has this organization made one of the worst jobs of any of our governmental agen~ cies? Why has it been unable to satisfy any of our producers or any of our processors? Why has it been unable to keep down costs? . Why has its administration resulted · in putting thousands of people out of business, in bringing about scarcities to consumers in commodities of which there is a proven abundance? Why is it the most criticized of all our agencies, and why is it held by our people in the least respect of any of them?

That these statements, which I have made in the form of questions, are true, no Member can possibly doubt, because every Member has ample evidence of it from every portion of his constituency. A large part of our daily mail is comprised of letters from people who have been injured, damaged, confused, and confounded by orders and regulations from OPA which directly affects their lives and businesses, orders and regulations which in many cases are without rhyme or reason, and which are so inconsistent with ordinary common business sense as to indicate that those who made them were either completely incompetent or deliberately destructive of the rights and interest of the sane and patriotic people of our counry.

I believe, and I have repeatedly so stated, that all this inju"stice, confusion, worry, and hardship brought about by the administration of OPA is not due to

.6532 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 21 incompetence on the part of the Administrator or his policy makers, and it is not accidental. It comes about, rather, as the result of a deliberate policy on the part of OPA to ignore and to violate the plain provisions of the law, and to make orders and regulations affecting the very lives of our people, in many cases, without any authority of law at all.

From its beginning, OPA has followed a philosophy and a policy which is 6'tlien to our American ideas of government, and many of the principal policy makers in that agency for years have been men whose known records and official actions prove them to be adherents to a governmental philosophy imported from other countries and which has nothing in common with our own philosophy of government.

Theirs has been a philosophy and a policy of complete regimentation of the people. Their aim has been to confuse, hamper, and bewilder those over whom they exert their control. This plainly has been a communistic-Fascist technique which has been used for years by every totalitarian government in the world, and its objective has always been complete regimentation, and not only during the war, but for all time thereafter, or as long as they can remain in power.

This policy and philosophy was first put into effect in OPA by Ginsberg and his associates, and the 1·eal policy makers of that agency have in large part been adherents to the system of regimentation which he put into practice. This has always been the case, no matter who happened to be the Administrator. The Administrators have never actually had anything to do with making the basic policy of OP A. They have always simply followed out the orders of this continuous crowd of policy makers who still infest the organization and who will continue to infest it with their alien ideas until the President of the United States, who is responsible for their continuance in office, replaces them with honest, capable, sane, American citizens who have some respect for our system of Government and who have some knowledge of the production, both business and agriculture, which they regulate and control.

It would, of course, have been impossible for these people to create the confusion, the hardships, and the bankruptcies for which they are responsible had they kept within the jurisdiction ·and authority which ·the Price Control Act gives them. They have never done this. They have obeyed the law only whe11 it suited their purpose. Every Member of this House could cite literally hundreds of cases where this agency has deliberately ignored the law, where it has ·thumbed its nose at it, where it has ·asserted that its authority over price control was derived not from the law ·itself, but from some other law like the Second War Powers Act or from some vague portion of one or more of the hundreds of Executive orders and directives which have been issued over the past few years, and which were never intended by the Congress to give any authority whatever to OPA to regulate prices of commodities.

The jurisdiction and authority of the Price Administrator, so far as control of prices is concerned, is contained wholly within the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended. It has no other authority. The solution then, if the thing is capable of solution at all, is to amend the Price Control Act so as to compel those who administer it to obey it and to keep within it.

When this bill is read under the 5-minute rule tomorrow or Saturday, I shall offer an amendment which I think will at least help to do this. The amendment simply provides that the Administrator in making an order or a regulation controlling prices of commodities must not go outside the plain provisions of the Price Control Act, and it contains a section which I believe, if adopted, will go a long ways toward preventing him from doing this.

Let us see in the first place what the purposes of the Price Control Act really are. OPA, since 1942, has so confused the people through its propaganda and its totalitarian actions in matters entirely outside the scope and purposes of this act that most people have forgotten what those purposes really are. They are all contained in subdivision A of section 1 of the original Emergency Price Control Act of 1942. They are simple, unambiguous, and brief. This is the language of that section:

SECTION 1. (a) It is hereby declared to be in the. interest of the national defense and security and necessary to the effective prosecution of the present war, and the purposes of this act are to stabilize prices and to prevent speculative, unwarranted, and abnormal increases in prices and rents; to eliminate and prevent profiteering, hoarding, manipulation, speculation, and other disruptive practices resulting from abnormal market conditions. or scarcities caused by or contributing to the national emergency; to assure that defense appropriations are not dissipated by excessive prices; to protect persons with relatively fixed and limited incomes, consumers, wage earners, investors, and persons dependent on life insurance, annuities, and pen:Sions, from · undue impairmen~ of their standard of living; to prevent hardships to persons engaged in business, to schools, universities, and other institutions, and to the Federal, State, and local governments, which would result from abnormal increases in prices; to assist in securing adequate production of commodities and facilities; to prevent a post-emergency collapse of values; to stabilize agricultural prices in ~ the manner provided in section 3; and to permit vomntary cooperation between the Government and producers, processors, and others to accomplish aforesaid purposes.

Most of the remainder of that act is devoted to declarations of what are not the purposes of the act and what power is not conferred by the act upon the Administrator. In other words, the great bulk of the original act consists of restrictive language, and that has been the case with each amendment to the first Price Control Act. Nothing could be more plain than that the Congress intended the Administrator to carry out only the enumerated purposes of the act, and that it did not intend him or authorize him to make orders or regulations for any other purposes.

Now, when and in what circumstances, is the Administrator permitted to make

a regulation or an order to effectuate the purposes of the act? That permission and authority is contained in section 2A of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, which is cited as the "Stabilization Extension Act of 1944." ~ Here is the language of that section:

SEc. 2. (a) Whenever in the j~dgment of the Price Administrator (provided for in sec. 201) the price or prices of a commodity

. or commodities have risen or threaten to rise to an extent or in a manner inconsistent with the purposes of this act, he may by regulation or order establish such maximum price or maximum prices as in his judgment will be generally fair and equitable and will effectuate the purposes of this act. So far as practicable, in establishing any maximum

. price, the Administrator shall ascertain and give due consideration to the prices prevailing between October 1 and October 15, 1941 (or if, in the case of any commodity, there are no prevailing prices between such dates, or the prevailing prices between such dates are not generally representative because of abnormal or seasonable market conditions or other cause, then to the prices prevailing during the nearest 2-week period in which, in the judgment of the Administrator, the prices for such commodity are generally representative). for the commodity or commodities included under such regulation or order, and shall make adjustments for such relevant factors as he may determine and deem to be of general applicability. including the follpwing: Speculative fiuctuations, general increases or decreases in costs of production, distribution, and transportation, and general increases or decreases in profits earned by sellers of the commodity or commodities, during and subsequent to the year ended October 1, 1941: Provided, That no such regulation or order shall contain any provision requiring the determination of costs otherwise than in accordance with established accounting methods.

That is the entire statutory jurisdiction and authority of the Administrator to control prices of commodities and Irepeat that if the Administrator is once compelled by law to stay within that 'jurisdiction and authority we will have heard ·the last of the senseless, damaging, inconsistent, and ridiculous orders which OPA has been enforcing upon the decent, patriotic, law-abiding people of this country, and concerning which we are receiving hundreds of protests daily from a justly indignant and outraged public which is now on the very verge of complete, hopeless, and illegal regimentation.

My amendment is, I think, a simple one, if there can be any simple approach at all to a problem which OPA policymakers have done their alien best to

·complicate. This is the amendment: On page 1, line 9, after the period, add two

new sections, as follows: "SECTION-. (a) Notwithstanding the pro

visions of any other law or Executive order or directive, the jurisdiction and authority of the Administrator to ·regulate or control prices of commodities shall be limited to the jurisdiction and authority specifically provided therefor in the Emergency Price Control Act of January 30, 1942, and act s amendatory thereto. ~

"(b) In making any order . or regulli tion .establishing maximum prices or othenyise regulating or controlling prices, the Administrator shall st ate in such order, and as a

·part thereof, the particu lar purpose or pur-poses for the effectuat ion of which the order or regulation is made, and such purpose or purposes so stated shall be ·limited to t hose specifically enumerated in section 1 (a) of

.·

l945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD"-HOUSE ~533

title I of the Emergency Price Control Act of January 30, 1942.

" (c) In making any such order or regula· tion the Price -Administrator shall declare therein, and as a part thereof, and in compli· ance with the language of section 2 (a) of title I of ·the Price Control Act of 1942, as . amended (Stabilization Ext~nsion Act of 1944) that in his judgment the price or prices of the commodity or commodities included in such order or regulation have risen or threatened -to rise to an extent or in a manner inconsistent with the particular purpose or purposes of the act as so stated and enumerated in the order.

"SEc. -. ~ubsection (a) of section 203 of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, is further amended by inserting after the period at the end or the first sentence the following: Such objections may include the objection that the order or regulation was not made in compliance with the provisions and limitations of section- (the preceding section)."

The purpose of the second section of this amendment is to give a person injured or aggrieved by an OPA order unlawfully made the right to include in his objections to the order the further

_objection that the order or regulation was not made in compliance with th~ provisions -and limitations of the first section of this amendment. This gives the aggrieved person the legal right, which he does not now possess, to assert .and to show not only that ~he order objected to was . unjust, inequitable, and

. discriminatory, but also that it .was illegal, -and that, I believe, is a part ·of the teeth of the amendment, and the part of it which will help most to compel the Administrator see to it in the first place that those who actualiy make the orders

. ·and regulatipns which he .s.igns k.eep within the law.

My own considered judgment, after very long an·d patient and thorough study of the whole pr.oblem, is that this amendment, if adopted, will come more nearly bringing order out of confusion, justice out of injustice, and sanity out of insanity, than any of the sco~es of restrictive amendments we have made to the Price Control Act since 1942. It will in nowise. hamper the legitimate administration of the act, and on that ground I tpinlc it could not be objected to even by the most ardent defenders of

' the OPA administration, provided those · defenders admit that ours is supposed to be a government of law and not of men. It cannot possibly do harm, even if it should fail to accomplish its purpose of compelling the law violators in OPA to obey the law. ·on the other hand, there is every reasonable prospect it will accomplish that purpose, and if it does, the problem will be solved. At least, it goes to the root of a situation which nearly all -agree has been the main cause of the over-all failure of OPA, and that is the refusal of that agency to operate within

·. the law. This amendment undertakes to compel OPA to do just that, and its adoption ·will be welcomed by the people as an evidence that the Congress intends, insofar as it has jurisdiction to do so, to stop this agency from operating further under a pretended authority which does not exist, which neither the. Congress no.r the people would never think of giving to OPA, and which never has been given to it.

Mr. BROWN of Georgia. Mr. Chair-man, I ask that the Clerk read.

The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows: Resolved, etc., That section 1 (b) of the

-Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, is amended by striking out "June

-30, 1945" and substituting "December 31, 1946."

Mr. BROWN of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimolls consent that sections 1 and 2 may be considered together and that amendments may be in order

· under the general rules of the House to any part of the resolution.

-Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, I do so for the purpose of propounding a parliamentary inquiry. If the unanimous consent of the gentleman from Georgia is adopted will amendments to the amendments to both the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, and the Stabilization Act of 1942, as amended, be in order after the reading of section 2?

The CHAffiMAN; - Yes. Is there objection to the request of the

·gentleman· from Georgia? -There was no objection. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will

read. . Tfl.e Clerk read as follows: SEc. 2. Section 6 of the Stabilization Act

·of 1942, as amendEd, is amended by striking ·out "June 30, 1945" and substituting "December 31, 1946."

· With the following committee amend.ments:· ·

Page 1, line 5, strike ·out "December 31, 1946" and insert "June 30, 1946."

Page i, line 9, strike out "December 31, 1946," and insert "J:une 30, 1946."

Mr. BROWN of Georgia. ~ ·Mr. Chair;. man, I ask unanimous consent that the committee amendments may be con

. sidered en bloc. The CHAffiMAN. Is there objection

to the request of the gentleman from Georgia?

There was no objection. Mr. BROWN of Georgia. Mr. Chair

·man, I move that the Committee do now rise. · · The motion was agreed to.

Ac~ordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. CooPER, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that Commit. tee, having had under consideration House Joint Resolution 101, had come to 'no resolution thereon.

HOUR OF MEETING TOMORROW

Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, at the request of the majority leader and pur.suant to an · agreement reached, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 10 o'clock ·tomorrow.

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

There was no objection. COMMITI'EE ON ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT

Mr. HOOK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for

10 minutes and to revise and extend my remarks. . . The SPEAKER. Is there objection to . the request of the gentleman from Michigan?

There was no objection. Mr. HOOK. Mr. Speaker, the Com-

-mittee on Economic Development has done a very remarkable job in presenting not only to the people of the Nation but even some of our lawmakers a program

:purporting to chastise themselves by _controls over business that to them seems just and proper. There is no doubt in

_my mind, Mr. Speaker, that they are sincere as far as their own business and . their own philosophy is . concerned. However, it just so happens that this is a nation that is made up of labor, industry, agriculture, and other segments that

·put together, spells America. No one group can speak for all-when attempting to speak· only for themselves. The retail merchants of this country represent basically a small business minority. The Retail -Credit Institute of America is a very important. factor in keeping the ·retail merchant firmly in the economic structure of this Nation. The Commit-tee on Economic Development has completely igi1ored the suggestions and the _program of the Retail Credit Institute of America. ·

If I understand the program and plan of the Committee on Economic Develop.

·ment, it speaks for those who have the fat bank rolls and the savings that repre·

. sents about $118,000,000,000 of purchasing power in this Natiori. I fully realize that if this $118,000,000,000 were let loose today without controls, we .would have a period of inflation. I fully realize also

' that if we, without any controls over this $118,000,000,000 of purchasing power, authorized installment buying we will have added additional purchasing power. Far be it from me in addressing my remarks here today, to open this Nation to infla-

- tion. I do believe, however, that pur-. chasing power of installment credit is far more important to the Nation than ·the purchasing power of those with the .bank rolls. Therefore, I believe that I am speaking today for the average laborer, white-collar worker, and those of the middle and low income groups who have ·not had the opportunity to save large bank-rolls but who at the beginning of this war, yes, even at the beginning of the national-defense ·program-let me say in other words at the time that we -had to convert from peacetime to wartime economy-did not have the real necessities of life, such as new refrigerators, sewing machines, washing machines, watches, and many other neces·sai·y things that are used for the purpose of relieving the back-breaking drudgery of the housewife. Those who could afford those things, bought them on installment credit. Those commodi-ties have now been worn out and these _people are in need of them. They cannot buy them today; nor will they be able to buy them in the immediate postwar J>rogram, because of the· fact that they do not have the immediate cash outlay. Therefore, I believe that in order to give ·a buying opportunity to those who most -need these necessities, we must have in·stallment buying, This means that we

6534 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOU.SE JUNE 21 must have control _over tbe $118,000,-000,000 of purchasing power now held by those with big savings and the bank rolls.

Recently the Committee for Economic Development set forth, published and distributed in great quantity a plan purporting to be the platform of American business respecting the method of eliminating present wartime controls upon business and industry, as part of peacetime reconversion. The CED is familiar to you all. It is an organization of some of the most powerful industrialists in the United States and a measure of the influential advertising executives and some bankers.

These industrialists have undertaken to speak about the control of the use of credit by consumers after the war. What they say amazes me. It would never have reached my attention, and possibly yours, were it not for an attack upon CEO's policy by the Retail Credit Institute of America. The Institute's director, W. J. Cheyney, charges the CED with the adoption of policies vitally affecting millions of consumers and hundreds of thousands of retail merchants, without conferring with or asking the opinion of any responsible spokesmen of either of the affected groups. I want to repeat to you the charge made by the Credit Institute:

The Committee for Economic Development Issues a national policy statement which will be misunderstood as the policy of American business respecting how consumers should be regulated by law as' they use their credit. With ·apparent complete misunderstanding of the way business is done with consumers

- in this country, it has advocated the division of the people in two classes. CED unthinkingly offers to the first group, to those who have plenty of cash, the unrestricted opportunity to buy anything and everything that can be found in the markets of the country. With respect to the purchases of this class of Americans, CED _has nothing whatever to say about the evils or dangers of infiation. Into another class it huddles together even more American citizens than in the first. Purchases by this second group, according to the CED would be infiationary, dangerous. These less prosperous Americans, industry would deny the purchase of all the more important products of their choice until, in the words of the CED itself, "the production of durable goods has reached a peak and started to decline." The people of the second group are America's working classes.

Gentlemen, in the period after the war so long as the plants owned by these gentlemen of the Committee for Eco- · nomic Development are running at full blast they do not need, they do not want the patronage of the poor man, the everyday worker in this. country. By their own words these giants of industry are con~ teRt to sell their products first to the more fortunate group of those who have savings and wealth.

It is only after these more affluent pur~ chasers no longer demand as much as these mill owners can make that they begin to look for further markets. Then they would allow the poor man to buy. Then they would extend credit so that he can buy.

The CED industrialists woUld encourage purchasing by those with ready cash. They woulq take . restrictions o1f the

charge account, the credit mechanism of the socially elite and economically . pros~ perous, but only if at the same time the working class can still be drastically re~ stricted in the things it can buy. Gentlemen, I think that it is high time the Congress should consider this matter.

I say to you that if there are refrigerators, washing machines, watches, and other major necessities manufactured in limited quantities after the war it should not be the rich who are solely able, by our laws, to buy these things. It is ridiculous that a washing machine is needed more by the family with plenty of cash than by the family of a workingman yet under the present regulation of consumer credit and even under the national policy of the industrialists of the CED this is exactly the sort of allocation of our post~ war production that lies ahead.

In speaking of the CEO's policy Mr. Cheyney of the Credit Institute quotes from a leading university professor: ·

Control of credit is a means of rationing indirectly what you-haven't the guts to ration directly. '

But I have not finished: To cap the climax the CED industrialists have the affrontery to · openly say in their policy that when the milis can no longer prosper because they have saturated the rich man's market then they would presume to say to your constituents and mine, the workingmen of the country, the farmers and the white-collar workers, "now to bolster our falling production, now to save us from unemployment, now to guarantee us the continuation of our profit system, we are going to let you have some of the products from which by our own policy we have restricted you heretofore: Now you who need credit can go ahead and buy and enjoy and incidentally as you do su you will be saving our industrial skins."

Gentlemen, I believe the smaller businessman of the country will stand for no such policy. I ..:ongratulate the Re~ tail Credit Institute of America for having locked horns with the Committee for Economic Development to shake it loose from any such short-sighted antisocial, un-American economic policy for the future. As the Credit Institute aptly says:

Is the prosperity of America so fickle that it can be maintained in no other way than at such cost to the people?

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

Mr. GRANGER (at the request of Mr. HooK) was granted permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD and include therein a table.

Mr. MONRONEY asked and was granted permission to include in the remarks he made in Committee of the Whole certain letters and tables.

Mr. PITTENGER (at the request of Mr. GAMBLE) was granted permission to extend his own remar,ks in the RECORD.

Mr. BUFFETT (at the request of Mr. GAMBLE) was granted permission to ex~ tend his remarks in the Appendix of the RECORD.

Mr. LEMKE <at the request of Mr. GAMBLE) was given permission to revise and extend the remarks he made in Committee of the Whole and include various .telegrams anJ:t statements.

Mr. BEALL · (at the request of Mr. GAMBLE) was granted permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD and include an article appearing in the Cumberland <Md.) News of June 18, 1945.

Mr. PHILBIN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the RECORD in three instances and to include therewith two articles by Dorothy Dunbar Bromley and a letter from Snider Bros.

Mr. MOTT asked and was granted permission to extend the remarks he made in Committee and to include therewith · an amendment which he proposed to offer.

Mr. CRAWFORD asked and was given permission to extend the remarks he made in Committee of the Whole and to include a statement by the Industrial Conference Board.

PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. MANSFIELD of Montana. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that on Monday next, after the legislative business of the day and all special orders heretofore entered, I may address the House for 45 minutes.

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

There was no objection. Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. Speaker, I have a

special order for today. I ask unanimous consent that it may be vacated as of today and transferred to next Monday at the conclusion of all other business and special orders.

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

There was no objectio-n. LEAVE OF ABSENCE

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Mr. LYNCH (at the request of Mr. QUINN of New York>, indefinitely, on account of illness.

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED

Mr. ROGERS of New York, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee had examined and found truly enrolled a bill of the House of the following title, which was there~ upon signed by the Speaker:

H. R. 3240. An act to extend the authority of the President under section 350 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and for other p --:poses.

BILL AND JOINT RESOLUTION PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT

Mr. ROGERS of New York, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee did on this day present to the President, for his approval, a bill and a joint resolution of the House of the following titles:

H. R. 2416. An ~ct authorizing the State of Alabama to lease or sell and convey all or any; part of the Salt Springs land granted to said State by the act of March 2, 1919; and

H. J. Res. 206. Joint resolution ·extending the time for the release of powers of appointment for the purposes of certain provisions of the Internal Revenue Code.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. . The motion was agreed to; accordingly :<at 6 o'clock and 4 minutes p. m.) under

1945 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 6535 its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, June 22, 1945, at 10 o'clock a. m.

COMMITTEE HEARINGS COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

There. will be a meeting of the Committee on the Judiciary at 10:30 a. m., Friday, June 22, 1945, to continue hearings on the following -bills with respect to Federal administrative procedure: H. R. 184; H. R. 339; H. R. 1117; H. R. 1203; H. R. 1206; and H. R. 2602. The hearings will be held in the Judiciary Committee room 346, Old House Office Building.

The hearing previously scheduled by the Special Subcommittee on Bankruptcy and Reorganization of the Committee on the Judiciary for Friday, June 15, 1945, will be held on Monday, June 25, 1945, at 10 a. m. The hearing wiil be on the provisions of the bills <H." R. "33 and H. R. 3338) to amend an act entitled "An act to establish a uniform system· of bankruptcy throughout the United ..States," approved July 1, 1898, and acts amendatory thereof and supplementary thereto (referees-method of appointing, compensation, etc.), and will be conducted in the Judiciary Committee room 346, Old House Office Building.

There will be a meeting of Subcom-· mittee No. 4 of the Committee on the Judiciary, beginning at 10 a. m. on Wednesda-y,- June 27, 1945, to continue hearings on the -bill . (H. R. 2788) to amend title 28 of the Judicial Code in regard to the limitation of certain actions, and for other purposes. The hearing will be held in· room 346, Old House Offi~e Building.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC 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. MANSFIELD: Committee on Rivers and Harbors. H. R. 2690. A bill to amenli the Bonneville Project Act, with amendment (Rept. No. 777) Referred to the Committee of the Whole ~ouse on the State of the Union. .

Mr. MURDOCK: Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation. S. 24. An act for the re-

. lief of the Truckee-Carson irrigation district, without amendment (Rept. No. 778). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

Mr. VINSON: Committee on Naval Affairs. House Joint Resolution 215. Joint resolution authorizing the production of petroleum for the national defense from Naval Petroleum Reserve No. 1; without amendment (Rept. No. 779). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 3 of rule XXII, public bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. BECKWORTH: H. R. 3526. A bill to extend certain benefits

of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944 to widows of veterans and to wives of certain totally and permanently disabled veteral;ls; to the Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation.

By Mr. COLE of Missouri: H. R . 3527. A bill to provide for the settlel.

ment of claims against the United States for damage to crops caused by wild fowl in the vicinity of national wildliie refuges; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. FARRIN:GTON: H. R. 3528~ A bill to confer United States

citizem:hip upon certain inhabitants of the island of Guam; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

By Mr. SPARKMAN: H. R. 3529. A t-ill to amend the Pay Re

adjustment Act of 1942; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. KNUTSON: H. R. 3530. A bill relating to seniority

rights of veterans; to the - Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. BROOKS (by request) : H. R. 3531. A bill to amend the Service

men's Readjustment Act of 1944 so as to provide readjustment insurance for those persons who served in the armed forces of the_ United States during the present war, and for other purposes; to the Committe·e on World War Veterans' Legislation.

By Mr. EBERHARTER: H. R. 3532. A bill amending the act of

October 14, 1940, entitled "An act to record the .lawful admission to the United States for permanent residence of Nicholas G . . Karas"; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

By Mr. HOCH: H. R. 3533. A bill to authorize revisions in

_ the boundary of the Hopewell Village national historic site, Pennsylvania, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Public Lands.

By Mr. MURDOCK: H. R. 3534. A bill to clarify the applicabil

ity of section 10 of the act of June 17, 1902 (~2 Stat. 388), section 15 of the act of August 13, 1914 (38 Stat. €86), and of section 15 of the act of August 4, 1939 (53 Stat. 1187), with respect to the availability of funds appropriated to the Bureau of Reclamation, Department of the Interior, for the performance of acts necessary and proper in connection with the investigation, construction, operat ion, or maintenance of Federal reclamation projects; to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation.

By Mr. PLUMLEY: H. R. 3535. A bill to amend the act entitled

''An act to amend further the Civil Service Retirement Act, lJPProved May 29, 1930, as amended,'' approved January 24, 1942, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Civil Service.

By Mr. RANKIN: H. R. 3536. A bill to amend the Service

men's Reaqjustment Act of 1944 to provide for a readjustment allowance for all veterans of World War II; to the Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation.

By Mr. 'RANKIN (by request): H. R. 3537. A bill to amend the Service

men's P.eadjustment Act of 1944 so as to provide readjustment insurance for those persons wh) served in the armed forces of the United States during the present war, and for other purposes; to the Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation.

By. Mr. BROOKS: . H. R. 3538. A bill to officially name the dam

authorized by act of June 28, 1938 (52 Stat. 1219) on Red River near Denison, Tex., the "Rayburn Dam"; to the Committee on Flood Control.

By Mr. BRADLEY of Pennsylvania: H. Res . 297. Resolution providing addition

al compensation for certain messengers in the Office of the Doorkeeper; to the Committee on Accounts.

By Mr. BIEMILLER: H. Res. 298. Resolution to provide for the

Investigation by the Attorney General of the proceedings surrounding the conde_mnatio~

of the Milwaukee County House of Correction; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. PLUMLEY: H. Res. 299. Resolution providing an order

of business for the consideration of the bill H. R. 2408; to the Committee on Rules.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. GROSS: H.R. 3539. A bill for the relief of A. G.

Crunt:leton, trading as A. G. Crunkleton Electric Co., of Greencastle, Pa~; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. LANE: H. R. 3540. A bill for the relief of Nicholas

Mortatos; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

By Mr. LARCADE: H. R . 3541. A bill authorizing the Presi

dent of the United States to award a Congressional Medal of Honor to Gen. John J. Pershing, United States Army; to tha Com-mittee on Military Affairs. - ·

H . R. 3542. A bill authorizing the President of the United States to award a Congressional Medal of Honor to Gen. Dwight David Eisenhower, United States Army; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. SPARKMAN: H. R. 3543. A bill for the relief of Elmer

D. Thompson; to the Committee on Claims,

PETITIONS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of rule XXII, peti.tions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows:

989. By Mr. COCHRAN: Petition of Joe Bob Haw'kins and 298 other citizens of Missouri, protesting against the passage of any prohibition legislation by the Congress; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

990. Also, petition of E. E. Blockberger and 310 other citizens of Missouri, protesting against the passage of any prohibition legislation by the Congress; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FRIDAY, JuNE 22, 1945 ,

The House met at 10 a.m. The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera

Montgomery, D. D., o:fiered the following prayer:

0 patient and loving Father, at whose footstool the morning stars· sing together, and in whom there is perfect harmony forevermore, Thy providence has brought us to the beginning of another day. How much more _intelligently and bravely we can serve our fellow men with Thy truth to guide us and Thy ·spirit to inspire u~; bestow upon us the mercy of these blessings. Life's limitations would be bitter indeed were it not for the .assurance that this is

· God's earth, with its testimony of Thy presence and care.

We pray Thee to deliver us from the unrest of life with its recurring anxiety. Make every weakness a strength and every hindrance an inspiration. Lead us with fatherly care and help us to live simple, contented, and trustful lives. The Lord God be with our country, and may our citizens ever be wise that the

19_45 :congressional record-senate - Congress.gov

Documents

Transcript of 19_45 :congressional record-senate - Congress.gov