Newspaper Page Text
^P)c ftomttg §staf I
With Sunday Morning Edition. THEODORE W. NOYES, Editor. WASHINGTON, D, c" the Evening Star Newspaper Company. Main Office: llth 8t. and Pennsylvania Ave. New York Office: 110 East 42d St. Chicago Office: 436 North Michigan Ave. Delivered by Carrier—Metropolitan Area. Effective October 1. 1944. Regular Edition. 4 Sundays. 5 Sundays. Evening and Sunday. 90c per mo. $1.00 per mo. The Evening Star_ 60c per month. The Sunday Star . 10c per copy. Night Final Edition. 4 Sundays. 5 Sundays Night Final and Sunday. $1.00 mo. $1.10 mo. Kight Final Star_ 76c Per month. Rates by Mail—Payable in Advance. Anywhere in United States. _ 1 month. 6 months. 1 year. Evening and Sunday..$1.00 $6 00 $12.00 The Evening Star_ .76 4.00 8.00 The Sunday Star_ .50 2.60 5.6o Telephone National 6000. Entered at the Post Office Washington, D. C., aa second-class mail matter. Member of the Associated Press. The Associated Press is exclusively entitled to the use lor republtcatlon ol all news dispatches credited to it or not otherwise credited in this paper and also the local news published herein. All rights ol publication ol special dispatches herein also are reserved. A—6 »_MONDAY. June 11, 1945 The Traveling Editors The delegation of journalists sent abroad by the American Society of Newspaper Editors report a sympa thetic response almost everywhere to the idea, or ideal, that the peace treaties should contain expressions relating to the desirability of a free and unhampered flow of news in the postwar world. Some of the assurances they re ceived in that respect may have represented, in the opinion of the editors, courteous “lip service,” rather than definite statements of Intent. But the value of this un precedented expedition by Ameri can newspaper editors lay as much in the exploitation of a desirable objective as in precise items of actual accomplishment. The frank exchange of ideas and opinions between American and Russian journalists which took place in a series of meetings in Moscow was in itself enough to justify the pilgrimage. For this interchange, in a friendly atmosphere, seemed to typify the basic nature of some of the misunderstandings between Soviet Russia and the United States. The tactics of sections of the Amer ican press are as incomprehensible to the Russians as their own are to us. As Russian journalists stated with pride, the Russian press is an Integral part of the Russian gov ernment, and its service, as they see it, is completely in behalf of the people. To American journalists these two ideas are in themselves contradictory. In our concept a press which is subservient to or becomes an agency of government loses its value in serving the people. The Russians expressed some amazement that American news paper readers will permit the pub lication of political or other theories with which they do not agree. The fundamental of a free press in this country, of course, is the sacred right to exploit unpopular ideas and opinions. Differences in conceptions of the functions of the press stem, of course, from the differences be tween totalitarian and democratic philosophies of government. The Russians are suspicious of our motives and of our press. But no more so than we are of their own. The task facing both nations is cultivation of a spirit of mutual tolerance of the other point of view. In a broad recognition of the cause of misunderstanding lies the hope of real understanding, so essential to the success of both countries in achieving hopes for sustained peace. Russia's Communists Generally speaking, when new blood is infused into any organiza tion, the organization itself is bound to undergo some change in charac ter, and policies or actions are likely to be affected in one degree or an other. Accordingly, there is perhaps more than a little significance in the report that the size of the Commu nist party in Russia has increased about 60 per cent during the past few years and that a great number of its old members have died in the war. Prior to Hitler s attack in June, 1941, membership in the party was held down to a static total of 3,000, 000 Russians, with a few hundred thousand others listed for eventual admission. An important percent age of the regular members fought in the Red Army, however, and suf fered heavy casualties. These large losses have now been replaced by new personalities, and in addition the membership as a whole has been expanded to a total of 5,000,000, while the “probationary” waiting lists have been enlarged to about 1,000,000. This great infusion of new blood, according to a New York Times dis patch. is made up principally of officers and men who have distin guished themselves on the fighting fronts and of workers and executives who have displayed special marks of ability and patriotism in war-sup porting activities. As full-fledged members of the party, they now be long to the Russian elite, to the World’,s most exclusive political or ganization. In that capacity, as a small fraction of the Soviet Union’s 180,000,000 people, they control their country through a pyramid - like structure of authority founded on village and town councils and rang ing beyond that through councils of districts, regions and republics to the All-Union Congress of the U. S. S. R. The policies and discipline of the Russian Communists presumably will be directed as firmly as ever from the top, but the fact that there has been an exceptional change in the personnel of the organization—liter ally millions of new faces and new minds—seems certain to have qpme effect, however slight or gradual, on the course of Soviet affairs, both domestic and foreign. There Is nothing immutable in this world,' and the Moscow "party line” is no exception. The extensive member ship turnover is highly interesting, and its influence on events may prove to be not inconsiderable as time goes on. Report on the Philippines An extraordinary interest in this country was attached to Senator Tydings’ recent visit to the Philip pines and his moving report to the Senate last week on conditions he found there. It was Senator Tydings who helped perfect the legislation, which bears his name, under which the Filipinos were to become an in dependent nation in 1946. He has visited the islands before and is thoroughly informed on the curi ously complex problem represented in their future political status. His report to the Senate last week reflected two of his impressions, which obviously affected him deeply. One was of war's indescribable havoc, not only in Manila, but throughout the islands. The other was his admiration for the conduct of the Filipinos during the Japanese invasion; their unswerving loyalty to the United States, which the Sen ator illustrated by many touching incidents of real heroism. The islands seem prostrate. The cur rency has been debased and ren dered practically valueless. Not a bank is open. There is no available credit. The sugar industry, which before the war furnished the chief export crop, cannot be revived for at least two years. The food situa tion is “tragic,” and transportation has been so disrupted that it is dif ficult to distribute even the limited imported supplies. senator Tydings points out the vital use we are to make of the islands in continuing the war against Japan. He advocates an outright gift of $100,000,000 for re construction work, together with loans. And he is convinced, as many have been before him, that the question of political independence for the Philippines is inextricably linked with their economic inde pendence. Thus, if the Philippines are to be given outright political independence, without some form of continued extension of favored treatment in our markets for their products, the gesture on our part would be a mockery. Much of the pressure behind the act granting Philippine independ ence in 1946 came from special in terests in this country anxious to end competition from Philippine products. They will have to be won over to extending continued favored treatment now. Certainly the con duct of the Filipinos during the war has won for them the undying grati tude of our people, creating new ties of mutual respect that never existed before. Our own destiny in the Pa cific is closely linked with the future well-being of the Philippines. Science and the 'Problem' Joseph J. Schifferes, writing in the May bulletin of the Association for the Advancement of Science, dis cusses the costs and the potential gains of modern war in language which should be of interest to many persons who commonly do not think of themselves as scientists. The death of millions of people, as he sees it, is one variety of tragedy; the death of ideas is another. “Broken lives, hardship - steeled emotional callousness, regimented thoughtlessness, maimed bodies, in terrupted careers, restless waiting and wandering in, to and from fox holes and hospitals and a thousand other seeds of bitterness”—these factors, he argues, add up to a vast, all-embracing problem which many thinking individuals appreciate, yet none has solved. And the effect of that problem on cultural progress is blighting. Mr. Schifferes mentions H. J. G. Mosely, the discoverer of atomic numbers, and Rupert Brooke, the poet, as men lost in the conflict of 1914-1918, still mourned, still unre placed. “For these two names,” he declares, “thousands could be sub stituted” from humanity’s experi ence in the past three blood-and tear-stained decades. Equally sad is the frustration of the wounded, the sick, the mentally and spiritually nurt survivors or both the first and second global struggles. “We shall never know how many ‘mfcte In glorious’ Newtons or ‘village’ Ein steins * * * have died untimely” or lived on, too broken, too stunned by horror and suffering to think, to write, even to speak without pain. But Mr. Schlfferes finds ground for hope “in the enlightened ‘GI Bill of Rights’ ” as “one of the most constructive possible steps to ease the solution of the problem.” Referring directly to “the im plementation” of the legislation by “the provision of educational opportunities,” he insists that sci entists “must not fail the veterans nor * * * shirk the magnificent opportunity for the advancement of science provided under (its; gener ous financial terms.” The Govern ment^-the taxpayers of the Nation will meet the expense of tuition, books and “certain other incidentals and subsistence up to fifty dollars a month"; and “here is a broad platform of support upon which scientists may hope to discover and cultivate those bright young minds, now in uniform, whose still inar ticulate ideas yet auger the greatest hope for the future well-being of mankind." Mr. Schifferes, obviously, is less concerned with science as a pijofes sion and scientists as individuals having vested interest in scien tific progress than with science as “one of the humanities ‘capable of being looked at and thought about apart from direct doing.”’ He wants science to develop “an atmosphere i ■!— vne ideas of the still-living boys can flourish." That is another way of demanding "life more abun dant,’’ free and intelligent than it has been in the past—the eras whose fruit was slaughter. And at last perhaps, the cure for war, like the cure for other diseases, may come from the laboratories, the study halls and the libraries in which the new generations of scientists labor. It is not unreasonable to yearn for such a consummation. Final Ruling Needed A Federal Circuit Court, dividing 2-to-l, has upheld the Government in its seizure last spring of the Chicago' business of Montgomery Ward. This reverses the finding by District Judge Phillip L. Sullivan, who had ruled that the President lacked authority, either under the Constitution or the War Labor Dis putes Act, to order the seizure of a business like Montgomery Ward, which is essentially a retail estab lishment engaged in distribution. The Circuit Court decision was rested on the narrow basis of the Disputes Act, which empowers the President, under certain conditions, to take possession of any plant, mine or facility "equipped for the manu facture, production or mining" of articles necessary or useful in the conduct of the war. The key word in this instance is “production.” Montgomery Ward denied that a re tail establishment is engaged in production, and Judge Sullivan agreed. But a majority of the Cir cuit Court ruled otherwise, although its reasoning is neither clear nor persuasive. Of greater interest, however, is the fact that the appellate court refused to pass on the asserted right of the President to seize the plant under the vague powers conferred by the Constitution on the Commander in Chief. Judge Sullivan had met this issue in a ruling adverse to the Gov ernment, but the Circuit Court side stepped it, the contention being that since the Disputes Act covered the case there was no reason to discuss the constitutional question. This leaves a large area of un certainty as to the extent of the President’s wartime powers, how ever, and it is to be hoped that the Supreme Court, if the case goes there, will deal comprehensively with all of the issues involved. In its implications for the future, the constitutional question is too im portant to be left in doubt. Abraham Lincoln said, “The world has never had a good definition of the word ‘liberty,’ ” but he lived too soon to know how the essential meaning of the term was demon strated by the raising of the flag on Iwo Jima and the saving of the Franklin at the front door of Tokyo. This and That By Charles E. Tracewell "BETHESDA, MD. “Dear Sir; “I am interested in building a squirrel house and I would appreciate any sug gestions which you might be able to give me. “Yours truly, H. M. W.” Squirrels are very independent. They will take to almost any large bird house, and gnaw the entrance hole large enough to suit them. They do very well with their summer nests, large bird nests in the trees, but will occupy wooden houses put out for them. A flicker box will do. This is made according to the follow ing dimensions; Floor of box, 7 by 7 inches; depth, 16 inches; diameter of hole, 3 or 4 inches; height of entrance above floor, 14 inches; placement in tree, 10 to 20 feet. The flicker house, when intended for the bird, should be placed on the side of the trunk, but if designed for squirrels is best placed in a crotch. It may be realized that almost any sized house will do for the gray squirrel. He and his family curl up tightly, and occupy little space. They can get in at doors seemingly too little for them. We once knew a learned doctor who erected what he called a cardinal house. Cardinals, of course, do not occupy houses, but the kindly man who put it out did not know that. we put up a neat nouse, painted a dark green, said waited for the cardinals to come. Squirrels came, gnawed out the door and made themselves much at home, to the satisfaction of all concerned. When putting out a house for flickers, it is a good thing to sprinkle a handful of sawdust or shavings in the bottom of the box. If the house is meant for squirrels, the entrance may be lowered from the tip to near the bottom of the box. It really makes no difference. But if ma terial is brought in, the door may be covered by it when the entrance is near the bottom. It may be realized that the dimensions of a house primarily intended for our squirrels can be almost any shape or size desired. Often the position will determine the exact size. If the crotch is small, an almost square box may be made, but if the placement has greater room the box can be made as long as desired. So it is perfectly feasible to make the box with the greatest dimension in length, rather than height. That is, a box roughly a foot square, and two feet long, might fit into a cer tain site better and give a better appear ance. The door usually is made too large. Sometimes makers want to make it 6 inches square, which is entirely too big. Such an entry permits too much cold to enter. Since the primary intention is to afford shelter, the smaller the en trance hole, the better, provided the animals can get in. If the box is made of soft wood, they will gnaw out the hole to suit themselves. As for painting, a deep brown, green or gray will be best, but an unpainted house soon weathers to a perfect shade, and one may suit himself in this regard. If the animals seem chary about tak ing up their quarters, the place may be baited with peanuts or the like. Let us make it clear that this type of shelter is not entirely natural for such a hardy rodent. Squirrels find shelter in trees without houses, and occupy their sum mer nests, so-called, the year around. If no squirrels apply for lodgings, do not be disappointed, but permit anything which flies or walks to occupy it. It is easy enough to make a house and de clare it is for squirrels, but sometimes it is not so easy to make them take to it. In the same way, houses intended for bluebirds often become sparrow houaea, and boxes made for titmice are i occupied by wrens. ^ - k Letters to The Star Readers Differ on Use of Gas In War Against the Japs To th« Editor ot The Star: Maj. George Fielding Eliot has sug gested the use of poison gas by thfe United States forces against Japan. Truly one can’t help wondering whether at bottom we Americans have one bit more respect for moral (Christian) standards in dealing with problems than have our enemies. If you ask me, the "good-natured, kindly, friendly Amer icans" are Just like any of the other peoples of the world, except where the principles of Jesus Christ have seeped deep into the consciousness of individ uals or groups. Shame on Maj. Eliot. God grant that this cruel war may end quickly, or we all shall be practicing the rules of the Jungle—ruthless, "real istic" force instead of Christian humil ity and understanding. Let America beware! Some day she may have to "take" what today she "gives.” Where are today's Christians? B. E. R., a Veteran. To tht Editor of The Star: Maj. George Fielding Eliot, in his article "Gas Against the Japanese,” ap pears to have suffered a relapse. He seems to be back to the bad Judgment he showed around the time of Pearl Harbor when he felt that all we had to do to the Nipponese was a few weeks of mopping up. The late Adolf Hitler promised not to use gas during the progress of World War II, and he kept his word. It is becoming Increasingly easy for military men who, as fighters, have failed to attain the objective on time; or who, as writers, have failed to guess right, to demand the use of poison gas against our enemies. Certainly the women of the American and Chinese republics are not asking for gas to be used against the hordes of Hirohito. But tossing humanltarianism to the four winds, the major is in error from a point of over-all strategy. Let us assume momentarily that we use poison gas on the Nipponese. Nat urally they will use it against us, and our troops will be provided with a supply of gas masks, decontamination equipment and the like. But China and Great Britain now are the two other of the “Big Three” in World War II; and have we consulted their wishes? Would Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek be willing to have the lives of hun dreds of thousands of his soldiers de stroyed because they had no gas masks and because we were in a hurry to capture a few caves and pillboxes? How long would it take us to recover the ground which the Chinese automati cally would have to concede to the Japs once gas were used by the latter? And how long, if ever, would it be before we could recover the good will of the Chinese which we wilfully would lose through the errors of short-sighted mili tary men? It sounds very brave for those with military titles to talk of “gassing ’em”; but it takes a brave nurse to see those boys in hospitals coughing up bloody sections of their lungs until they die. It ip’t very funny. MISS CHIU CHUN-MUI. To the Editor of The Star: Many a parent will agree with the letter of T 5 Raymond C. Ferrell in The Star, advocating that German pris oners be used in the Pacific theater of operations instead of American sol diers for common labor. As he well points out, it is indefensible to send young Americans to build roads, air fields and barracks, when hundreds of thousands of German prisoners are lazying their time away, enjoying good American food right here at home. It just doesn't make sense. Many more parents will agree even more heartily with the strong, thor oughly reasoned article by Maj, George Fielding Eliot, urging that gas be used against the Japs as a means of saving hundreds of thousands of American lives and other hundreds of thousands of broken bodies in warfare against an enemy that has determined to make his defeat as costly as possible and whose fanatically propagandized soldiers are prepared to die by millions, provided they can bring about the death of even more millions of Americans. And they are ready to do precisely that. To oppose use of gas on the grounds of humanity is nonsense. The most ter rible weapon of death and destruction ever used in the world is the new jelly gasoline and phosphorous bomb. If the truth were known, it probably would be recorded that hundreds of thousands of Japanese have lost their lives in hurricanes of the flaming, searing bombs dropped from the skies. We do not hesitate because we know they are making war against us to the bitter end and unless overwhelmingly defeated will plan to retrieve their defeat even though it takes them a hundred years to accomplish it. Compared with these devastating incendiary weapons, to send Japanese soldiers and munition work ers to join their ancestors by means of asphyxiating gas is humane. ROSSEL EDWARD MITCHELL. From War Correspondent’s Wife To the Editor of The 8t»r: The Star recently published a letter from a lady, presumably, signing her self “Cousin to Weaklings.” With the major portion of her letter I have no particular quarrel, and I offer congrat ulations to the mother of a son deco rated in the service of his country. But I do take exception to her slap at the public relations branch of the Army. She thinks the man who wrote that news story about her son “took shelter behind his typewriter” in & "bomb crater." Well, I'd like you to meet my hus band, one disabled American veteran with two years’ service behind him and a shoulder patch on his uniform that says “Army war correspondent.” Pinned to the front of that uniform are an area ribbon with two campaign stars, a Presidential Citation with an Oak Leaf Cluster and a couple of other bits of assorted color. The typewriter he was hiding behind in Prance when a particular bomb hit has not been heard from since, but the effects of that bomb, and others, on him have. The “soft job” he had took him on the Normandy beachhead and on through the St. Lo breakthrough, after months of the English blitz. Air fields in which he took such cowardly refuge behind a pencil got shot up a bit, too. Perhaps I should be ashamed to tell my children, their daddy was so “yel low” he enlisted In the Army at 28, served as an enlisted—not ofBcer—war correspondent and was discharged too late to celebrate his 30th birthday at home. Perhaps Z be, but I’m soil D. R. .1 J* This Changing World By Constantine Brown Last week’s arrests of State Depart ment officials and magazine writers is more than a step to prevent further un authorized leaks from key Government offices. It is the sequel to a situation in which Congress took a hand to safe guard the security of the United States more than a year ago. If pushed to the limit it is likely to develop into a really sensational affair. For a long time it was known to the' security services of this country that there were individuals in Government offices who were disloyal to the United States and, because of their alleged Communist ideology, kept Russia posted on many matters which should not have been known by any foreign nation. Russia, of course, is an ally. But the intelligence services of all the Govern ment departments know exactly what should be communicated to our Allies. There is an excellent liaison between the Soviet Embassy and other agencies in the United States and the Government departments. The officers in charge are responsible men who keep all our Allies Informed about matters they should know. Russia, Britain and all the other mem bers of the United Nations know this and confidential information is ex changed as a rule on the basis of reci procity. Because of the characteristic difference of the Russians very little of a confidential nature is being trans mitted to the United States. Our rep resentatives in the USSR receive a very meager diet of information and there are no American secret agents on Rus sian territory because it is a “closed country” where the slightest indiscre tion of any kind is punished by death. In spite of this lack of reciprocity, the American Government agencies have been extremely liberal with the Soviet representatives both from the point of view of communicating military infor mation to them and permitting Russian technicians to visit our most secret lab oratories. * * * * What is said to be forcing the situa tion into the open is the fact that some American citizens are pushing their Communist ideologies to such a point that they are willing to help by passing on information of every kind to their many friends in the various Soviet agencies. There is no “party line” in Russia except the Communist line which also means intense patriotism and na tionalism. The situation is different in this coun try. The followers of Communism are devoted not only to the Marxian and Lenin doctrine but also to the govern ment which has enforced them. They push their loyalty to their ideology to such an extent that they are willing to become tools of a foreign power. No one here can blame the Soviet officials and agents for taking advantage of this loyalty. But the American cit izens themselves are to be blamed and punished if they break the existing laws. It has been an open secret for some time that many such agents—most of them volunteers; that is to say, they ex pect no remuneration—have infiltrated into many Government departments. Some time ago when Maxim Litvlnoff was still in Washington one of the high est officials in the State Department discussed with the Russian Ambassador certain questions which involved a bit of “give and take.” Later a secret re port was made to him concerning the question at issue and it was suggested that the whole matter should be left in abeyance because it gave the United States a very strong bargaining power. This document was marked “very secret” and was intended only for the eyes of the “very high official.” A few days later when the drafter of the memorandum visited the Russian Embassy on an entirely different matter he was flabbergasted when the Ambas sador said to him, “Mr. X, why have you taken an adverse attitude in 6uch and such a matter?” The Ambassador then proceeded to quote almost verbatim the contents of the “very secret” memo randum, which should never have come into the possession of the representa tive of the Russian government. It was not a vital question, but it showed to this American official that there was an important leak somewhere between his desk, the desk of his chief and the secret filing cabinet. * * * * It is because of this and other such incidents that the House Military Affairs Committee has so strongly questioned the wisdom of the War Department in commissioning Communists into the secret services of the United States Army. This committee has taken the attitude—in opposition to some of the high officials in the War Department— that individuals commissioned in the Army and particularly those in com munications, radar, cryptography and Intelligence cannot be Communists or have any connection with the Com munist Party. On foreign affairs, the party line Is very clear and explicit. Those who are described as “fellow travelers”—that is to say, individuals who have espoused the Communist doctrine without ac ' tually having been enrolled in the party —are invariably following the policies which are most favorable to Moscow, and, under cover of democracy, denounce policies of their own Government. Crit icism of the Government’s policies is healthy and there is much that can be criticized in the workings of the State Department. But there is a line to be drawn between this criticism and w’hat is recognized to be the national policy of this country. On the Record By Dorothy Thompson IN COUNTRY DISTRICT NEAR MUNICH.—The European war has been over for a month and we new are In the chore of governing defeated Germany We have taken on an uncharted task in a nation which for generations was an economic unity and for the past several years was composed of highly centralized totalitarian states, which have fallen apart now to be governed by four occupying armies, each sovereign of its own zone. All its cities have been ravaged, most of them totally destroyed. In Munich it is feared even to cart off the rubble since tens of thousands of corpses are rotting under it and the danger in exhuming them lies in the possibility of epidemics. Its agriculture is run down. It is short of seed, fertilizer and, for the moment, labor. Yet Bavaria and all Germany, thus disintegrated, must be prepared to feed the people. Proclamation over the radio and the single weekly newspaper published by the military government warn the popu lation there will be no Hoover or Quaker relief, that relief will be the German problem under military gov ernment. Bavaria, the luckiest part of Germany, in normal times produced 78 per cent of its own food. Westphalia in the Rhineland is far worse off, but already the ration there is 800 calories daily. Supplements of seasonable vegetables will bring it to perhaps 1,100. It is my opinion, which is shared by other correspondents, that in Col. John Jay Keegan, head of the Allied Military Government for Bavaria, and his im ; mediate assistants we have as able men—under given directives from above —as we are likely to And anywhere with what confronts them. * * * * They are ordered first to maintain law and order. This is not ao difficult as might be conceived. The population is exhausted, stunned, groggy and docile and its only point of stability is the American Army. But law and order are unlikely maintainable in the face of famine. In the village is AMG for the town ship, headed, as are most such units, by a youthful American officer, inex perienced in any sort of government. He and two American assistants, who do not speak German, are dependent upon a translator who is a local German picked at the suggestion of pre-Hitler town functionaries. The translator, who is the mediator between the population and the government, actually holds enormous power, and the local popula tion and this petty creature realize it to the fullest. * * * * In the government even the highest officials are forbidden to fraternize, and so must govern the population with one way communication and must, accord ing to directives, create an anti-Nazi German administration to carry out its orders without any idea of local condi tions. The safest thing is to reinstate pre-Hitler functionaries and let them fill administrative offices. But every one who has done anything in public life for the last 12 years has been a party member, either by choice or by com pulsion, and the youth from say Tulsa, Okla., who wants to go home, must de cide not what has been on a coat lapel, but what is in the heart. In this rich food-producing area Nazi scoundels and SS profiteers had ac quired all the large rich farms and in one case chains of them. The owners are now in the clink, but AMG has not taken over the farms, so they are adrift under previous managers and the own ers, through relatives, are carting off unchecked what they claim belongs to them. It happened on a farm this morning. The Nazi system of forced deliveries has been suspended. No one is con trolling stocks, seed, grain or animals, and the primitive will of survival leads the peasants to slaughter the animals and can and store food for their per sonal wants. The slave workers still remaining are completely out of hand. Demobilized soldiers are not organized for farm or other work. The new landrat, fearing to displease the Americans or the popu lation, makes the fewest possible deci sions, and the youthful head of the military government also is afraid to make mistakes and, naturally, avoids decisions. Unconditional surrender is a total reality, but turns victory, under the policies we have adopted, into a terri ble burden. (Copyright, 1B45 > The Fuehrer Hunt Is On By Maj. George Fielding Eliot We cannot afford to allow Adolf Hitler to vanish into the mists of mystery. This is a matter of deadly seriousness, now and for the future. We shall have enough troubles with out a Hitler legend hanging over our heads like a Sword of Damocles. The Russians drew the covert, and found the beast had escaped. They have told us so. They have said in effect: “He got away from us. He is probably out of our reach. He is prob ably in that part of the world where we look to you Americans and you British to keep order. Now it is up to you.” Of course, we can’t be sure just where he is—always provided that he did not perish miserably in the flaming ruins of Berlin, after all, and is not yet identified, or is beyond identification. We do know that Russian methods are pretty thorough; we can be reasonably confident that they would not admit that they were at a loss without ex hausting every immediate possibility. We cannot be sure that Hitler is not hiding somewhere in Eastern Europe, in the Russian zone of influence, but the chances are against it. * * * * Why? Because, if he got away from Berlin, almost certainly his escape was long and carefully planned, with every detail worked out. The choice of a place of refuge must have been made with great care. It is unlikely to the last degree that this place of refuge, would be one within the zone of opera tions of the Russian secret police. Hit ler, with his contempt for the "deca dent democracies" and their silly ideas about human rights; their stupid laws and their restrictions on what a police man can do, would prefer to take his chances in the west—or so it would seem to this writer. Wherever he went, it was somewhere witi^n airplane radius of Berlin. The 4 ■ Pest guess—the one the Russians have made—is Spain. We know that. German refugees have been reaching Spain— maybe some of them to prepare the way for the Fuehrer's escape, though very few indeed will be trusted with that secret for the present. We know that there are a good many Germans already in Spain. We know that Francisco Franco considers that he owes a great debt to Hitler for having established him in power at Madrid. He would not dare give Hitler open sanctuary. But he might be willing to help Hitler es cape from Allied justice. After all, the public trial and execution as a criminal of the man to whom he has admitted he owes his present position would not be calculated to increase Franco’s stand ing in the world or with his own people. And. it may be added, it is quite pos sible to take ship at a quiet little Span ish port lor South America: or it is possible to fly to the Spanish colony of Rio de Oro and take ship there, even more quietly. Or one can fly from Rio de Oro to Brazil—if there should be some interior airfield which can be hid den away from the local police—and thence one could fly to the Argentine. And there are such things as subma rines. * * * * All this is the purest speculation, a mere review of a few of the possibilities. There are others. The point is, that this is a matter which the governments of the United States and Great Britain, and their associates of the Western world, can not afford to neglect or shrug aside. If Adolf Hitler is loose in the world he must be found and brought to justice. If he is dead, that fact must be estab lished beyond any possibility of doubt. If one of these two things does not happen we shall be plagued for a gen eration to come with the Hitler legend. (Coprrtsbt, IMS.) Defense Policy Council Seen Needed by U. S. Army and Navy Should Know Commitments, Says Observer By David Lawrence America’s participation In a world league to maintain peace is now assured and it means obligations in the realm of defense which cannot be left to conjec ture from year to year. Hence the Army and the Navy are somewhat puzzled as to what size the military force or arma ment must be and how much money can be spent hereafter for these purposes. What are the commitments? Must the United States maintain a large enough Army to be able to go overseas imme diately on the outbreak of a major crisis? How large must the Navy be? These questions are of the kind that officers of the Army and Navy have in the past found it difficult to answer. These commanders have had to guess at American requirements and make as 8U™fiJi°ns as to the extent of the de fense problem. Why should this be left to guesswork from year to year? Why should not the United States have a defense policy? There has been much talk about a consolidation of the War and Navy De partments. This doesn’t begin to scratch the surface of the problem of national safety. What really is needed is an or ganization composed of the United States joint chiefs of staffs and policy making officers from the State Depart ment as well as from the civilian side of the War and Navy Departments. Such a council on defense policy should be required to meet together and report to the president of the United States periodically. It should define the scope of our defense requirements in the light of national policy. Careless Misstatements. There has recently been a tendency to say carelessly that the United States has had "no foreign policy.” This is a mis statement of a condition of affairs which might better be described as the absence of a co-ordinated body of for eign policy makers. For we have always had a foreign policy—only it has been made opportunistically from year to year by some bright, young men in the State Department who prepare the fun damental memoranda based on a super - | ficial knowledge of the foundations of national power and too often influenced by a congenital habit of disregarding the advice of military men. Yet when war clouds appear on the horizon these same diplomatic officers make commitments for which the mili tary side of our Government has not been given an adequate opportunity to prepare. Should the Philippines have been prepared for defense? Should Guam have been fortified? Should our naval forces have been divided as between the Atlantic and Pacific? Should the United States Navy have been given enough aircraft carriers and Marines to permit of extensive amphibious op erations? These are questions that 1 should have been asked frequently in ! the decade prior to 1939, and answered j by a defense policy council consisting j of the best minds of the executive and j legislative branches of our Govern I ment. As a matter of fact the United States might have prevented the entry of Japan into this war if plans for a two ocean Navy had not been repeatedly brushed aside, even by some high naval officials who mistakenly assumed that the United States would not under take the defense of the Philippines and who never figured on a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as they con sented to the depletion of our Pacific Fleet for use in the Atlantic. The very year it was apparent that Japan would join some day with Italy and Germany there was need for a change in our defense policy and an immediate en largement of our Navy. Pan-American Defense. In the so-called postwar world, na j tional policy should be formulated a i long time in advance. We know al ! ready, for instance, that defense of > the pan-American countries is a com | mitment. This can be accomplished pri ! marily by seapower, which includes airpower, surface power and undersea power as well as amphibious troops. We know' also that we must keep any potential enemy from approaching our shores by way of Africa, Alaska or any overseas vantage point in the Atlantic or the Pacific. But apparently the Army and Navy today are to guess at American commitments from a reading of the newspapers. Unfortunately it has happened that j w'hen a naval officer appears before a congressional committee and tells the truth about the dangers that face us he is called an alarmist or reprimanded. It would be a much safer plan all around if Congress or the President created a defense policy council. Then the American people might be prepared to prevent or thwart any possible at tacks on the United States, thus saving perhaps tens of thousands of lives, as our unpreparedness in the Pacific al ready has cost us. (Reproduction Rights Reserved.) True Canadianism From the OtUws Le Droit. Tolerance and unity do not entail assimilation and the fusion of the principal elements of our population, or the throwing aside of the truth, historic or otherwise. Each ethnic group has its religious, national, academic, social, economic institutions which cor respond to its traditions and aspira tions and which no one has the right to ask it to sacrifice. Whenever these institutions are legitimate, there should be no opposition to their Survival or to the respect accorded them. . . . True Canadianism consists exactly in de veloping side by side two cultures and two civilizations, without either being opposed to the expansion of the other or encroaching upon its rights. It is, furthermore, in this hostility and en croachment that are to be found the main reason for national disunity. School Yard ' The bell rings out for recess, and a tide Of voices rises with a summer sound Like laughter over water and the pound Of feet upon a shore. The voices- ride Like swimmers on the surf, their shouts collide And sparkle and recede, then dash again As if their very rush would overrun The boynds of space. The belli The waves subside. The stillness holds a moment, listening, tense— And now once more the busy sound* grow plain A hammer-tap of nails upon a fence, The swish of some one sweeping in the street, The minor-keyed, far whistle of a train, And the firm trudging of the postman’s feet. HORTENSE ROBERTA ROBERTS.