Newspaper Page Text
With Sanday Marnlnr Edltien. THEODORE W. NOYES, Editor. WASHINGTON, D, C. i'h* Evenlni Star Newspaper Company. Main Office: 11th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. New York Office: 110 East 42d St Chicago Office: 435 North Michigan Ave. Delivered by Carrier—Metropolitan Area. SEagalar Edition. 4 Sundays. fi Sundays, ening and Sunday. 80c per mo. Sl.oo per mo I 6,0c Per month, e Sunday 6tar 10c per copy. 4 Sundays, o Sundays. C i&wHJ* SFdSun<UlT- *t.00 mo $1.10 mo. Night Final Star- _ <5c per month. Rate* by Mail—Payable in Advance. Anywhere In United States. . _ 1 month, 6 months. 1 year i Jvenini and Sunday. $1.00 $0.00 $12 00 Tha evening Star- .75 4.00 goo The Sunday Star- .50 2 50 6.00 Telephone National 5000. entered at the Post Office, Washington. D. C„ as second-class mail matter. Member ef the Associated Press. ^3^*®.*°ci®1 • Is exclusively entitled to republlcation of all news dispatches «wited to It or net otherwise credited in this *L*® ^5?. l°c.al news published herein. kwrwTm Publication of special dispatches ntrein also are reserved._ _TUESDAY, May 7, 1946 It Goes Part Wav The Sumners-Capper amendment was drawn on the theory that the constitution should leave to Con gress the degree of representation, 'in Congress and in the electoral college, that the people of the Dis- | trict might enjoy—subject only to j the maximum limitations imposed 1 by proportional representation on • the people of the States. The thought behind this theory was that while Congress might ! limit this representation to the ! House alone, or might permit the election of only one instead of two Senators from the District, experi ence and public opinion might de cree more or less representation later on. In other words, the amend ment would merely give Congress the power to admit the people of the District to some sort of national representation, without attempting to specify how the power was to be exercised. It was an enabling amendment only. The Senate Judiciary Committee, by a margin of one vote, declined to report this resolution and sent j it back to the Hatch subcommittee for reconsideration. Several Sena tors, including Chairman McCarran i and Senator O'Mahoney, either objected to the possibility of District ! S representation in the Senate or be lieved that such a possibility would defeat the amendment. The new Hatch amendment has , been rewritten to overcome the ob jection of the possibility of District representation in the Senate. The Star, for one, hopes that the Judiciary Committee will report it to the Senate. If debate in the Senate supports the theory that no amendment can be approved that permits even the possibility of Dis trict representation in the Senate, the modified form of the amend ment now recommended by Senator Hatch is obviously to be preferred to no amendment at all. The new amendment would give the people of the District some voice in their j Government. It would go part way • in correcting a condition which so disgracefully repudiates, as long as it exists, the principles on which our form of government is based. j The Army and Food Shortly after V-J day the War Department requested a committee of civilian food experts to conduct a survey of Army food supplies and their handling, with a view not only j to salvaging huge surpluses left over from the war, but to placing the j Army messing program on an effi- | cient peacetime basis. The commit- j tee completed its survey las(> Octo- | ber and submitted its report on ; April 5. The report, recommending drastic reforms in policies and pro cedures and criticizing certain wast- j age of food, has just been made ] public. Why there was so much j delay in making public the findings ' of the investigators has not been explained. Whatever the reason, it is unfortunate that the report could not have been released more promptly, for it was inevitable that its publication in the midst of the Government’s famine-relief cam paign should leave headline readers with the impression that the criti cized waste and spoilage are prev alent in the Army at the very time that civilians are being urged to ] sacrifice. Actually, the losses of food through spoilage of surplus stocks | which the committee properly de- ! plored occurred approximately six months ago. At that time the Army fouiSd itself with a large reserve of wartime stocks of food on hand and with an increasing clamor for quick demobilization of our soldiers—in- | eluding, of course, those assigned to handle food. The rapid demobili zation left stores of perishable food without adequate or experienced personnel to take conservation measures against decay or to make It feasible to salvage and redistrib ute the war-born stocks. As a re sult, the committee found, there was “serious loss of food.” The com mittee confined its observations to the Army, but there undoubtedly have been similar food losses in the j Navy—although the fact that some discarded Navy food failed to have ill effects on an Oregon Representa tive in a dramatic test does not, of itself, prove that the food should not have been thrown away. On the basis of its observations last October, the committee has made some constructive recommen dations for reorganization of the Army’s traditional system of keep ing itself well fed. Noting what it described as the “general inferior quality” of men assigned to cook and handle food, the group sug gested the creation of a Food Serv ice Corps in the Army, composed of men carefully trained and ade- ; quately paid for the important and j highly specialized duties of feeding j an army. In addition, it was urged I that a course in food handling be made a regular part of the curricu lum at West Point. Most important of all, from the standpoint of the average GI, the committee would seek to raise the low estate into which KP duty has fallen. Instead of being a punishment, KP duty would mean extra, pay and the stig ma would be further removed by giving every soldier a turn at it, regardless of his conduct. Certain it is that Army chow will never be up to professional civilian standards as long as the job of preparing it is left to inexperienced and unwill ing hands. France Votes 'No' The rejection of the draft consti tution drawn up by the Assembly chosen last autumn in a popular election for that purpose comes as a distinct surprise to most foreign observers, predictions having been mostly for acceptance by a fairly close margin. The results, however, reveal its rejection by upwards of a j million votes. Popular interest was shown by the fact that approxi mately 80 per cent of those eligible to vote cast their ballots. inis draft constitution was chiefly the work of the Communist party, which overbore the objections of the Socialist leadership in the Assembly and the violent opposition of the conservative MRP. With its single Chamber possessing virtually un checked powers, it would have en abled any party gaining predomi nance through an election to have virtually transformed France at its pleasure during a five-year tenure. And the Communists felt that, in such a parliamentary setup, they stood to be the most likely gainers. That opinion, however, was shared by most of the French electorate. So, while the disciplined block of Communist voters plumped solidly for the draft constitution every where, a great number of Socialist voters gagged at the idea and joined with the conservatives of all shades in voting against the plan; the re sult being its rejection. Having sponsored the idea, the Communists are naturally the chief losers, not only in the defeat of their pet project but also by the loss of prestige they have suffered and the popular trend against them which appears to have set in. The chances would seem to be that, when new elections take place for the choice of another Constituent Assembly, the Communists will not be so strong as in the present Assembly and that the MRP will be proportionately stronger than now. Furthermore, the uneasy Communist-Socialist ac cord in the present Assembly may be dissolved. This would be the more likely if the moderate wing of the Socialists, typified by Leon Blum, should prefer an accord with a strengthened MRP, leaving the Communists to themselves. Meanwhile, France is left with a very “provisional” government and a considerable period of uncertainty before the new Constituent Assem bly can be elected, draw ud a new constitution, get it ratified by the people, and then give way to a reg ular legislature and executive duly elected by still another polling. In the natural course of events, this will take several months, during which France will be in a rather anomalous position as regards both its foreign policy and the course of domestic economic reconstruction. The effect of such uncertainty upon every aspect of French national life remains to be seen. British Atomic Law Though quite as sweeping in its objectives, the bill just filed with Parliament for the control of atomic energy in Britain seems almost a makeshift compared to the one pro posed for the United States. As recently introduced in the Senate, with unanimous committee approval, the McMahon bill would establish an all-powerful civilian commission for America, plus a mili tary liaison committee, an advisory committee and a special joint con gressional committee. From an administrative standpoint the ar rangement would be as elaborate as the unique and dangerous atomic problem demands, and it would involve fines up to $20,000 or prison sentences up to twenty years, or both, for individuals guilty of dis seminating restricted information. In sharp contrast, the British bill would set up no new agency of any kind but would merely hand over atomic energy control to the Min istry of Supply as an addition to the ministry’s present responsibilities. Moreover, penalties for revealing restricted data would be much milder tiidii uiuse nxea in tne proposed United States law, amounting to a maximum of only five years’ impris onment or a top fine of $500, or both. In short, although Britain’s control objectives would be as great and far-reaching as ours, its admin istrative and enforcement machinery would be relatively unimpressive—a fact likely to puzzle any American familiar with the long debate, the exhaustive hearings and the careful thinking that went into the writing of the McMahon bill. It would be a mistake, however, to conclude from this that Britain is underestimating the gravity and magnitude of the atomic problem. The fact that it contemplates con trols as drastic as ours proves other wise. The bill in Parliament has been filed with the frank acknowl edgment that the administrative features are of an experimental, stopgap nature. Unlike our own press and public, the press and public of the United Kingdom have been more or less indifferent to the legislative phases of this subject, and there has been nothing over there comparable to the McMahon committee, with the result that the proposed British law seems largely improvised. It is worth remember ing, further, that the British are not actually engaged in atomic produc tion, whereas we are. For good or ill, we are the world pioneers in this revolutionary field, and our legisla tion to govern it must naturally be more complete and detailed at this time than that of any power. A. A. A. S. Home The American Association for the Advancement of Science long has needed a home of its own. Its ad ministrative secretary has had an office in the old Smithsonian Insti tution building for many years, but accommodations there have been far from adequate. The Smith sonian plant already was crowded to the bursting point when it gave hospitality to the A. A. A. S, and conditions have not improved since then. But even if there were plenty of room in the Smithsonian establish ment for the world’s largest fellow ship of scientific workers, a build ing specifically devoted to shelter ing the enterprises of the A. A. A. S. would be wanted. Those activities are expanding and require space for their growth. During the next cen tury or so the whole picture of civili zation either will be ruined by sci ence or, providentially, preserved by it. The practitioners of “organized common sense” have discovered how to tap atomic energy. By the same processes of reason and logic, they now must learn how to employ their discovery to justify the survival of civilization. Such is their duty and their privilege. And scientists are well aware of both their obligation and their opportunity. They con stitute a modern equivalent of Archimedes the Syracusan, who about twenty-one centuries ago de clared: “Give me a lever long enough and a prop strong enough, and I single-handed can move the world.” The new A. A. A. S. building should be the “prop” just as the know-how should be the "lever” for science to do what the lay public expects sci ence to do. It will not be simply a monumental luxury. On the con trary, it will be a structure with* a strictly pragmatic purpose. The site at Scott Circle is convenient to the Carnegie Foundation, the Na tional Geographic Society and other centers of activity of the same gen eral character. It is not too distant from the Smithsonian. When the new edifice has been raised and placed in service, Washington will have even greater cause to claim to be the scientific center of the Western Hemisphere, if not of the entire globe. Should the A. A. A. S. need help from the local community toward that end, it will merit and deserve it to the full. This and That By Charles E. Tracewell. “FALLS CHURCH, Vft. Dear Sir: "There is honor among thieves, as the following eyewitness account will attest. This morning while working in mv garden I noticed a blue jay make re peated forays from the limb of a nearbv tree onto a patch of soil I had finished spading and quickly locating a Japanese beetle grub fly back again upon his perch. remaps zu minutes elapsed and there was a terrified scream behind me “Quickly turning, I was startled to ?ee, a sharp-shinned hawk seize the hickless blue jay and fly directly at, me and over my head, clutching his victim in his needlelike talons. "He came to earth immediately In a neighbors yard, near an unoccupied dog house, and had scarcely alighted ere a starling (coming from the neigh bors garage) flew directly into the melee of hawk and jay. The hawk was so startled that he ™'eas,ed h!S grip and Mr Blu«J»y. emit ting this time a note of defiance, fled somewhat disheveled, from the scene of his near demise. mf,3hei»!f?!k' chagrined at losing his meai, ieft. the arena disgustedly, while tne starling, pugnacious rascal that he is. retired the conqueror. there is honor, even among thieves. "Yours truly, E. H ” * * * * The starling has a deserved reputa tion for doing just this sort of thing He has been known to fly down and a^pool drowmng baby sparrow out of , A c®nry fellow, the starling is able to take care of himself—and others— w-henever need be He is not much afraid of any other bird, not even hawks as this account testifies. biI1 and neck muscles, nis solid body and marvelous flying ability combine to make him a foe to be feared. With these, however, he combines a good disposition, so that he manages species & °ng VCry Wel1 wlth a11 other Small birds never have much to fear from him at feeding stations, where he conducts himself rather well, every thing taken into consideration tn th praise as this may seem strange to those who have never really watched fihftm&tar-ing clos.ely’ but only know him fiom evidences left downtown, or from the conversation of starling haters. Actually, this is some bird, to use the nnrintChlan In the sPringtime he sings and whistles with the best of them, an other fact unknown to professional starling haters. "?e air> utbe starling has few to tWn iiLhU11neing ablC t0 master con tinents^as well as drive away hawks. . has 5lade for himself and his children wholly new migration routes still hHrinf6 land' Across the Ma he is still held in great esteem by the Euro peans. Natural enemies there keen down the number of his tribes. P *ere hf. .wf.xes on Rood American food ncainI?U^lplluS’ despite inroads made against him by persons who find killing great sport. 6 . 11 be, said- fairly, that unless man ™tdj imlh0W manages to educate itself out of looking upon killing as great fun full and satisfying, he will end by kill £TUu He is- with his atom bomb, on the highroad to doing it. The wise starling seems to have both humor and intelligence in his good deeds hahf'nn in6 fT’ saw one of them on tbe back of another that was pecking at a slice of bread. Prom this dry vantage point he reached down and ate some bread himself. We have seen a starling take pieces of bread back to the bird bath and “dunk” them with great satisfaction. Here is a good bird as birds go, despite all that has been said against him, a bird with brains and ability, fully able and willing at times to do good deeds just for the sake of doing them. Letters to The Star Argues Both Sides Are at Fault In Coal Mining Business To the Editor of The Star: From the information recently pub lished about miners' living conditions it is easy to see that the Federal and State governments have not done their duty Vy their citizens of the mining districts—or are likely to. For over 50 years the voters of Amer ica have done little to ameliorate con ditions by making and enforcing laws through their elected officials. Now the country is going to pay for its indiffer ence by going wtihout comfort until the mining industry settles its peren nial squabble. Overindulgence in liquor appears to be the main reason why a miner, who earns over $50 a week and pays but $5 a week for housing, lives in squalor on company property. When such men, who earn more than I did during most of my working life, do not do as well as I, who contribute to charity instead of asking it, they have themselves to blame. While miners live in hovels salesmen build mansions out of profits, despite their poor-mouthing. Some of the profits could be used at the mines for bettering conditions. I don’t like arbitrary Lew ises, drunken miners or gouging opera tors, and they don’t like each other but, Government agencies having failed, the miners and operators should get together and make efforts for improve ment instead of mutual destruction. In wages the miners are comparable to motormen and better paid than most engineers, despite lack of book educa tion. Mines could and should be made safer and cleaner, housing better, drunkenness abolished through nonem ployment of the persistently inefficient and reckless employes and a scale of living set up comparable with the money earned. This, evidently, can come only by worker and employer co-operation. What if all other business behaved like the mining business! Where would this country be? And where will it soon be, with England and Russia forging ahead while we talk of liberating and feeding the world, and are estopped from regular routines of living for lack of fuel? W. E. ALLEN. More About Southern Cooking To the Editor of The Sur: (With apologies to Ray H. Everett.) Uncle Zeke, old sour-looking, Just don't know our Southern cooking. All blowed up with ’east-cake bread, only baked beans in his head. Never heard of cornbread sticks, lives on gastronomic tricks; eats his pie for breakfast, wow! Needs seven stomachs like a cow. Never saw a juicy yam, never ate a Smithfleld ham! Never tasted shad delicious, greens and bacon, most nu tritious. When he's full of bony cod, cannot even smile at God. * Beans may build a long lean Yankee, maybe codfish makes ’em cranky. ’Way down South is where the girls wear the dimples, curves and curls; queenly w’ays. so charming looking all because of Southern cooking! ROSSEL EDW. MITCHELL. To the Editor of The Star: We harken to dispeptic Zeke while pannin’, with his rusty squeak, fine Southern grub—none better than! And good for what ails any man. Then pity in our bosom leaps for any one whose soul so sleeps that he can't savor chicken fried with grits and gravy on the side. Or turnip greens and good corn pone well seasoned with hawg jawbone, or flapjacks doused with sorghum grand —a luscious treat in any land. Trouble is Zeke’s never et good grub cooked right—we’ll make a bet! For if he did he'd yelp for more and chuck his tinkers out the door. Now, if he’d spend some time down South we'd have him watering at the mouth, and then return him, not so cranky, a sweeter. South-conditioned Yankee! Tis whispered, with authority (though there be some who won’t agree) that one who eats such vittles prime can whop three Yankees—any time! HUGH P. CASH. Slogans About ‘Heels’ To the Editor of The 8t*r: I am the 15-year-old president of a Youth Fellowship group. We have a question to present to you. and in view of the fact that ours is the age group who will have to handle the affairs of the world tomorrow, I feel certain that you will give this matter your con sideration. If you sit at any lunch counter and watch the one who turns out the sand wiches, you will see “heels” of bread being thrown again and again into the discard. This, in spite of the fact that millions are dying from lack of food. If we think of the amount of bread wasted in the United States in thisvway every day, it is appalling. Now this is our question: Would your paper sponsor a “Save the Heels” campaign? Or do you think we overestimate the loss in life saving food? Here are some slogans we have manufactured: “Use your heart and let your ‘heels’ save lives." “Use your brain and save your ‘heels.’" “Toe the mark and eat your ‘heels.’ ” “If ‘heels’ can save lives, can’t we save ‘heels’?” If you think our idea worthy of your effort, won’t you put it over? HELEN R. MEAD. President of the Youth Fellowship, Washington Grove, Md. Blames Congressmen for Famine To the Editor of The 8t»r: In your editorial, “While Millions Starve,” citing confusion at the top level regarding what methods should be taken to help alleviate the growing famine in Europe, you ask if we are not fiddling while a fourth of mankind starves. Sir, have we not been fiddling for the past 10 months? A year ago I saw in Europe thousands of acres of farmland lying fallow and untended. I also saw stunted French and Dutch children who already had suffered from malnutrition. To me those untended fields gave stark, mute warning of im pending famine. Since my return to the United States 1 have heard one Representative and one Senator from my State say that they, too, were in Europe last summer. These men are supposed to possess keen, observant minds. Seeing those un planted fields and those stunted chil dren, did the obvious warning escape them? Was it lack of foresight or lack of courage which prompted these men and others of their colleagues to say little about—do less about—what they saw in Europe 10 months ago? RICHARD J. PERRY. This Changing World By Constantine Brown oome pouurai iorecasters wno nad predicted that the new French consti tution, strongly tinged with Communist Ideologies, would be approved by the French people at the polls are happy to admit they were wrong. The electorate rejected the constitution by a healthy margin. The forecasters, however, are keeping their fingers crossed and do not dare indulge in spectacular optimistic state ments until after the elections for an other Constituent Assembly which are scheduled to take place on June 2. The electoral battle which will develop in the next four weeks is expected to be the most sensational in the history of France. The Communists were dismayed at Sunday's election results. They had ex pected clear victory and on that as sumption had made it known that the next Premier will have to be one of the Communist Party's Big Three. They have now decided to launch a powerful campaign which, they hope, will give them a definite majority in the new assembly. There are many reasons why the French people rejected the Ill-concealed attempt to stifle their freedom "con stitutionally.” The foremost cause, how ever, is that the French are politically minded and their country is not occu pied by foreign force. They had the ad vantage over the nations which are under the thumb of the Red Armies and could express their wishes freely. The French are politically unstable; thev like changes. But when they realized that the new constitution would per manently shackle their political free dom and eventually lead to a one-partv government, they decided to throw the Communist-sponsored constitution into the discard. * * * * There seems to be no question that the renewed hope that the United States would come to their assistance economically has had much to do with the way the Frenchmen voted. The French Communist Party has en deavored to present Russia as the real friend of France. The Soviet's decision to send 500.000 tons of wheat to the starving French wras accompanied by a fanfare of "Hollywood'’ publicity. At the same time the apparent failure of the head of the Leftist Socialists, former Premier Leon Blum, to obtain a loan in Washington was exploited by the propa ganda agencies of Maurice Thorez, the nominal head of the Communist Party in Prance. But the realistic Prench re alized they could expect nothing but a "token” economic assistance from the U. S. S. R., which herself is asking for aid from the United States. The shrewdly arranged telephone con versation of last week between Presi dent Truman and Foreign Minister Bidault—who is the head of the MRP, a moderate Christian Socialist party and spearheaded the opposition to the constitution—was used in a spectacular manner by the moderate elements in France. The assertion by the White House that nothing but courteous greetings were exchanged between the President and the French Foreign Minister did not succeed in offsetting the effect of the inspired reports that America was ready to come to France's rescue. This view is expected to be confirmed in the near future when it is announced that Mr. Blum has been able to arrange for Immediate credits through the Ex port-Import Bank of at least $100,000, 000 worth of vital necessities to be purchased in this country and rushed to France as soon as possible. Further assistance in the form of credits which do not have to- go through the slow process of congressional ratification will be extended to France later. * * * * For the time being the French people have demonstrated clearly that they want to maintain their traditional right to control the government instead of being controlled by it, as is the case in Russia and in all the countries of Cen tral and Southeastern Europe. This demonstration is encouraging and may have a wide effect on the rest of Europe if the French people vote against to talitarianism at the forthcoming elec tion. Political ohservers in Washington re gard the result of the Sunday ballot as the first ray of sunshine in an other wise dark and uncertain European politi cal sky. They believe that the French determination not to accept totalitari anism—regardless of how it may have been coated—will have an important repercussion even in Britain, where the government is said to be seriously concerned over the lethargy of its people toward the increasing pressure of Com munist propaganda. The Political Mill By Gould Lincoln President Truman's proposal to Con gress that legislation be enacted author izing the supply of war material, military training and technical advice and training to the other nations of the Western Hemisphere looms at once as a matter of major importance in inter national relations. In his message to Congress the President spoke of the proposed program as one of “military collaboration with other American states.’’ It it intended to enhance the defense of the Western Hemisphere. The President was careful to say that the operation of the proposed program was to be within the spirit and principle of the United Nations Charter. It comes also within the provisions of the Charter which provide for regional arrangements. Under the terms of the Charter regional arrangements may be entered into—as in the case of” the Americas—which may be used for the maintenance of peace or the resistance of aggression, with the authority of the Security Council of the United Nations. The President's message and the introduction of the accompanying bill in Congress are not to be construed, it is said, as in any measure a threat to other nations, including Russia. It !s simply a common sense program to standardize and improve military de fenses by a nation which has the ability for production and for training, techni cal and otherwise. However, it will undoubtedly be construed as in some measure an offset to the extension of Russian military arrangements with the countries now within the sphere of Russian influence. * * * * This country, also, has considerable military material, under lease-lend in other American countries, and under the proposed legislation this material may be disposed of advantageously. The United States, too, has large surpluses of war materials on hand which also could be supplied to the other American nations. Mr. Truman in his message pointed out that the American republics have assumed new responsibilities for their mutual defense and for the mainten ance of peace in the Act of Chapultepec and the Charter of the United Nations His bill clearly is to Implement both. It is in line with the recommendations of an inter-American defense board. The program of collaboration can be extended also to Canada—whose com mon defense with the United States is of particular importance. While the President in his message said nothing about Argentina and the present situation of that country with respect to the United States and other American republics, it was said on re liable authority that there is no present intention to extend this program to that country—nor will there be until that situation has been considerably clari fied. Indeed, in some quarters it is j argued that the program might easily j be of great benefit to Uruguay and Para aguav, two small nations that have been under great pressure from Argentina. * * * * It is clear, as the President said, that a special responsibility for leadership in the matter of American defense rests upon the United States because of the j preponderant technical, economic and ! military resources of this country. It is. ! however, not the purpose of the Presi dent to provide an indiscriminate or un restricted distribution of armaments. It j is his contention that this would con- I tribute to "a useless and burdensome j armaments race.” The purpose is to pro- i vide for adequate defense, and this i country is in a position to see that it is assured to this part of the world. And it is intended primarily to enable the American nations to co-operate in the maintenance of inter-American peace. There is, however, the clear intimation that the program, if developed, will also play its part in hemispherical defense and in the discouragement of aggression from any source. It remains to be seen what will be the attitude of other American republics to the proposed program. The belief is that it w'ill be welcome to most of them. There is no present intention of rushing the measure through Congress, and it is already assured that the Senate For eign Relations Committee, to which the President's bill has been referred, will give ample consideration to the meas ure, holding hearings on it before under- ! taking any actiqn. Four-Power Pact By George Fielding Eliot Tne great virtue or me tour-power treaty concerning Germany, proposed by Secretary of State Byrnes at Paris, is that it establishes a definite pledge by the United States to stay in Germany for at least 25 years, and at the end of that time to consult with the other three powers as to the need of staying longer. As this column pointed out as long ago as February 1 of this year, such a definite pledge is of the utmost impor tance for the stabilization of Europe and of the world. Memories of American withdrawal and abandonment of re sponsibility after the last war have plagued the minds of many of our friends. The violent reaction after V-J day, the universal cry “Bring the Boys Home!’’ which resulted in the virtual disintegration of our Army, has done nottyng to increase confidence abroad in our determination to see this peace through. Mr. Byrnes’ treaty would go far to allay these very natural anxieties. Also, its ratification by the Senate would go far toward stabilizing our own thinking on the subject. It would establish a definite obligation. It would enable definite military plans to be made, as far as occupation forces are concerned. * * * * One would have supposed, therefore, that an American proposal of this char acter would have been received by our associates with something like acclama tion. To achieve such an American pledge was a major objective of French and British policy after World War I. The present treaty seems to have French and British approval now. But the Russians, apparently, regard it with dislike. v As evidence of this, we have a dis patch from the Tass correspondent at Paris, as reported by Moscow radio, suggesting that the proposed treaty is “a paper screen to conceal a retreat from obligations previously under taken.” It is hardly necessary to point out that the Tass correspondent at Paris would send no dispatch of this charac ter which did not reflect the view of Mr. Molotov and the Russian delega tion to the'Paris Conference: nor would it be broadcast on the Moscow radio if these views were not indorsed in the Kremlin. Wiry is it that the Russians are not overjoyed at an American proposal to make a definite pledge of American participation in the control of Germany for the next 25 years—especially when tms period is established as a minimum, without prejudice to further extension? It should be observed that the draft of the proposed treaty calls for the con clusion, within six months of the rati fication of the treaty, of special agree ments as to the numbers and types of forces to be made available to support the assumed obligations. The Russians may perhaps regard this as an attempt ! to set a maximal limit on their forces of occupation rather than a minimal limit on their own. But this is a matter which could easily be adjusted by neeotiation when the special agreements referred to came up for consideration. As a matter of principle, it would seem reasonable to think that the Russians would be glad to be assured that for 2b years at least we will share the burden of oc cupying and controlling Germany. * * * * The Potsdam agreement—which the Tass dispatch suggests is weakened by Mr. Byrnes’ proposal—establishes cer tain purposes and objectives, but it sets no time limits. Under the Potsdam agreement, we are pledged to carry out policies, but it is not clear that we are pledged to stay in Germany forever, and it is not clear just who will deter mine when the Potsdam objectives have been satisfactorily accomplished. In other words, the way is left open for gradual American withdrawal, perhaps on the ground that the disarmament, etc., of Germany is completed and that a German government must get ready to take over, or just as a result of ac cumulated disgust arising from con stant difficulties, friction and confusion. Is such a withdrawal, in fact, what the Russians want? Would they prefer to leave the situation as it is, with the dwindling and final disappearance of American military power from the con tinent of Europe among the possibilities of the immediate future? Would they prefer that there be no definition in terms of strength and time of our mili tary obligations in Germany? This is one possible explanation of their present attitude, if we may assume that attitude to be correctly reflected by the Tass dispatch. The point is one which we may well keep in mind as possibly illuminative of the future course of Russian policy regarding the Byrnes treaty—which will be further pressed—and regarding the whole ques tion of quadripartite arrangements in Germany and Austral. (Copyright, 1946.) Unification Weakness Seen in War Secrets Army Direction of Okinawa Campaign Costly, Says Writer By David Lawrence Some significant secrets of the war are coming out at last. For reasons of security and for reasons that had to do with harmony between high officers in the Army and Navy at a time while all energies were concentrated on win ning the war, the public was not per* mitted to have all the facts or the sig nificance of those facts. Now, however, as congressional com mittees are inquiring into the alleged unification of our armed services during the war, they are discovering that there were some serious losses due to the in ability of high Army officers to under stand the nature of naval action or the limitations of naval forces. Reading between the lines of the testimony of Admiral Chester W. Nim itz, one finds corroboration of the dis patches written by this correspondent after the Okinawa campaign. At that time these dispatches occasioned criti cism at the Admiral's headquarters in Guam because it was desired not to have anything published which might affront the Army or give rise to a belief that the Navy was criticizing the Army'a actions in the Okinawa campaign. Tells What Did Happen. But Admiral Nimitz now, with char acteristic frankness and candor, tells what did happen. In his official testi mony—the first he has ever given on the Okinawa campaign—he says: “Shortly after the visit of the Richard son Committee to my headquarters early in December, 1944, the Pacific Fleet had the experience of the inva sion of Luzon and the requirements for expensive naval cover and support of the Lingayen landing in the face of suicide attacks. During that operation, which accentuated earlier experiences of the fleet off Leyte, naval commanders, my self included, became more and more impressed with the fact that officers of the Army often lacked adequate appre ciation of the capabilities and limita tions of the naval forces. Subsequently, Iwo Jima was captured by the Marines with the,support of the Pacific Fleet. The Iwo Jima operation was carried on expeditiously and although the casual ties among the Marines were heavy, the period of exposure of ships to enemy attack was brief, and the net result was a shortening of the period in which the casualties and suffering of war were to be incurred elsewhere. “The next and last major amphibi ous operation of the war was the Oki nawa campaign. The operations on shore at Okinawa were carried on skill fully and methodically. However, ap proximately three months were con sumed in overcoming Japanese resist ance. During that three months we em ployed the greatest naval force ever as sembled for a single operation. We in curred greater casualties and had more ships put out of action than in any other operation in history, Subseqently, by independent naval operation, we vir tually completed the destruction of the Japanese fleet and bombarded Japan itself.” Marine Corps Strategy. Admiral Nimitz does not reveal that the Marine Corps had urged, before the Okinawa campaign was mapped out, that a Marine officer be given command of the whole amphibious operation nor does he tell of the Marine Corps strate gy, which is to land troops and keep up a persistent attack without letting the enemy dig in—as the Japanese subse quently did on Okinawa while the Army commanders slowly brought up artillery. The admiral hints that the Leyte operation in the Philippines revealed weaknesses in the failure of the land commanders to take into account what naval forces were needed and for how long. This is a different story, which will some day come out and will explain the long delay in that operation which involved particularly a conflict iff opin ion between air officers and naval com manders. As for Okinawa, the naval fleet had to use its carriers and their planes for nearly three months to cover the action of ground troops. Naval forces were never designed to be used as tactical air cover for so long a time. What Episode Shows. What the episode shows is that be cause the Army was given the responsi bility of doing an amphibious job for which it never was primarily trained, the United States was compelled to take serious losses in its fleet. It will be re called that more American boys were killed on the decks of the warships in that campaign than in all American history. Admiral Nimitz contrasts the three months at Okinawa with the one month at Iwo Jima, a much smaller island and a perhaps more difficult assault opera tion. He says with respect to the opera tion at Okinawa that “we incurred greater casualties and had more ships put out of action than in any other operation in history-.’’ This is a sensational statement. It was not given out during the war. This correspondent made that very statement shortly after the Okinawa episode. It'a all past history now but what was the lesson? It was that Army officers can't and should not try to command ships and naval officers can't and should not try to command ground troops. It teaches also that a single commander for all services is wrrong but a system of unified command directed by the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff is the only practicable way to co-ordinate the spe cialized operations of all our armed services. (Reproduction rishts reierved.) The Burning Cliffs Gold-ochre to pale rose, and. rose to crimson-violet, Tower upon tower the clouds of eve ning mass Into phantasmal mirage, a city of cold flame Whose steep escarpments glow as molten glass. This is a place seen once, once only, In a dream, An unremembered for a long-forgot ten lovely place. Beautiful in far-off silence, majestic in its scale: At once as tangible as stone, ephem eral as lace. For while we watch, the westward sun declines And lights the towers with its final amber flare; What was just now a fabulous city is dissolved. The painted walls receding in blue evening air. FREDERICK EBRIGHT.