Evening star. [volume], May 19, 1946, Page C-2, Image 41

About Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
experiments are essential to Ameri
can security. At the same time,
however, it is worth remembering
that other nations have every reason
to engage in similar activities, and
undoubtedly will. The danger im
plicit in this is clear: Unless there
is an unsparing international effort
to establish a lasting peace, civiliza
tion will move willy-nilly, and liter
ally, toward suicide in the grimmest
and deadliest armaments race in
history. A platitude? Yes, but if it
is not taken to heart everywhere
and never forgotten, our human |
society can have no future but a
future universally freighted with a
sense of doom. .
Five-Day Reprieve
To a Nation which had become
more or less resigned to the calamity
of a railroad strike, word of the five
day postponement of the walkout
comes as good news. It cannot be
emphasized too strongly, however,
that this concession is a reprieve
from disaster, and that alone. It
settles nothing.
As matters stand, the American j
people begin this week with two j
grave threats hanging over their
heads. One is the termination of
the railroad reprieve on Thursday.
And the other is the expiration of
the coal strike truce on Saturday.
Failure in the interim to settle either
or both of these disputes will imme- !
diately revive the prospect, if not the
certainty, of economic collapse in
this self-styled most powerful coun
try in the world.
It has become repetitious to say
that the American people ought not '
to be subjected to this continuous
harassment. They ought not to be at
the mercy of a handful of power
swollen labor leaders. They should
not have to depend for the necessi
ties of life on the willingness of a
John L. Lewis, or an Alvanley Johns- i
ton, or an A. F. Whitney to accede
to pleas from the President of the
United States that they order the
members of their unions back to
work for two weeks or five days. But
the fact is that the American people
—the sovereign people in the elec
tioneering speeches of certain poli
ticians—are at the mercy, so far as
their economic needs are concerned,
of the handful of men who deter
mine union policies.
There is a possibility that the
eleventh-hour decision by the lead
ers of the Brotherhood of Locomo
tive Engineers and the Brotherhood
of Railroad Trainmen to postpone
their strike was influenced by the ‘
threat from Charles Buford. Federal
railroad manager, to hire strike
breakers if they could be found and
to protect them with troops. This, j
at least, was an encouraging indica
tion of an intent on the part of the
President, for whom Mr. Buford was
acting, to do what he could, to break
a railroad strike. But another pos
sibility is that the rail union heads
deferred the strike in the expecta
tion that the Government, as it has
done in the past, would beat a re
treat and make additional conces
sions to keep the trains running. A
somewhat similar situation prevails
in the case of Mr. Lewis, the proba- j
bility being that the Government I
will seize the mines and then make
the best terms it can with him.
Meanwhile, the Senate continues :
to debate the issue of labor legisla
tion. The opponents of any measure i
to curb abuses by unions are stalling
for time, and those Senators who 1
believe that some legislation is es- i
sential seem unable to muster the
strength to force the question to a
vote. If this results in a prolonga
tion of the union “war of nerves”
against the public, the people to a
very large extent will have them
selves to blame. For even a reluctant
Senate could be compelled to pro
tect the public interest if a suffi
ciently arouse public opinion de
manded protection.
Orders and Tragedy
The shocking red tape, misunder- j
standing, poor judgment or what
ever it was that permitted a dying
Federal employe to lie in the rain
for half an hour last Sunday night
following an automobile accident at
Arlington Farms requires thorough
investigation and adoption of prompt
remedial measures to prevent a
recurrence of such an incident.
Struck by an automobile as she ran
to catch a bus, Miss Genelle Huston,
a twenty-two-year-old War Shipping
Administration clerk, lay unconscious
in a military roadway while frantic
calls for help to military and civil
authorities went unheeded. By
standers finally removed her to
Emergency Hospital in a station
wagon.
Although the road is under juris
diction of the Army and is patrolled
by military police, Fort Myer refused
to send an ambulance because, a
soldier explained, the girl was a
civilian. Phone calls to Washington,
Arlington and Alexandria brought
the common excuse: “No jurisdic
tion.” All of this went on while a
human being lay dying on a Gov
ernment highway in a driving
rainstorm.
Superiors of the Fort Myer soldier
conceded that he used poor judg
ment in declining to send an Army
ambulance to the scene, but added
that he lacked full details of the
seriousness of the accident. Even
if he had been impressed with the
life-or-death nature of the call,
however, the officials admit that
he was under orders to use the
ambulance only for military per
sonnel. He would have been only
carrying out to the letter the orders
i given him by his superiors if he had
1 remained deaf to the pleas for aid,
however detailed and urgent. Sol
; diers ordinarily are not permitted
to exercise discretion in carrying
out orders. Military authorities say
they have amended the orders so as
to avoid a repetition of Sunday's
*
callous ruling. This is as it should
be. In emergencies of this nature,*
red tape, jurisdictional disputes or
other technicalities must be subordi
nated to common sense and common
decency.
- ---
Up to the Indians
These are days of momentous de
cision for India. The Moslem League
and the Hindu-dominated Congress
party having failed to reconcile
their differences at the recent Simla
conference, the British government
has now worked out a plan of its
own in another earnest and historic
effort—the third since the Cripps
mission of 1942—to make Indian in
dependence a reality despite deep
and bitter inter-Indian cleavages.
At Simla the Moslems continued
to insist upon their proposal to par
tition the country by carving out of
it a separate state of their own to be
known as Pakistan. The reason for
their insistence is that they have a
very real fear that their religious,
cultural, economic, political and
other interests would be seriously
endangered by any plan of inde
pendence which would keep India all
in one piece, giving the much more
populous Hindus an opportunity to
control the government and run
everything.
This is the main obstacle which
the new British proposal aims to ;
meet and overcome, but there are
other formidable difficulties as well.
In the vast and seething complex
that is India, the two chief factions
—the Moslems and Hindus — are
themselves faction-ridden. It is a
land of high illiteracy, of clashing
sects, of many different languages ;
and cultures and of hundreds of big i
and little princely states whose |
rulers are by no means eager to |
surrender their sovereignty. To be
sure, all Indian leaders want inde
pendence, but they are so far apart :
on the form it should take that the
problem of achieving it is one of the
most difficult and explosive in the
world.
It is against this background that
the British plan must be read. To
begin with, the idea of Pakistan is
rejected, and, though this may cause
the bitterest Moslem opposition, the
reasons for rejecting it—social, ad
ministrative, political, geographical,
economic and military — seem so
sound and convincing on their face
that it is hard to see how Jinnah’s
party can refute them. Instead of
a partitioned India, what is pro
posed is a Federated Union of India. !
Under this, the Moslems, without
their Pakistan, would still have their
special interests guaranteed. The
central government would act for
all groups, including the princely
states, in matters of foreign affairs,
defense and communications, but
beyond that there would be broad
provincial autonomy, roughly like
that in our own States, but more
sweeping. To put this into effect,
the British would have the Indians
hold a constitutional assembly at
the earliest possible moment and
would meanwhile set up an interim
regime representative of every ele
ment in the country.
The Congress party, though not j
completely satisfied, apparently takes
a favorable view of the plan. The
crucial question revolves around the
Moslems. Given their good will and
co-operation, given the same on the
part of all other native parties con
cerned, the old dream of a free,
self-governing India—either within
or outside the British Common
wealth-can become real. Otherwise,
as the Attlee government warns,
there may be violence and chaos
with grave consequences for the
whole world. On the record, Britain
has been doing its best to avert this.
From now on the responsibility will
rest principally on the Indians
themselves.
An Incident—but Minor
On the basis of the facts which
have been made public it requires a
considerable stretching of the
imagination to make a bona fide
diplomatic incident out of the
“Hooliganism” charge which the
Russians have brought against a
clerk in the American Embassy at
Moscow.
The clerk, according to the Soviet
police, committed “insolent acts”
against a Russian actress in an au
tomobile. They want to try him for
“Hooliganism,” which term presum
ably could cover a variety of acts.
The American authorities, who seem
to think that the clerk is the victim
of a frameup, are siding with him.
At the moment everybody is stand
ing firm—the Americans refusing to
surrender the clerk and insisting
that he be permitted to leave Russia,
the Russians refusing to let him go
and demanding that he be brought
to trial.
If these are all the facts it is
difficult to see why the trial should
not be held. If the Russians have
no case against the clerk, that can
be shown at' a public hearing at
tended by representatives of the
American Embassy. If they have a
case, why should our officials seek
to forestall a trial by claiming
diplomatic immunity for the clerk?
If the situation were reversed, and
if some clerk at the Soviet Embassy
here were accused of molesting an
American girl, it is hardly likely
that our people would look with
favor on an effort by the Russians
to claim immunity from trial for the
offender. And in the known cir
cumstances of the present case the
attitude of our State Department
must seem equally objectionable to
the Russian people.
It is difficult enough to get along
with the Russians under the most
favorable circumstances, and there
is an abundance of differences con
cerning which there is substantial
basis for friction. But if this “Hooli
gan” episode is a “diplomatic inci
dent,” it seems at best to be a very
minor and very trivial one.
k
A Government Deal
With Lewis Seen
Precedent Set in 1943 When Ickes
Made Travel Time Agieement
By James Y. Neivton.
The cries of administration critics
were loud and long when the late
President Roosevelt, after seizing the
Nation's soft coal mines late in 1943,
ordered Secretary Ickes to negotiate a
work contract with John L. Lewis.
The complaints of Government
capitulation to Mr. Lewis, of a Federal
sellout of private interests to the union,
were even louder when it was revealed
that Mr. Ickes had granted the mine
workers partial payment for time spent
traveling to and from work within the
mines and reduced their payless lunch
period from a half hour to 15 minutes.
It was true that the contract nego
tiated by Mr. Ickes was for the period
of Government operation of the mines.
But it was necessary for the private
operators to accept its terms in order
to reclaim their properties. The miners
would not work without it. Northern
Appalachian operators, the “captives”
or steel company interests and those
from the Midwest, did just that some
six weeks after Mr. Ickes closed the
deal. It was not until six months later
that the Southern operators finally
came around.
Mr. Lewis greatly expanded the major
gains won from Mr. Ickes the next
time the mine contract came up for
renewal—-in the spring of last year.
In direct negotiations with the opera
tors he won for his men full travel
time and lunch period pay plus a num
ber of other important concessions.
The Ickes deal with the miners took
place at a time during the war when
our leaders, cognizant of the grave possi
bilities of enemy development of the use
of atomic energy, were far from con
fident that we would win, and those who
were sure, believed victory would be far
more costly in lives than it turned out
to be.
What will be the reaction this time,
nearly a year after the war’s end. if the
Government follows the 1943 pattern
takes over the mines and closes a deal
with Mr. Lewis?
President Truman is being advised
to take the step. To most of the Federal
officials close to the mine controversy
it seems the only quick way out of the
coal crisis. And a quick way must be
found, for it is obvious that the Nation
cannot stand a resumption of the strike
when Mr. Lewis’ truce ends next Satur
day.
Many of the operators also feel that
there is nothing that can be done except
Federal seizure and negotiation. Quite
a few, however, still are hopeful that
Congress will perform a legislative wing
clipping operation and save them from
the big man with the shaggy eyebrows
and booming voice. It does not seem
now that Congress will act in time to
fulfill their hopes. Even if it does there
is the chance that the crafty Mr. Lewis
will find a way to turn an intended pu
nitive law to his advantage. He did just
that with the Smith-Connally Act which
a highly-provoked Congress designed as
a crusher In 1843. t
Strange .a* it may seem, some of the
most influential operators believe that
the Government could make a'deal with
Mr. Lewis that would be less costly to
the industry in the end than they them
selves could make. The big union leader
has been just that tough this year. Then,
in a Government-negotiated agreement,
there would be a better chance of getting
a good break on price increases from
OPA. That's a factor, too.
Even the owners who see Federal seiz
ure as the only way out of the crisis
say, however, that they would scrutinize
any Federal contract very closely before
accepting it for their own.
How would Mr. Lewis react to Govern
ment seizure and negotiation? There
would have to be assurance that the
miners would remain on the job before
such a step is taken and a good bit of
sounding out on the subject already has
taken place.
Some sources close to the miners be
lieve Mr. Lewis would insist that a
Government contract be drafted before
he would call off the strike entirely.
They hasten to say, however, that agree
ment could be worked out in 24 hours
if Mr. Lewis dickered with a reasonable
person instead of the "hard-headed’’
operators. It is considered a good bet
that he would at least extend the truce
if the decision is made by President
Truman to take over the mines and
designate some one to talk turkey with
the union.
The negotiating task of Mr. Ickes in
1943 was like falling off of a log com
pared with the job confronting what
ever Federal agent who might be selected
this year. The main point of dispute in
1943—the portal-to-portal or travel-time
pay issue—was tough, but it seems sim
ple when lined up against some of the
highly controversial problems involved
in this year’s contract battle.
Wages and hours have been unim
portant issues this time, at least so far.
There has been no serious discussion of
the questions in more than two months
of so-called negotiations.
The toughest nut to crack has been
the Lewis demand for an operator
supported, union-directed health and
welfare fund. Not far behind in the
category of headaches are the demands
that findings of Federal Bureau of Mines
inspectors be adhered to by the opera
tors and for the unionization of all
supervisory and clerical mine employes
except six men to each work shift.
Both the welfare fund and the fore
men’s issues have implications that
transcend the coal industry and are of
the utmost importance to nearly every
businessman in the country. So the
outside pressure on the operators to hold
fast against the Lewis onslaughts on
those lines is very great.
There would be loud cries for the scalp
of the Federal agent any way he worked
out an agreement with the mine workers
on those points. That is the principal
reason the Government has been re
luctant to use the seizure device.
It is interesting to note that Mr. Lewis
in rejecting the President’s proposal to
arbitrate contract differences turned his
back on dispute-settling machinery with
which the mine workers in the past
have a perfect record of victory. It has
been used only twice in the industry.
Shortly after the First World War the
miners won a big wage increase through
arbitration. Then, late in 1941, Mr.
Lewis was awarded the closed shop in
the “captive” mines, although some of
the operators claimed the union had
little or no strength among their
workers.
■yv*
■m.: The Search for God
By Dr. Page McK. Etchison,
Religious Work Director, YMCA
A great many centuries ago, Job
uttered the cry that is in our hearts
today when he said: "Oh, that I knew
where I might find Him!” How may
we find God? How may we know
that God is near us and does care
for us? How may we be sure that
God does hear our supplications when
we turn to Him in prayer? We want
to know, and, without a positive
answer to these questions, our reli
gion is unreal.
In the first place we have a Book
to guide us in our search. The very
first words we find in this Book
are: "In the beginning God.” But
some one may say, “You are starting
with an assumption. How do you
know? You cannot see God.” One
day I sailed out of New York Harbor
on the Cunard liner, the Aquitania.
I did not see the captain of that great
ship. As a matter of fact, I did not
see him during the entire voyage.
But I assumed that he was there,
at his place, performing his duty,
and my assumption was correct, for
five and a half days later we were
landed safely at Southampton, Eng
land. The truth of the matter is that
every day that we live, we take many
things for granted. In the realm of
religion we also must assume some
thing as a basis for our belief. There
fore, we declare, as we enter upon
our search: “In the beginning God.”
History also will help us in our
quest for God. Here we discover that
mankind always has worshiped some
kind of a god. The yearning to be
lieve has been placed in the hearts
of men by the Creator. This assump
tion now is based upon evidence
found in the history’ of the human
race, which proves conclusively the
reality of God.
Faith is another pathway to God.
A great scientist, the late Dr. Charles
P. Steinmetz, said: “Faith begins
where knowledge ceases,” and Tenny
son beautifully has written:
“We have but faith: We cannot know;
For knowledge is of things we see.
Believing where we cannot prove."
St. John of old challenged the
Fifty Years Ago
Eight columns of closelv-set small
size type in The Star of May 8, 1896, j
reported the ar- \
Suspect rest and alleged
Confesses Crime confession of
Irving L. Ford, a
Negro who was captured at Harper's
Ferry and brought back to Washington
charged with the murder of Elsie Kreglo.
■ Why did you kill that poor girl?” he
was said to have been asked. "Just
’cause she made me mad," was the
answer supposed to have been given by
the prisoner. A "little black-boned pen
knife," it was contended, was the
weapon employed. Rape was not the
intention of the killer. His purpose
merely was to avoid being accused of
rape. The frightened prisoner expected
to be lynched at any moment.
Under the heading of Herndon cor- |
re6pondence, The Star on May 9, 1896,
■ v ‘ reported: "Pull houses 1
Two Weddings witnessed the mar
Reported riages of Charles F.
Cummins and Miss
Edith Dyer at the M. E. Church Wed
nesday at 11 o'clock and of E. L. Robey
and Miss Edith Bready in Congrega
tional Church at 12 noon. Rev. Mr.
Stallings performed the ceremony at
the M. E.. and Rev. Dr. Mason at the
Congregational Church. Immediately
after the marriage of the first couple
the company started for the other
church, which was soon filled to over
flowing. Both churches were profusely
decorated with plants and flowers, each
having a beautiful arch of arbor vitae
and snowballs, with suspended floral
bells. The ushers at the M. E. Church
were E. L. Garrett, jr„ and Ira Schooley;
at the Congregational Church, Dr. Rozier
Middleton of Washington, and Guy E.
Mitchell. After the close of the cere
mony, Mr. and Mrs. Robey held a re
ception at the house of the bride's
father, Isaiah Bready. A large number
attended and a very happy hour was
enjoyed. Bountiful refreshments were
served, after w'hich all repaired to the
station, where both couples took the
1:42 train and started on the tour to
Old Point Comfort and Norfolk.”
* * * *
Featured on the editorial page of The
Star for May 11, 1896, was a personality
sketch from the New'
Mr. McKinley's York Sun which read
Manager in part as follows:
"This private citizen,
who is as little known in the every-day
political life of Washington as it is
passible to be. and who nevertheless has
been one of the leading spirits in man
aging the McKinley campaign, is John
Hay, author, poet and diplomat, and
those whose opinions are worthy of
respect declare him to be McKinley's
closest personal and political friend, and
certain to be Secretary of State in his
cabinet should the Ohio man be elected
President. * * • Col. Hay has lived in
Washington almost continuously since
he was Assistant Secretary of State in
the Hayes cabinet, and here he has
done his important literary and journal
istic work. His wife was the daughter
of the late Amasa Stone of Cleveland,
one of the richest men in the United
States, and they live in a beautiful
house on the corner of Sixteenth and I
streets, just across Lafayette Square
from the White House. Here Col. Hay
put the finishing touches to the life of
Lincoln, which he and John G. Nicolay
published a few years ago. * * * He and
his family are among the best known of
the fashionable set of Washington
society, and with the political leaders
and the administration officials he is
on terms of the closest intimacy.”
"Under a clear sky and beneath a
burning sun,” explained The Star on
May 12, 1896,
Hancock Monument "the heroic
Ceremony equestrian
statue” of Gen.
Winfield Scott Hancock at the juncture
of Pennsylvania and Louisiana avenues
and Seventh street was unveiled. Presi
dent Cleveland, Vice President Steven
son, the cabinet, the justices of the
Supreme Court, Senators and Represen
tatives, Army, Navy and Marine officers
in throngs and civilians in multitudes
attended the ceremony in homage to
the memory of the “illustrious com
mander of the 2d Army Corps.” The
principal orator of the occasion was
/
Capital Sidelights
By Will P. Kennedy.
In the early days of Congress, ora
torical members, especially the brilliant
but long-winded John Randolph of
Roanoke, Va„ vexed their colleagues by
frequent and extended speeches. On
March 26, 1820, Randolph spoke more
than four hours on the Missouri bill and
on April 28 of the same year Represent
ative Stevenson Archer of Maryland
proposed a rule that no member should
speak longer than an hour at a time,
and that no question should be dis
cussed over five days, but this proposed
rule was not acted upon. In 1822 Rep
resentative John Cocke of Tennessee,
again proposed the hour curb, but it
was not adopted. Again, in 1828, Rep
resentative William Haile of Mississippi
reviewed the tediousness of debates but
failed to get a limit accepted. On March
I, 1833, Representative Prank E. Plum
mer of Mississippi so wearied the House
in the closing hours of the Congress that
repeated attempts were made to take
him off the floor and there was serious
disorder.
On the motion of Representative Lott'
Warren of Georgia. July 6, 1841, the first
rule for the purpose was adopted, and
on June 11, 1842, on motion of Repre
sentative Benjamin S. Cowen of Ohio, it
was made one of the standing rules of
the House when unlimited debate
caused the greatest danger to bills in
the Committee of the Whole. This rule
that no member should occupy "more
than one hour in debate on any ques
tion," often has been attacked—notably
by Thomas Hart Benton of Missouri in
his “Thirty Years' View" and by Repre
sentative Clement L. Vallandigham of
Ohio at the time of the revision in 1860.
three years before he was arrested by
the Union military authorities for trea
sonable utterances and was banished to
the Confederate States.
During these wild-cry days of threat
ened inflation and far-flung propa
ganda to avert a financial panic, with
the "Wolf! Wolf!” pack in full cry, some
of the sober men in Congress are coun
seling their more affrighted colleagues
that often these forecast calamities are
really not so imminent or colossal as
they are imagined to be. Some of the
elder statesmen in Congress are recall
ing two less-than-a-month-apart illus
trations of 33 years ago. In March,
1913. a great storm had swept the Ohio
Valley, with the city of fiayton a special
sufferer. The banks of that community,
after the flood had subsided, feared to
reopen their doors. On April 4 the Citi
zens’ Relief Committee wired the Treas
ury Department. Within 24 hours on
the recommendation of a national bank
examiner the Federal Department des
ignated every national bank in Dayton
a Government depository, with the Gov
ernment ready to ship in $2,000,000 of
Government funds. Confidence was re
stored, the banks reopened and there
was a call for only $182,000 of the antici
pated $2,000,000.
When a special session of Congress
was convened on April 7, 1913, to con
sider currency and tariff reforms, a pan
demonium of unrest pervaded business
circles. To relieve anxiety, to pull the
teeth of threatened restriction of credit,
to assure the country that there was an
unjustifiable false alarm, the Treasury
announced that there was on hand
$500,000,000 in new national bank note
currency to be shipped to any and all
banks complying with the requirements
under the Aldrich-Vreeland Act of May
30, 1908—and none of this money was
applied for by the banks.
The wiser heads in Congress are ad
vising: ‘‘Don’t be stampeded by false
alarms and propaganda.’’
Maj. Gen. John M. Palmer, then a Sen
ator from Illinois, who at the conclusion
of his speech somewhat mournfully de
clared: “We stand in the presence of
this appropriate monument of a hero,
we do all that we can to perpetuate his
fame, conscious that as the centuries
recede his great name will be less and
less known and less and less frequently
mentioned.” On the platform with
other distinguished listeners to the
eulogy was Henry J. Ellicott, the sculp
tor responsible for the mounted effigy
of “the champion of freedom, union,
God and right.” He had done his best
to render his subject immortal, and
his work still stands.
ft
mighty Roman Empire when he de
clared: ‘‘This is the victory that
overcometh the world, even our
faith.” Men live by faith. The whole
economic world is operated on faith.
Why should we not permit faith to
operate in the spiritual world?
However, our best approach to God
is through Christ. His knowledge
and conception of God were perfectly
clear. His vision, His assurance, and
the life that He lived, are our best
revelation. He lived in such close
harmony with God that He could
say: “The Father and I are one.”
He revealed God as the loving Father
of all men. Here we have a his
torical person, whose teachings and
character we can understand. His
hearers testified that He taught with
authority. He taught that God is
love and demonstrated by His life
and death the full meaning of love.
He said: "He that hath seen me. hath
seen the Father.” If we will but
find Christ, our search is ended, for
He is a true portrait of God.
* * * *
Many people believe in God as
pictured in the New Testament.. Not
only do they believe, but they worship
Him; they place their trust in Him
and many have died for their belief.
We must believe their testimony.
How may we find God? In answer
to this great question, we must begin
with the assumption that God is. We
follow history in other realms, why
not in that which is spiritual? Isaac
Watts has declared in his great hymn
of faith;
“'Before the hills in order stood,
Or earth received her frame
Prom everlasting Thou art God,
To endless years the same.”
Above all else, the best approach
to God is found in the teachings of
Christ. He gives us the perfect
revelation of God, It has stood the
test of the centuries. He answers
the great questions that try the souls
of men today. Find God through
Christ, and you have the highest,
ihe noblest and the best conception
that has been given to man.
America Will Fulfill
Promises to Hungry
Writer Commends Anderson for
Meeting Commitments
By Raymond Moley.
The Secretary of Agriculture, Clinton
P. Anderson, has now been in oflice
approximately a year. He accepted the
job in the face of a challenge. As a
member of the House, his reports
sharply criticized the food policies of
the administration. The President
thereupon told him to take over and do
it better. Mr. Anderson’s common sense
over the past year has been in sharp
contrast with fumbling in other depart
ments of the Government.
The following picture of the food
situation is based on conferences with
Secretary Anderson, with some of his
aides, with experts in foreign agricul
tural affairs, with people in the U. N.
food and agricultural setup in Wash
ington and with others. The general
ized picture which emerges differs in
many ways from most current opinions
that we hear. It is measurably more
reassuring.
Secretary Anderson probably is right
in saying that after all the self-re
proach which we have heard in the
United States for having done “too
little and too late.” the final result will
be fairly satisfactory. The American
performances are as follows:
The t ’> set, after the deliberations
of the Famine Emergency Committee in
January and February, 1946, was 6,000.
000 tons for export from the United
States from that time until June 30,
1946. The commitment actually taken
over by us was only 5,500,000 tons.
Despite the problems arising from the
shortage of time, this commitment ap
proximately will be met by June 30.
Former President Herbert Hoover al
ready has reported that he had to
“deflate considerably” a part of the re
quirements of foreign nations. In some
cases, when Mr. Hoover left a particular
country, for instance, Finland, its gov
ernment made it known that it could
do with less than the original estimate.
So far as Europe is concerned, nobody
pretends that any really great number
of deaths will result this year from mass
starvation.
What will happen after the new crop
comes in, of course, cannot be predicted.
We expect another bumper wheat crop
of 1,000,000.000 bushels, which certainly
will be more than enough for the
United States. Since, however, we ha*e
assumed an unwritten obligation to be
the feeders of the world, in case the
crops in other continents should not be
sufficient—or even if their methods of
collecting and distributing the food
within their own countries should not
be sufficient—we have now' issued a plan
which requires that no less than one
! quarter of our expected wheat crop, or
i up to 250.000,000 bushels, be set aside
' and exported.
| The crux of the whole food situation
i is whether the United States is going
I to maintain its greatly expanded popu
lation of cattle, hogs and poultry, which
. is decisive for tolerable world feeding
; or starvation.
Figures are startling: The average
1935-1944 cattle population was approxi
mately 71,000.000 head. On January 1.
1946, it was nearly 80,000,000. The hog
population averaged, from 1935 to 1944,
about 55,009,000 head. This year it was
= 62.000,000 head.
Despite the bumper crop of corn
(which lost part of its feed value be
cause of moisture), animals ate, last
year, almost 60 per cent as much wheat,
as the entire human consumption of
wheat in the United States. Therefore,
the central aim of the Secretary of Ag
riculture must be to reduce the number
and the grain consumption of our meat
animals.
Reintroduction of rationing of meat
and a new rationing of bread, vociferous
ly demanded in some quarters, flatly haa
been opposed by the Department of
Agriculture. The decisive point is not
what human beings eat, but what ani
mals eat.
In attacking the black market in
meat, the Secretary wants to increase
deliveries to federally inspected slaugh
ter houses. During the past few days,
he says, the movement of hogs to
slaughter houses has increased, so that
this part of his program, in his opinion,
is likely to be achieved.
Far from proposing to lift the price
ceilings on meat, Mr. Anderson intends
to use the price inter-relation between
corn and hogs to reduce the many mil
lions of animal guests which we have
invited to our national grain table. He
is convinced that the new price policy,
which he inaugurated last week by rais
ing the price of wheat by 15 cents a
bushel and that of corn by 25 cents a
bushel, in addition to an increase for
other grains and protein feeds, will be
sufficient to make the sale of grains
more profitable than using them for
feed.
The new program, which requires the
Government to buy 25 per cent of the
whole wheat supply, seems to give an
unexpected answer to the question of
the price of the principal grains during
the next 18 months. A year ago every
One expected and feared a sudden sharp
fall of grain prices, and the Department
of Agriculture figured that the farmer'*
income might be 15 per cent less in
1946 than in 1945. But as long as the
Department of Agriculture is the buyer
of 25 per cent of all wheat, it almost
surely can set the price, at least to such
j. ®n extent that no serious decrease can
.be expected for the next 18 months.
It may be a disappointment to some
domestic industries that we are going to
reduce their use of wheat from 20,000,
000 bushels to 2,000,000. For some, it
may even be more depressing that, in
stead of an alleged "90-day affair,” the
full weight of restrictions may be loaded
an them for several months to come—
for the sole.reason that there may be a
possibility of a continuing need of grain
for food in 1947.
This has brought about a belief in
some places that such industrial restric
tions are only window dressing, espe
cially since such industries as luxury
foods, breweries and liquor production
give back a considerable volume of corn
and barley in the form of cattle feed.,
In demands for these restrictions there
is a measure of politics and reform
sentiment. Such practically insignifi
cant savings of grains probably will not
be required when the first clear new?s
of good European crops is confirmed.
The Department of Agriculture point?
out that of all wheat exported by all
countries to meet this present situation,a
the United State* is supplying nearly
, half.
The Evening Star Newspaper Company
Main Office: 11th St. and Pennsylvania Ave.
New York Office: 110 East 42d St.
Chicago Office: 4.35 North Michigan Ave.
Delivered bj Carrier—Metropolitan Area.
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.
Night Final Star_ 75c per month.
Bates by Mail—Payable in Advance.
Anywhere in United States.
1 month. 6 months 1 year.
livening and Sunday..$1.00
The Evening Star_ .75
The Sunday St^:_ .50
$6.00
4.00
2.50
Telephone National 5000.
$12.00
8.00
5.00
Entered at the Post Office Washington, D.
as second-class mail matter.
C„
Member of the Associated Press.
The Associated Press is exclusively entitled to
the use (or republication of all news dispatches
credited to It or not otherwise credited in this
paper and also the local news published herein.
All rights of publication of special dispatches
herein also are reserved.
C—2
SUNDAY, May 19, 1946
Slum Clearance Bill
Chances for enactment of the
slum clearance bill at this session of
Congress have brightened consider
ably with the favorable report or
dered on Wednesday by the McGehee
subcommittee.
It is unfortunate, however, that
the subcommittee saw fit to revive a
phase of the old public-vs.-private
housing controversy by adding
amendments which were disposed of
last fall in a compromise which
brought about Senate passage of the
same measure.
The amendments are designed to
make more difficult the construction
of low-cost housing by a public
agency. Private housing’s fear of
and antagonism toward public hous
ing are understandable. But in the
end it will be public opinion which
decides this controversy and it
would seem highly desirable if the
private building industry placed the
emphasis on a positive showing of
what it can accomplish to house the
lower-income groups and indicated
greater willingness to forego some
of the negative efforts directed at
shutting public building out of the
field altogether.
The thing that will kill the com- j
petition of public building in this
country is a demonstration of how
much more efficiently, and at less ;
cost to the public, private building !
can supply a need of which the
public generally has become con
scious. Everywhere there is an in
creasing tendency to link such com
munity burdens as crime, juvenile
delinquency and disease to the ex
istence of slum areas. Public opinion
favors public support, to a degree
undreamed of a few years ago, for
private enterprise in razing slum
areas and providing low-cost, decent
housing.
But if the need is not met by pri- \
vate enterprise, with this generous
public support already promised, the
alternative will be a demand for
more and more public housing and
that demand will be far more dan
gerous to private enterprise than
the loopholes which the private
housers have sought to close in the
District slum clearance measure by
amendments which are confusing
and difficult if not impossible to
administer.
As it passed the Senate, the slum
clearance bill was a fair bill. It
leaned over backwards to give pri
vate enterprise the edge, and this
was wholly desirable. The House
committee amendments seem a
wholly unnecessary method of mak
ing the bill clumsy and difficult of
administration, when the desidera
tum should be simplicity and work
ability.
Important Platitude
Like the first atomic bomb that
exploded there last July, the rocket
tests that have just begun in the
New Mexican desert confirm the
fantastically real nature of the Buck
Rogers era in which mankind now
finds itself feeling its way, not with
out a measure of awed and fright
ened bafflement.
That the age is merely in its
Infancy is clear from the fact that
the first of these tests, despite its
almost incredible aspects, was
merely the forerunner of far more
amazing things to come. The Ger
man V-2 weapon which the Army
fired recently to a height of sev
enty-five miles, and which attained
a speed of more than 3,000 miles an
hour before smashing itself to bits
deep irt the White Sands Proving
Grounds, is already obsolete. Its
maximum range from launching site
to target, as used by the Nazis
against London, is under 300 miles.
This, plus its weight of fourteen
tons, is weak and mild compared to
what will succeed it, and we are ex
perimenting with it now only be
cause of the guidance it will give
our military scientists in developing
things of irijuch greater power and
accuracy.
Thus, in testing V-2, the Army has
in mind for the foreseeable future—
say, twenty or twenty-five years
from' now—rockets weighing 150
tons and capable of being fired ac
curately across oceans at supersonic
speed directly upon a chosen target
area. It has in mind, too, smaller
guided missiles that “home” auto
matically to their objectives. It has
in mind a whole host of similar
weapons which, with radar-like elec
tronic devices and with bacterio
logical or atomic warheads, promise
to revolutionize all past concepts of
military defense and offense on land,
at sea. under the sea and in the air.
In sum, the New Mexican experi
ments, though they may yield im
portant byproducts in the realm of
pure science, are designed primarily
to keep the United States up to the
minute in the rapidly changing art
of warfare—a black but real sorcery
»t last at the point of becoming
humanly unendurable.
As the world stands today, such
4