Newspaper Page Text
With Sunday Morning Edition. WASHINGTON, D. C. Published by . KTha Evening Star Newspaper Company. | ^ SAMUEL H. KAUFFMANN, President. & _S. M. McKELWAY, Editor. * MAIN OFFICE: 11th St. and Pennsylvania Avo. NEW YORK OFFICE: 110 East 42d St. CHICAGO OFFICE: 435 North Michigan Ave. Delivered by Carrier—Metropolitan Area. Daily and Sunday Daily Only Sunday Only Monthly — 1.20* Monthly -90c 10c per copy S Weekly —30c Weekly _20c 10c per copy *10* additional when 5 Sundays are in a month. Also 10* additional for Night Final Edition In those sections where delivery is made. Rates by Mail—Payable in Advance. Anywhere in United States. ■ventng and Sunday Evening Sunday 1 month _ 1.50 1 month_ 90c 1 month. 60c t months.. 7.50 6 months_ 5.00 6 months 3.00 year —15.00 1 year _10.00 1 year ..6.00 ** Telephone Sterling 5000. Cntered at the Post Office, Washington, D. C., as second-class mail matter. Member e| the Associated Pres*. The Associated Press Is entitled exclusively to the use for repubiication of all the local news printed in this newspaper, os well as all A. P. news dispatches. A—12TUESDAY. October 18, 1949 Give Enough—Give More A lot of hard work and good organization have gone into preparation for the Com munity Chest Federation's campaign now getting under way. It is difficult to make comparisons in such matters. But to the old hands in Community Chefct work there has been evident a new spirit this year, a new willingness by new groups of citizens to leave nothing undone in the way of preparatory organization that will mean success. The results are indicated in some of the statistics. Six hundred “key men” for the Business 1 unit—covering firms with fifteen employes or more—have been enrolled and are hard at work now, twice as many as last year. There are 1,000 men working on the smaller business firms, three times as many as last year. Altogether, about 20,000 citizens have volunteered to give their efforts in Chest solicitation. Through them, last year’s 330,000 individual con tributors will be increased, it is hoped, by at least 70,000. If these 70,000 contributors can be added this year to those who gave last year, and if the average campaign gift of about $10 of last year can be increased by at least $2, the fund will be subscribed for the support of the 102 agencies whose appeals are com bined in this single campaign. * Campaign authorities are correct in telling the people what they want. What they want is a day’s take-home pay from those whose income is under $5,000. They do not want it in cash. They want it in a pledge, breaking the gift into install ments over the year, for it is easier to give that way. 4 From those whose incomes exceed $5,OOU, they have set 1 per cent of gross salary as the reasonable amount. And they are ask ing firms to measure their gifts in some relation to their volume of business, and with full realization that this combined appeal is made In the name of 102 agencies. If good citizens of Washington and the Metropolitan Area will follow these sug gestions as guides, the community response will be In keeping with the need. The drive this year has been so carefully planned and has brought together in this great volunteer effort so many men and women of good will, that it is opening with high expectations of success which ought to be realized. A Menacing Puppet Regardless of the fact that it is hbviously the Kremlin’s baby, the new German Com munist “republic” cannot be laughed off as an inconsequential illegitimacy. On the contrary, it has been brought forth in such a way as to indicate that its Soviet creators intend, to exploit it to the full in an effort to undermine the genuinely democratic Bonn government and clear the road for partitioned Germany’s eventual unifica tion under Red totalitarian control. Certainly, there can be no doubt that the Kremlin attaches great importance to this latest of its puppets. A good indication of that is the fact that Premier Stalin has taken special pains to shower it with his personal praises. Although it is a fraud, although it has no legal basis, although it is designed solely and simply to serve Mos cow, he has hailed it as the government of a non-existent “unified, democratic, peace-loving Germany.” Then, wishing it long life and prosperity, he has gone on to say that “The experience of the last war has shown that the German and Soviet peoples made the largest sacrifices in that war, that both these peoples have the largest potentialities in Europe to com plete great actions of world significance.” What “great actions of world signifi cance”? The ominous implication of Btalin’s words is that the Soviet Union— despite the fact that the Germans under Hitler destroyed about 10,000,000 Russians —looks forward to the day wher. Germany (a Red one, of course) will worx hand in glove with the U. S. S. R. to 'win control of the whole of Europe and thus become a towering menace to the free world be yond. In other words, what the Politburo seems to have in mind is something like a super-scale version of the Ribbentrop Molotov pact of 1939, but with the Kremlin dominating it so as to make the German partner a mere vassal. To that end, from now on, there probably will be a series of moves designed to discredit Bonn, build a fire under Anglo-French-American occu pation policies, and tempt the Western Germans to make some sort of deal with the Communist puppet regime. Thus, as hinted at already, the Kremlin may soon offer a “peace treaty" to its Berlin stooges. It may also come forward with a pact of alliance. In addition, it may make a show of withdrawing its troops from the Red occupation zone, meanwhile playing up to the German people’s natural desire for unification and to the intense nationalism still existing throughout the divided country. The potential effective ness of such moves ought not to be under estimated. Though palpably fraudulent and aimed only at the eventual sovietiza tion of all of Germany, they could exert a powerful influence, weakening the popu larity of the Bonn government, creating numerous new difficulties for the Western Powers, and appealing strongly to the many Germans who, though anti-Com munist, have a historically inherited tend ency toward a Russian partnership, on the assumption that they would in time be the masters of it. It is not surprising, therefore, that week end reports from Berlin emphasize that pro-West German political figures feel that France, Britain and the United States— together with the Bonn government—must take positive action to counter the Soviet puppet regime, which is armed, as our latest note to Moscow declares, with a large police force “well equipped with military weapons.’’ Just what the action should be, however, is not clear. The only thing clear is that a threatened situation is in the making and that the free West had better not belittle it or lose time in work ing out measures to cope with it. China in the U. N. In a de facto sense, with its armies con tinuing to advance against virtually no opposition, the Communist regime now has military control of most of China. In addi tion, with its leaders openly and enthusi astically dedicated to the Kremlin, it has been recognized by the Soviet Union as the country’s only government. By way of contrast, as far as the non Soviet world is concerned, the Nationalist regime is still recognized as China’s sole legitimate governing authority. Yet, de facto, it has lost the ability to govern in the vast areas now occupied by the Moscow - serving Chinese Communists. Moreover, it is so hard pressed militarily that it probably will have to abandon much of the mainland territory still re maining under its control. Wholly apart from what this situation may mean in terms of the long-range balance of power in Asia, it opens the way to a legal snarl in the United Nations. China is one of the Big Five. Along with France, Britain, Russia and the United States, it has a veto right in the Security Council. But what will happen if the Red regime at Peiping—insisting, with some cogency, that the Nationalists do not exist as an effective government—ask to be seated in the U. N.f What if this bid is backed by the Soviet bloc and rejected by everybody else? Of course, it is not impossible that there will be such a complete Nationalist col lapse that the hard realities of the situa tion will lead to a universal recognition of the Chinese Communist regime. In that case, although the country’s present repre sentatives might claim that they still had the power to veto an ouster move, a change in China’s U. N. representation could be carried out simply enough, with the result that the Russians would then be able to capitalize on whatever gain there might be in being able to count on the support of a puppet in the Security Council. But if either France, Britain or the United States, as a member of the Big Five, con tinued to recognize the Nationalists and held out against the Peiping Reds, the Council—whose affirmative decisions must have the Five’s unanimous backing—could take no valid action, could not function within the legal framework of the United Nations Charter, could only suffer paralysis and confusion thrice confounded. Up to now, neither the Chinese Com munists nor their Soviet masters have indicated that they intend to make an early bid for a change in China’s repre sentation. Sooner or later, however, such a step is bound to be taken. Thus, both for our own country and the non-Soviet world as a whole, the situation—as it bears upon the functioning of the U. N.—prom ises to raise a difficult problem in the not distant future. On the one hand, if we recognize the Peiping regime, we will be lending aid and comfort to a puppet not truly representative of the people of China. On the other hand, if we do not recognize it, we will be creating a crisis in the United Nations. The choice between these two courses will almost certainly have to be made one of these days. There seems no way of dodging it. It is a thing that probably will have to be done largely on the basis of expediency. ————, % The Lehman-Dulles Race Political prognosticators have lost no time in looking for omens in the New York City and up-State registration for next month’s mayoralty and senatorial elec tions. As is customary in such matters, each of the contending parties has hailed the figures as a pretty good sign that it is going to win. But more objective observers seem less inclined to make any hard-and-fast pre dictions. The one fact all can agree upon is that 'the registration has been heavy and that it reflects a lively and wholesome interest on the part of the electorate. Beyond that, however, opinions are rather cautious, though they lean toward Demo cratic Mayor O’Dwyer for re-election in New York City, and toward former Demo cratic Governor Lehman in his race tp supplant Republican John Foster Dulles in the United States Senate. The Lehman-Dulles contest has natu rally stirred up considerable national inter est. In the course of their campaigns, the two men have offered what may prove to be a preview of the 1952 presidential debate. Mr. Lehman has come out squarely for the Fair Deal—rfor broadened social security, for Federal aid to education, for repeal of the Taft - Hartley Act, etc. Against this, moving farther to the right than many of his fellow Republicans— including his colleague Senator Ives—Mr. Dulles has hammered hard at “statism,” coming out flatly against such things as “socialized” medicine and Federal aid to education. He has also indicated that he favors only a slight modification of present labor legislation. Although he does not speak for the whole Republican organization, Mr. Dulles has in effect made his bid for election on a personal GOP platform that says any thing but “me, too,” to the domestic policies of President Truman’s Fair Deal. Essen tially, he has campaigned as a conserva tive promising to fight against what he regards as a trend toward “statism” in things like Federal subsidies to individuals and schools. Needless to say, if he wins on that basis, his party will have reason to wonder whether it ought not to try the same line in the national contests next year and in 1952. By the same token, if Mr. Lehman wins, the Fair Deal Democrats will view the victory as further evidence that they are offering what the peoples want and that they will come out on top in the 1950 and 1952 elections if they keep on offering it. Whatever its outcome may be, the New York senatorial race thus represents a significant test of two quite different political appeals. Questioning School Children The circumstances of a particular case, not some inflexible rule, should determine whether the police will be permitted to question school children in connection with r crime. In routine investigations, it would be manifestly improper to permit the police to question children in school during school hours. And this would be all the more true if the officers were investigating some minor offense in which some of the chil dren might be involved. The proper place for that kind of interrogation is in the home in the presence of the parents. But the incident which prompted Police Chief Barrett’s letter of complaint to the District Commissioners relates to an en tirely different type of case. This investi gation concerns the vicious murder of Harrison Walker, an eight-year-old school boy. With little to work on, the police, as is their duty, have been running down all possible clues which might lead them to the murderer. They wanted to inter view the children at the school attended by the Walker child in a general assembly, but were not permitted to do so. The school authorities took the position that the children should be interviewed at their homes, a burdensome and time consuming process. In justification of the refusal, a 25-year-old “rule” is cited, and it is also claimed that the children might be psychologically harmed if interviewed in an assembly. This is not impressive. Assuming that proper questions were asked in a proper way, and this could be done in agreement between the police and school officials, it is hard to see why a mass interview would be more harmful psychologically than in dividual interviews, if, indeed, there would be any harmful results from either procedure. The fact that has been lost sight of in this dispute between the school authorities and the police is that a vicious murder has been committed and that the killer is still at large. No school child will be entirely safe until he is caught, and everything within reason should be done to co-operate with the police to this end. For his appointments, as time goes by, Mr. Truman may have to go outside the immediate circle of old pals—naming some one, say, who sat three rows away in the Senate. The honors list in industry, from the Wall Street Journal: The oil-burner people name John L. Lewis their ace salesman of the year. This and That By Charles E. Tracewell "BETHESDA, Md. "Dear Sir: "Anything can happen on a bird hike. "Any layman may and often does con tribute to scientific ornithology. "On September 25, when tramping through an open field in Bethesda, all aglow with golden rod and Joe Pye weed, I no ticed a bird’s nest, made mainly of grasses, and situated in a low fork of a locust, about three feet from the ground. "Naturally I expected it to be abandoned, but to my delight and surprise, there were three young in it. “Their stump bills and characteristic black wings suggested goldfinches to me, and then, aftei; a few minutes’ waiting, the mother appeared, her drab olive green plumage made this almost a certainty. * * * * “A telephone call to the Smithsonian In stitution revealed that this must have been a goldfinch nest, for only the English spar row, the mourning dove and some species of owls have young or eggs in this vicinity at this time of year. “The goldfinch pair should not have any trouble to feed their young, for seeds of thistles and ragweed, on which I have often seen goldfinches here, are plentiful right now. “Incidentally, this region is excellent for bird observation. So far I have seen about 35 species here. Some of the more unusual are the killdeer, Eastern kingbird and the towhee. “Unfortunately, this particular region is being built up very fast, and I am afraid that many birds will disappear. “Sincerely yours, T. W. E. S.” * * * * It is pretty late for bird babies, but they grow amazingly. fast, and are by nature equipped to take over the duties of life after a brief education by their parents. Often squirrels are bom as late, and these are well furred and muscular and brimful of life by the time the real cold weather sets in. The goldfinch, or wild canary, as it is sometimes called, is one of our most interest ing birds. A great many watchers see it without rec ognizing It. They are forever wanting to know what it is, and often are disappointed when they find out. They should not be, for this is a very fine species. The goldfinch is 5 inches long, with a varying plumage in different seasons. That is where the difficulty in recognition comes in. The male in summer has a lemon-yellow body and wings and tail black. In winter, the male has the upper parts olive-brown, the underparts gray-white, and the wings and tail blackish. (This is also the dress of the females at all seasons.) In other words, the male in winter is simi lar to the female, but with wings and tail a deeper black, with white markings more conspicuous. The young are like the winter adults, ex cept that they are browner, and all other markings suffused with pale cinnamon color. So you see this is a bird that may fool you! * * * * The goldfinch is a true nature lover, him self. That is, when other birds are nesting, he is greeting the springtime with song and frolic. He hops around, sings, flies, apparently without a thought of the stem duties of life. It seems the goldfinch needs the nesting examples of other birds to put him in mind! Then he settles down, nests and brings forth his young, just as other birds do, but he is always a little late about it. Most goldfinch nests are placed no lower than 5 feet from the ground, sometimes as high as 30 feet. Their entire nesting takes place from the last week in June through the second in September; eggs number from three to six, with five or six common; eggs are pale-blue white, unmarked. Altogether, thii is one of our best birds. Sometimes it is seen hanging upside down on a bending weed, eating seeds as if they were the most delightful food in the world, as they are, indeed, to a seed-eating bird. Letters to The Star Self-Regulation Essential 5 To Freedom of Press To the Editor of The Star: I should like to commend your recent editorial regarding the Government’s suit against the Lorain (Ohio) Journal. Your two points are well taken, and your second one is certainly apropos of National News paper Week. First, if the Journal is refusing to accept advertising broadcast over certain radio stations and published in certain competing newspapers as the Government alleges, then the Journal should be ordered to desist from such action. Second, by crying interference with freedom of the press, the publishers of the Journal are bringing opprobrium upon the press as a whole. I believe, regretfully, that the Journal’s defense is that of far too many newspapers, and I feel that The Star’s enlightened and courageous staid will be unpopular among many publish* rs. It is in direct disagree ment with the opinion expressed by Editor and Publisher, the leading trade journal. To the Government’s allegations that the Journal refused certain advertisements be cause they had been published in other media, Editor and Publisher brashly asks, “What of it?” What of it, too, if the owners of the Journal are doing this in order to put themselves in a position to acquire other newspaper properties; and what of it, too, if the Journal agrees with other newspapers not to compete in certain areas for circula tion and advertising, Editor and Publisher says. Then the trade journal charges: “The Department of Justice seeks an injunction to prevent the Lorain paper from refusing to publish any advertisement (with excep tion of advertisements in violation of Ohio or United States law).” Surely Editor and Publisher must be acquainted with enough civil suits which have come to decision to know that a newspaper can refuse adver tising for almost any reason or for no reason other than it does not like some one’s complexion. Of course, only the courts can decide the case against the Journal, which seems to be championing free enterprise for Itself, with little regard for other news papers. Then Editor and Publisher says in effect: The Government attempts to make the press a common carrier and open to all advertising. If it regulates advertising, it will regulate rates. If it regulates rates, soon it will regulate the editorial content. “Such regulation of advertising and/or editorial content would mean the end of a free press as we know it.” Tom Wallace of the Louisville Times once epitomized Editor and Publisher’s concept when he said that a publisher’s idea of freedom of the press is the right to drive a circulation truck through a red light. In my opinion, Editor and Publisher is doing the press and even the public a gross dis service. Its kind of thinking makes the public want Government regulation which in the end the public knows would be harm ful. I 'believe the press is a quasi-public institution which must regulate Itself with the aid of the best public opinion. To the end of self-regulation The Star’s editorial is most forthright and timely. It is what the Editor and Publisher editorial is not: an important contribution to freedom of the press. EVERETT W. WITHERS. ( - McLemore Challenged on Column Belittling England as Colonizer To the Editor of The star: Henry McLemore’s column from Dublin (Star, October 11) describing the gloating of the Irish over Britain’s present predica ment not only does grave injustice to all decent, fairminded Irish people, but is one of the most distorted and one-sided expres sions of prejudices and ignorance that it has ever been my misfortune to read. Mr. McLemore would far better have remained a writer on sports, a Held in which he had some knowlege. When, to use his own words, he attempts “to get philosophical” he is so out of his depth that his statements would be laughable if they were not capable of causing great harm. England can be fairly accused of many mistakes in her administration of Ireland and India, as many an Englishman would be ready to admit. When, however, Mr. Mc Lemore makes the wild statement that Eng land is the world’s worst colonizer, then as a fellow American citizen I would like to ask him the following questions. 1. When Mr. McLemore was finding, with such apparent ease, all the polo fields and golf courses in India, how did he happen to overlook the fact that the entire legal system of courts and administering justice was established by the British in India? Did he overlook the schools, hospitals, sanitation system and native police forces also estab lished under British jurisdiction? 2. In reply to Mr. McLemore’s challenge, to name just one colony that “stood up” for England in the last war, I will name as a starter Cyprus, Ceylon, Jamaica, Mauri tius and I will tell him that when unable to send troops overseas, there was no in stance of a colony failing to make its contri bution to the war effort. I will also give him the names of several dominions he has over looked. Though independent countries and in no way obligated to “stand up” for England they came to her side in this war as quickly as they did in World War I when they did not have full dominion status. These countries were Canada, Aus tralia, New Zealand, South Africa and parts of India. 3. Did Mr. McLemore ever hear of the fact that the British forfeited entirely their right to the use of ports in Southern Ireland before the last war? And that they never tried to regain the use of these ports, though they would have been of inestimable aid during the war? 4. Has Mr, McLemore ever heard at all of the existence of Northern Ireland and espe cially of its loyalty to England during the war? I am glad that Mr. McLemore speaks of the courteous reception the Irish give to visiting Britons, “laughing quietly while they pay for cream and butter with a de valued pound.” He obviously enjoys the fact that it was the English who took the rap, and the Irish who have the butter and cream. I suggest that Mr. McLemore re tire from journalism, remain permanently in Ireland,- and devote himself to dairy farm ing and the study of history. CATHERINE N. YERKES. +• ■ .. He Says Key Bridge Should Have Been Built Across Roosevelt Island To the Editor ot The Star: There have been many deserved compli mentary remarks In the Washington papers about the Whitehurst Freeway between Washington Circle and the Key Bridge, costing $3,400,000 for the sole purpose of avoiding driving through Georgetown over M street, * It should interest the people of Wash ington to know that if the advice of Arling ton residents, Including the writer, before the appropriation committees Of Congress as to the proper location of the Key Bridge, erected a generation ago, had been followed, this entire expenditure could have been avoided and there would have been far better service between Arlington and Wash ington. Residents of Arlington urged the bridge be erected over Roosevelt Island ending at about the juncture of Virginia and New Hampshire avenues, within half a mile of the White House, stating they knew of no one in Arlington who wanted to go to Georgetown, the “city of the dead.*’ Wash ington was then and now is our destl I --- Letters for publication must bear ' the signature and address of the writer, although it is permissible for a writer known to The Star to use a nom de plume. Please be brief. nation and thirty years later the District has expended $3,400,000 to demonstrate we were correct, but no attention was paid to our advice at the time of building the bridge. As we all know, the present Key Bridge, at its Washington terminus, runs into a 50-foot elevation from M to N street and to reach Washington the public had to travel for the past generation narrow M street. There is an old saying that time cures everything, but the expenditure of $3,400,000 is a poor substitute for an ap propriate bridge location from Arlington to Washington. FRANK LYON. Letters on Spanish Freedom Challenged as Inaccurate To the Editor of The Star: The letter from Eduardo Propper de Cal lejon, of the Spanish embassy, published in The Star on Octbber 3, defends the Franco regime against charges of religious persecu tion. The letter itself, however, furnishes in ternal evidence that the charges are true. Senor Callejon makes many assertions, but nowhere does he assert that non-Catholics in Spain enjoy equality with Catholics. As he indicates, non-Catholics in Franco Spain are allowed to exist, and to enjoy all the privileges of second-class citizenship. They are, for instance, permitted to bury their dead in “a special section (of all Span ish cemeteries) set aside for non-Catholics.” But Senor Callejon neglects to mention the pertinent fact that non-Catholics in Spain are forbidden to hold public funerals for their deceased, or even to indicate on the tombstones the non-Catholic religion of the deceased. Reporter Quoted. Senor Callejon invites the public to check his assertions with the reports of American correspondents. Very well. A dispatch of The. Associated Press correspondent, Louis Nevin, date-lined Madrid, July 20, reported: “Franoo promulgated a ‘Spanish bill of rights’ July 17, 1945. It provides that the Cortes (parliament) ‘shall vote the neces sary laws for carrying out the rights rec ognized in this bill.’ The Cortes has yet to vote any of these laws. ‘‘So 28,000,000 people silently go on living without the benefits of freedom of speech, worship, correspondence and association, without the rights of a habeas corpus act, dr to work and own property, and without guarantees against illegal arrest or entry of homes, all promised in the ‘bill of rights’ and all in existence under the preceding Re public and monarchy. “• . . Freedom of assembly is permitted for ‘licit (lawful) ends.’ An act to codify the provisions of this clause has been before the Cortes more than three years. The Cortes act limits meetings to those in con formity with the ‘spiritual, national and so cial unity of Spain’ and prohibits any op posed to ‘Catholic morality.’ Other restric tions practically make formation of political parties impossible. . . Franco’s official policy toward all non-Catholic minorities is that: Catholioism is the state-protected religion of the country, but ‘no one will be molested for his religious beliefs nor in the private exercise of his cult’ so long as there are no external mani festations. The government interpretation of this clause effectively reduces Protestants to a sort of second-class citizens. . A Spaniard who has once been bap tized as a Catholic is always a Catholic and may not marry a Protestant. “More fundamental for the Protestant church is a ban on missionary work. The government correctly maintains that there is a Protestant publishing house in Madrid. But it does not add that the publisher has not dared to publish a single Protestant work since the end of the civil war. Both missionary work and publication of Protes tant literature were permitted under the monarchy and the republic.” Eyewitness Reports Available. Homer Bigart, foreign correspondent of the New York Herald Tribune, and the late William H. Newton, Scripps-Howard staff writer, reported substantially the same situ ation in comprehensive articles published earlier than Mr. Nevins’ report. Numerous other eyewitness reports are available. Senor Callejon’s estimate of “five or six thousand” Protestants in Spain conflicts with an estimate by Catholic Action of "less than thirty-five thousand” and an estimate of live hundred thousand published in the 1948 Catholic Almanac. The crowning irony in Senor Callejon’s letter is his reference to “a very well-known Protestant, Dr. Araujo,” who is now a Pro fessor of Mathematics at the University of Zaragoza. For six years previous to this appointment. Prof. Roberto Araujo was un employed because of a government ban against him. He had been dismissed from the University of Valencia because of his political and religious affiliations. STANLEY LICHTENSTEIN, Associate Editor, Church and'State News letter. Champion of Railroads Disputes Letter Writer Liebmann To the aditor of The Stsr: I don’t know who Aug. A. Liebmann is. Perhaps he represents some trucking in terest. His letter in The Star of September 29 comparing transportation by truck with that by railroad is interesting and quite amusing. Let me say here that I have a Government job far removed from anything connected with transportation in any form. Without being able to quote any nice round figures, such as ‘TOO streamlined trains,” as suggested by Mr. Liebmann, I have gleaned from casual reading of various periodicals that some first class railroads are now on sounder footing thtm at any time in recent years. And I believe that railroad engineers spend a great deal of time and study in the proper banking and curvature of roadbeds so that high speeds may be maintained safely. As to the “. . . ragged edge bursts up to 75 miles an hour” that Mr. Liebmann mentions, a cursory examination of published time tables and official railroad time cards, showing schedules of through freight and passenger-trains tells a different story. And certainly the safety records of the Nation’s railroads as recently published in The Star prove that trains are rfbt oper ated at “double the speed that insures safety, comfort and economy.” As to diesel trucks speeding 100 miles an hour (another nice round figure) in Western States, where is the safety factor in that as it concerns private autos or any other ' vehicle that must share the road with those behemoths? There is certainly no pleasure or safety in driving when one must creep up hills behind one of those heavily-loaded trucks, then have no chance to get around them as they speed up on the down grades. (Speaking of highway grades and curves, have you compared them with railroad grades and curves, Mr. Liebmann?) Railroads are heavily taxed and those taxes help make it possible for other forms of transportation to offer cheap, If not always reliable, competition with them. When the truck and bus lines build, main tain and pay taxes on their own rights-of way, then 1 will say more power to them. CHAS. A. LAIRD. The Political Mill Dr. Townsend in New Drive For Old-Age Pension Plan Man Who Startled Nation 16 Years Ago Here Seeking Support for New Bill By Gould Lincoln Dr. Francis Everett Townsend, pioneer old age pension planner, says things are looking up for the Townsend program. The people, he insists, are more and more pension conscious, demanding security for their old age. He cites, for example, the fight which is being made by the steel workers, the coal miners and auto workers for adequate pen sions on retirement. He backs this up with the drive made by the Truman administra tion for a broadened and deepened social security act—the House already has passed such a bill. It’s all down his alley, Dr. Town send claims. Eighty years old and still going strong, the man who startled the country sixteen years ago with his demand that a law be enacted to provide $200-a-month pension for every person in the country 60 years old and over, has again been in Washington lining up support for a revised Townsend old-age pen sion bill. Under the new measure, a 3 per cent gross tax is to be levied, on income, business and individual personal*income, and the proceeds are to be distributed monthly to persons 60 years and over—if they retire —and to the incapcitated. Dr. Townsend figures that the pension, at the start of the program, might be as low as $100 a month, but that once th« program was in full swing, with the pension money expended each month and thereby increasing jobs and production, it would not be long before the pension will Increase to $200, $300 or even $400 a month. The first $250-a-month income is to be exempt from the tax. , Hits “Patchwork” Program. Dr. Townsend has little use for the social security program—which he insists the late President Franklin D. Roosevelt and his aides thought up to head off the Townsend plan in the early ’30s. Nor does he see much virtue in the program which organized labor is demanding from management. The social security program, he says, is a patch work, inadequate plan at best. He does not believe the new bill is at all the answer. So Dr. Townsend is planning a campaign for the election of a Townsend-plan Congress next year. All he has to do, he says, is get 10 per cent of the voters to go along with him in each congressional district and he can hold the balance of power on election day. He contends that in the present House 139 members had the Townsend indorsement when they were elected. He is therefore organizing in every district, so as to bring ! pressure on the candidates for the House and for the Senate. As an evidence of strength, Dr. Townsend points out that a drive for signatures to dis charge the House Ways and Means Com mittee from further consideration of the Townsend bill—sponsored by Representatives Blatnik of Minnesota and Angell of Oregon and others—has already produced 167 sig natures of the necessary 218. If he can get the other 51, the Townsend bill will be brought before the House for a vote. Accord ing to Dr. Townsend, the defeat of former Representative Harold Knutson of Minne sota, who was chairman of the Ways and Means Committee in the 80th Congress, was brought about by the TOWnsendites, because of Mr. Knutson’s hostility to the old-age pen sion plan. The Townsend bill is sponsored in the Senate by Senators Pepper of Florida, Downey of California, Thomas of Oklahoma and Danger of North Dakota. Started Plan in Depression. Dr. Townsend is the pioneering, crusading type. A country doctor fqr years in the Black Hills country of South Dakota, he moved to California, where he eventually re tired and lived in Long Beach. It was then he became enraged over the plight of the old people—during the depths of the depres sion—and started out to organize his old age pension campaign. His organization grew and grew. Its funds were considerable, and a House committee undertook an in vestigation. The line of questioning so angered Dr. Townsend that he walked out. He was later cited for contempt of the House, was sentenced to jail and to pay a fine. President Roosevelt, however, on the recom mendation of the Speaker of the House and other House leaders, pardoned Dr. Town send, just as he was about to step into the jail. The passage by the House recently of the social security bill brought from Representa tive Noah M. Mason of Illinois, Republican, announcement he had signed the Townsend petition. He said when he compared the two programs, “I am convinced the Town send plan is to be preferred.” The House bill. Representative Mason said, proposes the Federal Government shall col lect from $6,000,000,000 to $8,000,000,000 a year in payroll taxes and spend it for Gov ernment expenses. The Townsend plan calls for raising a similar sum to be handed.-CTIt immediately to the old people of the Nation. Questions and Answers A reader can get the answer to anr Question •r fact by writing The Evening 8tar Information Please Inclose three (3) cents for return postage. Bureau, 316 Ere st. n.e., Washington 2, D. C. By THE HASKIN SERVICE Q. What decision was reached concern ing the "hidden city” in South Dakota?— A. B. A. There appears to be difference of opin ion. The faculty of the School of Mine* believed it to be a natural though very un usual formation, a series of sandstone dikes. Others consider the long wall to be the work of a prehistoric race, "the sole surviv ing remnant of a ‘hidden city.’ ” Q. When was the Women’s Army Corps established?—R. J. A. The bill authorizing the WAC became law when the President signed it May 15, 1942. The first group of enlisted WACs were sworn in July 10, 1942. Training for this group began July 20, 1942. The first officers’ class graduated August 29, 1942. Q. Has any one traced to its source the familiary saying, "The moon is made of green cheese”?—R. H. A. “The moon is made of green cheese” is one of the most frequently found say ings in 16th and 17th century literature. It is found, for example, in "Antithesis.” by John Frith, published in 1573, and in “Pro verbs,” Book n. Chapter 7, by John Heywood, published in 1546. The expression means merely that one has been led to believe a fantastic assertion is fact. t Q. What is the darkest hour of the night? *—M. I. M. A. No Jight is received from the sun when it is 18 degrees or more below the horizon, and during these hours there is none that is regularly the darkest. Susan in Sunlight Shine very gently on her, sun, . For she is such a little one. Black puppy, learn to curb your bark; She fears loud noises and the dark. White puppy, take care when you jump, For she is small and very plump, And topples easily. Puss cat, Claws are taboo; remember that. If she be tyrant, witch or fairy, The moods of little girls may vary, Shine gently, bark quite softly, purr— I am so very fond of hqr. DOROTHY P. ALBAUGH.