Newspaper Page Text
!f)e ftamg f&faf
With Sunday Morning Edition. WASHINGTON, D. C. Published by Tht Evening Star Newspaper Company. SAMUEL H. KAUFFMANN, President. B. M. McKELWAY, Editor. MAIN OFFICE: 11th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. NEW YORK OFFICE: 270 Madison Ave. CHICAGO OFFICE: 435 North Michigan Ave. Delivered by Carrier. Evoning and Sunday Evening Sunday Monthly 1.20* Monthly _90c 10c per copy Weekly _30c Weekly -20c 10c per copy ^*!0c additional when 5 Sundays are In a month. Also 10c additional for Night Final Edition. Rates by Mail—Payable in Advance. Anywhere in United States Evening and Sunday Evening Sunday 1 year _18.00 1 year -11.50 l year -7.50 4 months _ 9.50 6 months — 6.00 6 months_4.00 1 month _1.60 1 month_1.10 1 Month_ 70c Telephone STerling 5000 Entered at the Post Office, Washington, D. C. as second-class mail matter. Member of the Associated Press. The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for republication of all the local news printed in this newspaper as well as all A. P. news dispatches. A—1$ «*•THURSDAY. July 6, 1950 A Federal Obligation * Any prospective surplus the District can an ticipate at the end of this fiscal year probably will be consumed by urgent development needs, Just as was an earlier one some years ago. This is one reason why it is inconceivable that the Senate would go along with the House proposal for a cut in the amount of the Federal share of District costs. There are even stronger reasons, however, for rejecting this move to “economize” nationally by slicing 10 per cent off the Federal payment to the District. The present lump $12 million pay ment is a part of an understanding entered into when Congress started boosting District taxes several years ago. When heavier realty taxes were laid on the shoulders of District taxpayers, along with some other tax boosts three years ago, an increase in the Federal share was a part of the bargain. And when a sales tax, a cigarette tax, still higher realty taxes and increased liquor levies were ordered last year to prevent a threatened $18 million city deficit, the United States was to do its share, too. In fact, at that time, there were Senate demands for an increase in the Federal payment far above any $12 million. Yet some memDers oi tne senate are sug gesting that the Federal payment be cut to help reduce the national deficit. A “saving” of $1,200,000 in this item could be swept away and forgotten in one minor national spending bill. What it would do to the District finances, how ever, might be to delay needed school, welfare, health or sewer projects for which residehts are paying their share. District officials say the expected surplus next June 30 of about $5 million is largely superficial since many needs deliberately have been held back for 1952. Extra expenses beyond the Senate’s $119 million bill already are in sight, one of S*sm being about $1 million for the first year of the pending five-day work-week for police, which will cost more in later years. In addition there are deferred school needs, flood control works and the slum redevelopment program, now ap parently being revived. Senators Hill of Alabama and Hunt of Wyoming were right when they told the Senate the Federal payment was an obligation. It is not one to be lightly discarded in the search for Federal economy. There are much more appropriate fields for that endeaver. Death Takes No Holiday There is nothing to be proud of in the new record—783 people killed in accidents—that was set over the Fourth of July holiday. Of all those killed, 482 died in traffic acci dents. There is simply no excuse for this “butch ery,” as it has been described by a spokesman for the National Safety Council. In former years fireworks were the great Fourth of July killer. But public opinion put a stop to that. Now it is the automobile. Fast driving, reckless driving, and drunken driving have converted the Nation’s highways into death traps. Over this past week end, one person was killed every eight minutes in auto crashes. For the period from January through May, 12,470 persons— 82 every 24 hours—died in smashups. And the list of injured runs into the scores of thousands. It does not seem possible that public opinion will tolerate this slaughter much longer. It can be stopped when the motor maniacs are taken off the roads, and that will be done when the great majority of the people, who want to drive with safety, demand that it be done. 'Makers of History' Exhibition Despite the fact that portraits of them appear on the Nation’s coins, currency and postage stamps, the men and the women who made America great still are unknown to present generations of our people. Nobody really knows what George Washington looked like. The rep resentations of him were interpretations. After 150 years, all that we have in the way of impres sions of him are simply that—impressions of him. The same observation applies to every famous leader. Even when the artists who pic tured the “makers of history” were scrupulously honest, devotedly earnest in their endeavors, they could do nothing more than record their own personal perceptions, their own ideas, of their subjects. It is proper to concede this. But it does not follow that such an exhibition of important paintings as those now on display at the National Gallery is inconsequential. On the contrary each such show has a magnetic fascination for students of the Nation’s experi ence, the Nation’s growth and progress. The exhibit arranged in connection with the celebration of the sesquicentennial of the estab lishment of the Federal Government in Wash ington began more than a century-and-a-half ago. Just a casual glance at it proves that it was the work of able workers—artists who had their limitations yet strove mightily to achieve worthy and durable results. The Edward Savage study of the Washington family is an example. It was not thrown together in haste. The painter started the composition in New York in 1789, he finished it in Philadelphia in 1796. Every detail was thought out with care, executed with patience and caution. The map of the Federal City to which Mrs. Washington is pointing with her fan is based on L’Enfant’s plan and easily Is recognized for what it is. Visitors te the exhibition naturally will wish to compare the Savage portrait of Washington with the Vaughan-Sinclair portrait by Gilbert Stuart. The two canvases differ, but examina tion of them leaves the spectator with a concep tion of the Father of His Country which is richly satisfying. Washington was a magnificent theme, and here are two proofs of it. Other pictures of compelling power are John Trumbull’s Alexander Hamilton, Stuart’s John and Abigail Adams, Samuel F. B. Morse’s Lafayette, Charles Robert Leslie’s Mrs. John Quincy Adams, Henry Inman’s Mrs. Abraham Van Buren, Carl Gutherz’s Jefferson Davis, Oliver Ingraham Lay’s Edwin Booth, Leon Bonnat’s Levi P. Morton, Theobald Chartran’s Mrs. Theodore Roosevelt and Douglas Chandor’s Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. Altogether there are 142 separate works in the National Gallery’s sesquicentennial show, and whether they are considered individually or as a group they deserve seeing. Are We Doing Enough? In view of the Korean crisis and the grave new tension it has created throughout the world, there can be no doubt that our state of prepared ness needs to be studied and acted upon with the utmost care, speed and foresight. The prime factor to be reckoned with—and undoubtedly our defense authorities are reckoning with it—is the one involving the question of whether or not the Russians are getting ready to move in a way that could lead to a general war. The mere fact that we are faced with that question, coupled with the fact that we cannot be sure of the answer, is enough in itself to demonstrate how imperative our need is to ask ourselves—both as a people and as a Government —whether we are doing all the thjngs that ought to be done, and whether we are doing them as fast as we should, to cope with the ominous possibilities implicit in the present explosive situation. Perhaps we are, but there is more than a little reason for serious misgiving on that score, a case in point being the highly dubious level of our aircraft production. Certainly, the world right now is as full of danger as in the days of Hitler. On every side of us there is evidence of a gathering storm, and although the storm itself may not break, although the clouds may pass, although the crisis may be kept within bounds and brought to an end before it causes a global explosion, the United States would be suicidally foolhardy if it failed at this stage to do everything necessary, as speedily as possible, to prepare for the worst. Korea has put our own and all other free nations on notice. It is an alarm bell warning us that this is no time to drag our feet in a mood of dreamy wishfulness. In the circumstances, we must deal without delay with certain hard questions and we must do our best to arrive at the right answers. For example, can we afford to conduct business as usual or should we have at least a limited mobilization of our industrial capacity? Should we or should we not take immediate action for a marked increase in our output of planes, naval equipment, guns, tanks, etc.? Is there a need, or isn’t there, for legislative preparedness in the field of economic controls? With the news from Korea being anything but reassuring, and with some Pentagon sources suggesting that we may have to commit as many as six divisions of troops there, how can we adhere to our present program and still have sufficient military manpower to fight the hot war we are fighting in Asia and to safeguard our security elsewhere? These are but a sampling of the many difficult and grave questions now confronting our Nation. Most of us—being average citizens without access to the kind of restricted informa tion that is needed for a sound evaluation of the immediate world situation and our state of preparedness—are not equipped to supply the precise answers. That is the job of the President,. the State Department, our military establishment and other key agencies working together with Congress. The decisions must be made at that level. The leadership must come from there. Possibly, as of today, the situation does not require that we do anything more than what we are doing. The trend of events, however, suggests otherwise. At any rate, considered in relation to the dark nature of the news, our present program has all the earmarks of being inadequate. If that is so, then the President ought to move at once to put the Nation into higher gear—as high as necessary. The American people can be counted upon to give full support to every action that is necessary in this time of crisis. France's Instability During his 1948-49 premiership, which lasted thirteen months, Henry Queuille won special distinction for heading the longest-lived govern ment in postwar,France, and now he has the added distinction of having headed the shortest lived one as well—a tenure of only two days. The Socialists are primarily responsible for this swift downfall. They did not like the fact that Mr. Queuille had organized France’s most conservative cabinet since the end of the war. So they joined the Communists and the extreme rightists in voting against it. Had they done otherwise, there would have been a French government today. This situation, although it does not disrupt the country’s routine departmental operations in domestic and international matters, obviously is good neither for France nor for the free world as a whole. For the continuing rise and fall of cabinets in Paris—a phenomenon caused by a multiplicity of opposing parties, none of which represents a majority—reflects a basic political instability that undermines the important leadership role recently assumed by the French in Western Europe. Needless to say, as long as France has no government at all or a government whose existence cannot be counted upon from one week to the next, neighboring countries are going to be hesitant about co-operating in such excellent French projects as the Schuman Plan for pooling Eurppe’s coal and steel industries. More unfortunate still, France’s political capri ciousness in these highly critical times tends very definitely to weaken the common front being organized by. the free nations against the threat of world-wide Communist aggression. Although international events may prod the key French politicians into agreeing on a new government without too much additional delay, the fundamental problem of in-and-out cabinets will still remain. There can be no solution to it, apparently, without a general election and constitutional reforms that will make it possible for one of the big parties to win a clear majority. In any case, until its political system operates in a manner that will do away with short-lived governments, France will not be able to act confidently and firmly—as it used to do—as one of the world’s key powers. The sooner it can do so, the better both for itself and the West in general. 'Down Under' View of Korean Situation By Fred B. Hubbard TQRISBANE, Australia.—The news ed •D itor of a leading daily here winced as he rubbed an aching arm the other night. “What’s wrong with your arm?” asked a colleague. “I had tetanus and typhoid shots to day,” replied the executive, an ex-army officer. “War is coming, and I want to be ready to hop into it the first day.” Few Aussies went to such lengths when the grave news from Korea hit the headlines down here. But there is real anxiety everywhere, as Aussies wait to see if Russia will plunge the world into global war. “It’s just like 1942, when we waited to see which side the Russians would take,” said one housewife nervously. Newspaper editions are sellouts as Aussies follow the tense Korea scene. The editorials enthusiastically hail the historic steps taken by the United Na tions and the United States to halt Communist aggression in Korea. “But for U. S. action,” declares one daily, “the Red successors and emulators of the Nazis might have pulled off an other Munich over Korea.” Another hails the American steps as reassuring evidence that the United States is “Pacific-minded as well as European-minded.” Australia’s Reds, of course, are re acting typically. Trumpets one Com munist paper: “Peace-lovers are rejoic ing at the resounding defeats inflicted by the Korean people on American im perialism’s war plans.” This country’s concern over the grave implications the Korean situation holds is underlined by the reaction of its gov ernment. “It must be made clear to Communist PRIME MINISTER MENZIES. movements everywhere,” declares Prime Minister Menzies, “that if they promote aggressive campaigns to acquire new territory, they will find no division among British countries.” Backing up his words, Mr. Menzies has placed an RAAP fighter squadron and two warships at Gen. MacArthur’s disposal. Australia has also canceled plans to bring its 3,000 occupation troops back from Japan. Additionally, this country is sending one of its two fully operational heavy bomber squadrons to Malaya to support British action against Red terrorists. There is no doubt the planes will be switched to hotter spots if needed. Paralleling its worries over another World War is Australia’s dread of a Communist victory in Korea, only 3,500 miles away. This fear stems from Aus tralian belief that more Red successes in the Far East would swing fence sitting Asiatics into the Russian orbit and put millons of Communists on Aus tralia’s doorstep. The Oriental mind, as Australia well knows, respects a winner. The feeling here, therefore, is that a Red victory in Korea would blast United States and British hopes of building democratic buffer states communism in Asia. Australia is also worried over the state of its armed forces. The army has only 14,715 men, the navy 10,212, and the air force 9,398, on current figures. Part time “citizen forces” total 19,535. Moreover, the navy is a tiny one, mostly made up of old ships. The army is short of modem equipment, and the air force is handicapped by near-obsolete planes. The Korean situation may speed up the country’s universal military train ing scheme, scheduled to begin next year. But as yet it calls for only 20,000 youths in the 18-20 age bracket to be drafted each year for 14 weeks’ training. This state of affairs is understood to have alarmed Field Marshall Sir Wil liam Slim, chief of Britain’s Imperial General Staff, who is visiting both Aus tralia and New Zealand. While close secrecy has guarded his talks with the defense ohiefs of the two countries, it is believed he is urging the commonwealths to\speed up their mili tary planning. (Chicago Daily News Foreign Service.) Letters to The Star . . . A pseudonym is permissible only when letter carries correct name and address of writer. Please be brief. Painted Turtles ' To the true lover of nature, the pic ture in The Star of children being en couraged* to daub paint on turtles during their first day at camp will cause great regret. Your reporter has evidently caught the attitude of these children's counse lors by referring to the turtles as “novel ties of the woods.” But we see these creatures, far too often, offered for sale as “novelties,” hideously painted, in our urban stores.' It seems probable that these children will learn little of the real feeling for camping and the out-of-doors. This feeling so appreciates the charm of wild life in all forms that it prompts the individual to lean over backward in leaving the natural life and scene as he finds it, in order that others may share in its beauty. To paraphrase a well-known poem: Turtles are loveliest where they grow, Watch them, enjoy them, but leave them so, Philip W. Stafford. Annexation Testimony I should like to correct an unfortunate impression which your story created re garding my testimony on June 30 in the Falls Church-Fairfax County annex ation suit. The story implied that I testified that the people in the area to be annexed could expect a 66 per cent tax increase as a result of annexation. This is not a true reflection of the purport of my tes timony. The facts are as follows: First, the tax rate of $2.90 reported in the story is a hypothetical tax rate as sumed for the purpose of demonstrating the financial ability of Falls Church, even under the most adverse circum stances, to proceed with annexation. Ac tually, the tax rate probably would be even lower. Second, your story implies that there will be an increase in the valuation of all property to which the reduced tax rate is applied. This is wrong. The lower tax rate will apply also to personal property, the valuation of which amounts to more than a quarter of the present valuation of real estate. The personal property valuations will not be increased by the reassessment of real estate. In any event, the lowering of the tax rate will mean that residents of both Falls Church and the annexation area will enjoy a continued reduction in taxes upon personal property. Third, I did not testify that the assess ments in the annexation area could “immediately” be brought up to the level of the city. My testimony was that for the tax year 1951 assessments in the annexation area would remain at the level fixed by the county assessor. How ever, since the city proposes under its charter to provide* for the annual assess ment and equalization of assessments of real estate, I said that for the tax year 1952, for which taxes are payable in December, 1952, the city would be re quired by the State constitution to assess all property in the city on an equal basis. This would mean bringing the assess ments in the annexed area at that time in line with those in the city—whether higher or lower. Fourth, your story did not give con sideration to the fact, to which I testified, that Fairfax County is also presently reassessing all the real estate in the county, which will include the annexa tion area if that remains in the county. The board of supervisors of Fairfax County, in two separate official state I ments relating to the bonds of Sanitary District No. 1, have declared that the assessments in the county are approxi mately 33 V3 per cent of true value and that the current reassessment * should result in a substantial increase in the total assessed value of taxable property. Thus, whether the area remains with the county or is added to the city, there is a strong probability that taxes will be somewhat increased. However, this is not due to annexation, as your story implies, but principally because the area needs adequate school facilities and these facilities must be paid for. . Fifth, I said repeatedly to the court that in my presentation I was purposely assuming the most adverse conditions to show that, even under such circum stances, the city could financially sup port annexation. Thus, I assumed that there has been no new construction and resultant increases in property value since January, 1950, and that there will be none for the next five years. Actually, building permits have been issued for over a million dollars of new construc tion in Falls Church alone since Janu ary 1, 1950. The value added to the land by new construction increases the tax base, and as the tax base is thus increased, the tax rate can be lowered. Lee M. Rhoads, Councilman, City of Falls Church. How's That Again? Already the results of President Tru man’s undeclared war have been felt in the District of Columbia in the casual announcement by the Public Utilities Commission that the Capital Transit Co. is authorized on July 16 to charge 15-cent cash fares and $2 for the weekly pass. While this robbery upon the cit izens of the District of Columbia is quietly being put over, Edwin Lahey writes in The Star of the plans for rounding up of 50,000 to 100,000 subversives. If we were to judge from past experi ences of so-called subversive lists, sub versives are the type of people who are opposed to fare-raises and wage cuts, who challenge discrimination and segre gation. and would like to see the atom bomb outlawed on a world scale. The fare raise came first, the wage freeze is already being suggested. It becomes clear that Wall Street’s war to dominate Asia will nqt do the people right here at home any good. Roy H. Wood, Chairman, Robert Paul, Secretary, Communist Party of the District of Columbia. State Department Dishonest? The State Department appears to have been deliberately dishonest with Con gress on at least two different occasions. About two years ago, before the situation of the Nationalists in China had become desperate, Congress passed a bill making $75 million dollars available to be spent in the Far East to combat the Red Fas cists. The bill originally had been ear marked so that the funds were to be' made available specifically to the Na tionalists, but Mr. Acheson is said to have appeared before a committee and stated that it would be used to help the Nationalists even if not ear-marked. So on the basis of this assurance, the bill was passed without specifying that the money was to be made available to the Nationalists. But not a penny of this ap propriation was ever made available to the Nationalists. More recently Congress was about to pass a bill making $50 million dollars available to the Spanish Government when Mr. Acheson again appeared before a Congressional committee and stated that this bill was unnecessary since the money would be made available through the Export-Import Bank. Upon this as surance the bill was not passed. But no money has been made available. In both cases the direct result has been to help the Red Fascists. Why do so many of the State Department policies have this result? Observer. Milkman's Friend I have read the letters regarding the milk Strike signed "Physician” and “Housewife,” and I find myself slightly annoyed by their Pharisaical attitude. I have three young children who love their milk, but they certainly did not suffer during the strike. We used lots of canned milk and were thankful for it. Perhaps “Housewife” would be inter ested in what I said to my milkman when he returned last week. I said: “I am glad to see you again, though I never complained once during the strike. I am sorry you did not get the five-day week, but perhaps that will come later. And 1 see no reason why you should deliver milk to me on Sundays, Christ mas Day or Thanksgiving, and I hope before long that will be changed.” I would like to state here that my milkman is the most cheerful, pleasant and courteous tradesman with whom I deal. I live outside the city—but snow, sleet or ice have never once detained him in delivering my milk. I am deeply grateful to him for his service. Another Housewife. Alexandria. Hardship Example I would like to see this letter published in your paper, replying to one recently signed “Pro-Rent Control.” I am an example of “excessive hard ship” from the owner’s standpoint, as I am a widow whose income is derived largely from rental property in the Dis trict. My husband and I, both native Wash ingtonians, invested in local real estate, much to my sorrow now that I am alone. Since rent control went into effect, I have been allowed to raise rents only to cover the raises in District real estate taxes. However, repairs are much more costly and water rents also. The net in come from the properties is much less than five years ago, when my husband died. In that same five years, everything I buy has increased in cost: Food, clothes, carfare, gas and electric rates, medicine, etc. My tenants have had salary in creases, while my income gets smaller regularly. Is there any fairness in that? If the Transit Co., the utilities, etc., must have a fair profit, why shouldn't the small landlord? Anti-Rent Control. Anti-McAllister How sorry I feel for that poor howling Marine! t Why doesn’t someone yank out his ailing teeth, or load him up with aspirin, or give him a sedative to ease his pain? He must be in awful misery, for no nor mal, healthy grown-up would ever emit such noises. Not even in a ball park! But, perhaps, I am misinformed as to his age: and maybe he simply needs to be burped, or have his diapers changed. Disgusted Anti-Noiser. This and That . . . By Charles E. Tracewell The big moment of the July 4 celebra tion at Fragrant Farms came when Chet Wardrow put a ball through Mrs. Mar maduke’s living room window. Chet was at bat. When Mrs- Marmaduke stepped out on the front porch, she knew he had done it, because there was the bat in his hand. The ball, of course, was lying on the Marmaduke living room floor, surround ed by a large number of pieces of broken glass. “Young man,” snapped Mrs Marma duke, “come here!” It was the tone of command Chet had learned to respect from his own daddy, occasionally from his mother, but seldom from other people. * ★ This time, however, he came. He was still swinging the bat when he arrived at the steps. “Did you do that?” asked Mrs. Marma duke. Chet said nothing, deciding that may be discretion was the better -part of valor. “Who did it?" went on his questioner. She looked around at the other boys. “We didn’t do it,” they chimed in, with the conviction and smugness of small boys who, after all, hadn’t done it. - They had not all been able to bat at the same time. They had been catching, pitching, do ing all the things small boys do when they play ball, including yelling. * * “We didn’t do it!” they yelled, with one voice. Mrs. Marmaduke sternly looked at the culprit. Poor Chet always was the culprit. If anyone was caught, it was he. That time he climbed the fence; that time he—well, he always was caught, that was an. Some people are that w^y- Others manage to be looking very innocent when something happens. ' They were aU in it, but it was Chet who had slammed out that home run. It was a home run, all right, but it went into the wrong home. Why did it have to go through a win dow, anyway? That was what Chet wanted to know. * * The game had been going on in Old Man Brigham’s front yard. Brigham was up a ladder when it happened. He hadn’t seen a thing. He was too busy up the ladder. Mrs. Marmaduke declared, a bit heat edly, that young Chet would have to pay for it. She called his father, and Old Man Wardrow came down to see what his heir had done. There was no gainsaying the broken window, and the bat in Chet’s hand. “It was only a tennis ball,’’ some one said, scornfully. “A tennis ball can break a window as well as a regular baseball,” some one else said; it was hard to say who. * * By this time Old Man Brigham had come down the ladder. It wasn’t his boy who had broken tfie window, fortunately. “I think,” he suggested, “that Chet might pay half, and you boys pay half-” “We didn’t break it!” came the tri umphant scream. “We didn’t break it!” The logic was irrefutable. They hadn’t. “Chet done it!” “Chet did it.” said Old Man Brigham. “But you were all in it.” “We didn’t break it!” Old Man Brigham retired up the ladder. It was impossible to know just how the thing came out, because Mrs. Marmaduke retired to her telephone to call the police, and Old Man Wardrow retired to his proper domicile to talk the matter over with young Chet After all, Chet had the bat. You couldn’t get away from that. The Political Mill Fair Dealers Watch South Carolina Race Thurmond, Byrnes Offer Double-Barreled Threat By Gould Lincoln COLUMBIA, S. C.. July 6.—South Carolina’s Democratic primaries next Tuesday have a peculiar interest for the Truman Pair Deal, especially as Demo cratic nominations for office in this State are tantamount to election. First, in the Senate race: Here Gov. J. Storm Thurmond, pet enemy of Presi dent Truman, is running against incum bent Senator Olin Johnston. If Gov. Thurmond should win, he will be a new thorn in Fair Deal flesh in Washington. • Second, former Secretary of State James F. Byrnes, a declared enemy of practically all of the Fair Deal program, which he insists is carrying the country down the road to State socialism and bankruptcy, is a candidate for Governor. Should Mr. Byrnes win, Mr. Truman can look for no support from the South Car olina delegation at the 1952 Democratic National Convention, provided Mr. Tru man is a candidate for renomination, as he is now expected to be. Confident of One Hit. The anti-Truman Democrats are point ing this double-barreled shotgun at the Chief Executive. If they miss fire with one barrel, they are confident they will surely hit with the other. If Gov. Thurmond and Mr. Byrnes both win, the cumulative effect of the South Carolina primaries and those in Florida and in North Carolina will be severe, so far as the Fair Dealers are concerned. The Thurmond supporters here are de lighted that Senator Graham was de feated by Willis Smith in the North Car olina senatorial primary, and they got a real kick out of the defeat of Senator Pepper of Florida by Representative Smathers. Those were the only two Senators from the States of the “Solid South” who were suspected of being lukeworm in opposition to the Truman civil rights, anti-segregation program. Gov. Thurmond, they figure, if he goes to the Senate, will be even more severe against the Truman program than is Senator Johnston. Democratic Nomination. This year Gov. Thurmond, who was the States Rights’ presidential candidate for President in 1948 and as such has not been recognized as a “Democrat” by President Truman, is running for the straight Democratic senatorial nomina tion. Personally, this does not make Gov. Thurmond any more acceptable to the President. But Mr. Truman has said recently he will support regularly nom inated Democratic candidates. That would seem to include Gov. Thurmond, the man the President has snubbed both at the time of his inauguration and, re cently, when he failed to invite Mr. Thurmond with other Democratic Gov ernors to lunch at the Blair House. Whether Mr. Truman gives Gov. Thurmond the White House blessing or not, the Governor, if elected to the Sen ate, will be taken into the Democratic organization of that body as a Democrat. He makes It clear in his campaign speeches that he does not expect favors from Mr. Truman. ~ He tells his audiences, “my opponent. Senator Johnston, is content with get ting a few crumbs for South Carolina from Truman’s Pendergast table. When I am elected Senator, instead of begging a few crumbs, I’ll get a whole slice for you from Congress—and it’s Congress which passes the laws and enacts the appropriation bills, not the President.” Byrnes’ potent Voice.” In some measure, a Byrnes victory in South Carolina may be more devastating to the Fair Dealers than a victory for Gov. Thurmond. Mr. Byrnes, as Gov ernor, will become a potent voice throughout the South, where he is highly regarded for his attainments and his abilities. Last November, addressing the con ference of Southern Governors at Biloxi, Miss., he verbally tore the shirt off the Truman Fair Deal. His speech beyond a doubt helped to strengthen the opposi tion to the Truman program during the present session of Congress. Mr. Byrnes is using that speech in his present cam paign, changing and modifying it to meet various occasions. A sentence or two from that address is enough to indicate how Mr. Byrnes hits the Fair Deal in its tenderest parts. For example, "Our real trouble is debt and taxes. We cannot cure it by more debt and more taxes. We should devote to cutting expenditures some of the thought we are devoting to taxing and borrowing.” And again: “We are threat ened with the concentration in Wash ington of the powers of local govern ments, including the police powers, and with the imposition of creeping, but ever advancing, socialistic programs.” Questions and Answers The Star's readers can get the answer to any question of fact by either writing The Evening Star Information Bureau. 1200 I street N.W.. Washington 5. D. C., and inclosing 3 cents return postage, or by telephoning ST. 5000. Extension 338. By THE HASKIN SERVICE. Q. Is the Foreign Service Institute a Federal Government unit?—R. P. A. The Foreign Service Institute is the training department for members of the Department of State who are assigned to foreign service. It is open only to FoMgn Service personnel. Q. How much larger than the earth is the sun?—J. A. K. A. The diameter of the sun is 865,400 miles. This is more than 109 times the mean diameter of the earth. It has been estimated that a train traveling a mile a minute around the sun's equator, night and day, would require five years to com plete the trip. Q. What is the name of the tree that has hundreds of roots?—E. J. C. A. The banyan tree, which belongs to the mulberry family, is notable for its aerial roots. They grow from the branches and on reaching the soil thick en and form supporting pillars. Q. Did Queen Juliana of the Nethier ’ iands attend college?—V. N. A. A. She attended the University of Leiden, receiving her law degree, honoris causa, in 1931. This Fickle One The crowd applauds her magic dance. Her wild, kaleidoscopic whirl; , Bewitching, bold, she winks, she flirts— The circus is a dazzling girl. At sun-up, miles away, she yawns Up dreary grade and down; The circus is a mad-cap with A date in any town. MICHAEL O'SHANK.