Newspaper Page Text
With Daily Evening Edition.
WASHINGTON, D. C. Published by The Evening Star Newspaper Company. SAMUEL H. KAUFFMANN, President. B. M. McKELWAY, Editor. MAIN OFFICE: 11th St. and Pennsylvania Ave. NEW YORK OFFICE: 420 Lexington Ave. CHICAGO OFFICE: 435 North 'Michigan Ave. Delivered by Carrier. Evening and Sunday Evening Sunday Monthly -1.50* Monthly _1.10* Monthly _ 45c Weekly - 35c Weekly 25c Weekly .10c *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 1 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 in entitled exclusively to the use For sepwblicatlon oF all the local news printed in this newspaper at well as all A. P. news dispatches. *—* _SUNDAY, October 22. 1950 More Than a Parkway It is welcome news that the Baltimore Washington Parkway has survived the economy operations being carried out at the Budget Bureau by congressional edict. This road, when com pleted, will be more than a parkway for the pleasure of the motoring public. It will be a vital contribution to the safety of traffic between Baltimore and Washington, as well as a highway of definite military value in an emergency. The Budget Bureau has allotted $1.5 million from impounded park funds for resuming work on the parkway, the Baltimore-Jessup section of which is being built by Maryland. The Federal Government began grading its part of the high way during World War II, but work halted when the war ended. The release of funds will make it possible to proceed with bridge construction and other major preliminary work. Construction of the parkway will provide traffic relief for the parallel Baltimore Pike (U. S. Route D, which, in the Washington Baltimore stretch, has become one of the more dangerous main highways in the country. The money spent in building the parkway will be a worthwhile investment from the accident prevention standpoint alone. For Postal Self-Support Postmaster General Donaldson’s appeal to the Interstate Commerce Commission for approval of a raise in parcel post rates revives a rate-fixing method that has been in the discard for 20 years. Apparently the Post Office Department in the past has avoided use of the ICC course for fear of being put in the position of by-passing Congress in rate-fixing matters. Yet Congress authorized the method in 1925 and presumably wanted it to be employed when postal authorities deemed it desirable. Mr. Donaldson cannot be accused of undercutting Congress, because he was specifi cally authorized to go to the ICC by an obscure provision of the deficiency bill passed just before congressional adjournment. The 1925 law was last invoked in 1930 by Postmaster General Walter F. Brown. Since then all requests for postal rate changes have been made direct to Congress. Mr. Donaldson used the congressional approach unsuccessfully during the past session. The House approved a mail rate increase bill but the measure was interred by the Senate Post Office Committee. This was the same House that passed a resolution directing the Postmaster General to cancel his economy order curtailing mail deliveries. This resolution fortunately was lost on the Senate side in the rush to adjourn. Also lost, Incidentally, was the Hoover Commission proposal to “take the Post Office Department out of politics,” by removing postmasterships from the patronage list. Both the Postmaster General and the President backed this reform, but the bill remained in a committee pigeonhole. Mr. Donaldson wants to raise parcel post rates an average of 25 per cent, which would make the service pay for itself. The increase would cut the department’s expected deficit of $550 million by more than $100 million. Parcel post, like most other postal services, has been a losing proposition for a long time. Until rates for the losing services are boosted to somewhere near the cost of handling, the Post Office De partment must continue to operate on a sub sidized basis. There is no good reason why taxpayers in general should help postal customers pay their mailing bills. Mr. Donaldson deserves public support in his efforts to put his department on a businesslike, self-supporting basis. Henry L. Stimson The free world at large has good cause to Join with Americans in mourning the death of a great statesman, Henry L. Stimson. An out standing crusader for peace in an era clouded by aggression, he nevertheless stood steadfast against pacifistic compromise. He was among the first to perceive and warn against the dangers of appeasing power-hungry dictators. There was much truth in his jesting comment once to a Senate committee: “If you go on reading from my past statements you’ll make me feel like Winston Churchill for having been right so often.” Mr. Stimson was right when he foresaw the risks of permitting Japan to have its way in Manchuria. As Secretary of State he urged Great Britain and France to join with the United States in taking a firm stand against the Japa nese invaders, but was rebuffed. As a private citizen he sought in vain to have the United States co-operate with the League of Nations In enforcing rigid economic sanctions against Italy for the latter’s attack on Ethiopia. He deplored Britain’s refusal to support a French effort to eject Hitler’s troops from the Rhineland, first victim of Nazi aggression. He recommended that Congress outlaw shipment of arms, scrap Iron and oil to Japan. He twice invoked the Briand-Kellogg Anti-War Pact—first during the Russian-Chinese clash over the Chinese Eastern Railroad in Manchuria and again against the Japanese when they took control of Manchuria— both times without success. The latter effort brought into being a new American policy of refusing to recognize sovereignty changes effected by military force. This “Stimson doctrine” has been a keystone of American foreign policy ever since. With this background of clear thinking and forthright action, Mr. Stimson was exceptionally well fitted for a return engagement as Secretary of War during World War II. Always a believer In strength as a preserver of peace, Secretary ^jison, despite his years, entered enthusias i tically and tirelessly into his Job of building up the Nation’s military power in the shortest period possible. He gave unstintingly of his time and energy during the darkest days of the conflict and until victory had been won. He never regretted having been a party to the decision to use the atomic bomb in a climactic move to bring the war to a quick end. He consoled himself with the fact that use of the bomb probably saved thousands of American lives. The heart attack which he suffered not long after retiring from public service' quite probably was aggravated by the physicaUand mental strain of five years of grueling active duty as civilian head of the greatest American military machine in history. He recovered from that attack sufficiently to resume writing on the subject dearest to his heart—national defense for peace. His wise counsel will be missed in the still troubled era which he leaves behind him. The Will to Fight Herbert Hoover touched on a subject that is in many minds when he raised the question of the willingness of our Allies in Western Europe to take the steps necessary to erect a firm front against Russian aggression. These nations have achieved a greater indus trial production than before either the First or the Second World War. They have greater manpower. Yet, although in the former wars they put 140 trained and equipped combat divi sions in the field within 90 days, they could not muster enough troops today to fight a delaying action against the Russians. This country, in addition to building up its own armed strength, has spent billions of dollars and is planning to spend billions more to strengthen the economy of Western Europe and revive its military potential. It is doing this in the interests of its owm defense and the defense of European civilization. The question is whether the investment is a sound one in either respect. Mr. Hoover thinks our Allies are dragging their feet, that they may not have the will to fight if attacked, and that “we should say, and at once, that we shall provide no more money until a definitely unified and sufficient European army is in sight.” This, of course, raises the matter of what alternative we have. The former President sees it this way: “If we do not find real military action of powerful strength in Western Europe; if there is no definite and effective mobilization of the other members of the United Nations so as to take up the major burden of their own defenses, then we had better reconsider our whole relation to the problem. In that event we had better quit talking and paying, and consider holding the Atlantic Ocean with Britain (if they wish) as one frontier, and the Pacific Ocean with an armed Japan and other islands as the other frontier.’’ There will be those who will say that this is the old isolationism cropping out. Buf Mr. Hoover’s views do not differ greatly from those expressed a month ago by John Sherman Cooper, former Republican Senator and nowr a Republican adviser to the State Department. Mr. Cooper said that the action w'hich has been taken by Western Europe, and he included Britain, is inadequate and cautious. “Emergencies call for emergency action,” he said, “and decisions regarding survival cannot be made upon the basis of whether or not economic and social programs might be disturbed.” The £rst requirement, he declared, is the adoption of a defense plan for Western Europe. Without such a plan, said Mr. Cooper, “the aid that we furnish will be mis directed, and in part wasted. The entire effort may repeat the familiar “too little—too late” pattern. Within the past few days France has an nounced a program looking toward the military expenditure over the next three years of $5.8 billion, including the raising of 15 new divisions. This is an encouraging step in the right direction, but it falls far short of the total effort that should be made in Western Europe. It is to be hoped that the requisite effort will be forthcoming. If it is not, if the will to fight for their own survival is not present among the people of Western Europe, then, soon or late, we shall have to turn to the grim question of what can and should be done to safeguard ourselves. That will be a very difficult thing to do. But the worst thing we could do is to pin our hopes on Allies if they will not prepare them selves to stand up to the test when it comes. Sit Stafford Retires In the past few years, as Britain's “economic czar” and Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Staf ford Cripps has capped a long and distinguished legal, diplomatic and political career with a record of achievement well deserving of his countrymen’s deepest thanks. Moreover, in a broader sense, the free world at large has reason to pay tribute to him as he leaves office now because of ill health. For Sir Stafford, among all Britons, has earned the lion’s share of the credit for his country’s remarkable economic recovery since 1947—a recovery of vast importance not merely to the security of Britain but to the security of America and every other like-minded nation as well. In 1947, owing chiefly to the grave losses and dislocations caused by the Second World War, Britain was deep in a dangerous crisis. It was this crisis, with all its enormously difficult problems, that was dumped in Sir Stafford’s lap when he became Chancellor. From then on, in what amountted virtually to a one-man rescue effort, he displayed an extraordinary ability to lead his country out of the morass. With the indispensable help of the Marshall Plan, and with a rigorous no-favors-to-anybody austerity program, he carried on an unremitting drive that slowly but surely lifted the United Kingdom from the depths of depression to where it is today—in a relatively very healthy and strong economic and financial position. Accordingly, now that he has resigned be cause of his doctors’ insistent warnings that he must have rest or soon die, few Britons—even among the Conservatives—can fail to hail him as a man who has served his country remarkably well. Further, although a Socialist and a stalwart of the Labor Party, he has done so without engaging in partisanship or striving to achieve narrow, doctrinaire objectives. In short—as he turns over the seals of his office to Hugh Gaitskell, who has been his under study—it may rightly be said of Sir Stafford that he has placed the interests of all Britain high above the interests of personal politics. The results shine, and the free world as a whole is the gainer. On advice of his handlers, Senator Quagmire is not standing on his record in the campaign for re-election, but from here on in will emphasize “the great task ahead.” Vishinsky, at U. N„ is still in there pitching, but thejre are moments when he ought also to wear a catcher’s mitt. I. Spires of the Spirit So Help Me, God. By Frederick Brown Harris Minister. Foundry Methodist Church; Chaplain. United States Seriate. “So help me. God". That quartet of mighty monosyllables is the solemn con clusion of the oath of allegiance taken by every citizen of the Nation who as sumes public office. If those now carry ing the responsibilities of the executive, the legislative and the judicial phases of our Government could be called together for a mass meeting and should be asked to repeat in concert the words uttered individually when they took over their office, what a deafening affirmation would be heard, "So help me, God ’. In the Nation’s Capital a man of blameless integrity was appointed to head an important commission. Having just taken the oath of office, he turned to preside at the first meeting of the body, to the carrying out of whose func tions he had just dedicated all his powers, calling upon the Almighty to witness his determination. As he as sumed the chair his first words indicated that he was under the stress of great emotion. He stood silently for a moment, and then said: “Several times before, when assuming some governmental 'as signment, I have repeated that oath; but, somehow, never did it seem to mean to me what it does this hour. I would like to begin the first session of this body by repeating with all my heart those last four words. ‘So help me, God’. That means that there is a flag of final allegi ance lifted above the national ensign. It means that the affairs, the methods, the goals of the Nation are all under God. No official, from the President on through the list of public servants, ends his oath to uphold the Constitution with, ‘So help me, the United States of America,’ but with ‘So help me, God’ These four rugged, one-syllable, Anglo Saxon words suggest a moral climate in which certain things simply cannot live —such as compromise which crucifies principles, shoddy workmanship which betrays one’s best, cowardly expediency which is treason to the highest integrity. But these words, “So help me, God’, can mean everything or nothing. In all human relationships there is no more important question today than: How much do they mean? A recent survey conducted by a popu lar American magazine showed that while 95 per cent of those interviewed asserted belief in God, only 39 per cent declared that their religious beliefs had any real effect cfti their political and bus iness attitudes. In summing up the situation, the reviewers said: “The suc cess of communism is the result of the failure of Christians who have forgot ten the revolutionary demands of their faith,” The revolutionary demands have evaporated into a mild and manageable version that makes people comfortable, winks at pagan practices and blunts sensitiveness to anything that hurts men and women and little children. The large percentage who admitted that their religious beliefs did not color their politi cal or business attitudes would, neverthe less, expect to be put in the category of the religious. A modern novelist eloquently described the religion of one of her characters in the sentence: "She had God on her vis iting list.” How aptly that jibe sug gests the widespread, formal, polite, con ventionality which so often masquerades as religion. It was said in the obituary notice of an English squire: “He was not interested in religion. But in all other respects he was a consistent Protestant.” If one really believes in God, he will automatically face every day, every responsibility, every task, both private and public, in the spirit of “So help me, God,” making that not a pious ejacula tion, but a fervent supplication. It can not help but mold every thought and action if, out of an inner faith and a satisfying sense of deep reserves, we say, "So help me, God” in the glorious per sonal sense in which Sidney Lanier, gal lantly fighting tuberculosis, cried out: "By so many roots as the marsh grass sends In the sod, I will heartily lay me a hold on the greatness of God!” Robert Louis Stevenson was no naive believer in second-hand religion, nor a contender for orthodoxy. Yet, in his long-drawn-out battle against disease which was sapping his physical strength, he laid hold on the greatness of God. Describing a decisive stage in his soul's career, he testified: “I came about like a well-handled ship. There stood at the wheel that unknowm steersman whom we call God.” The Apostle Paul said, "Whether we eat or whether we drink, or whatsoever we do, we should do it unto Him.” By that “whatsoever” he meant, w'hether we work or whether we play, whether we rule a state or rock a cradle, we are to do it as unto God. How' drab and boring life can be if, like a galley slave, we go on with any kind of a task, even the most lowly, and never see the light of God upon it. A steady awareness of the di vine, a great prophet has declared, Is by far the best and most important thing that ever can happen to us in this world: and to miss it is the ultimate tragedy. That awareness of the Living God trans forms life utterly and imparts to it a depth and a dignity unknown before.'It is far and away the most vital experience that ever can happen to one. An ecclesiastical tag tells little about a person’s religipn. To be genuinely re ligious is to face every experience, every toil, in the spirit of four lines which breathe the reverential awe of our four words: "Thou Life w'ithin my life, than self more near, Thou veiled Presence infinitely clear. From all elusive show's of sense I flee. To find my center and my rest in Thee.” Here is a w'hite altar for the pravc So help me, God”. Letters to The Star. . Pen-names may be used if letters carry # writers’ correct names and addresses. All letters subject to condensation. v-opy Lat In one of the letters appearing in your Issue of October 17, under the head “Socrates and Dogs,” the writer, Eddie Miller, refers to Socrates’ reply, when elected as city dog-catcher: “It is not the job which honors the man. it is the man who honors the job.” This is in line with the oft-quoted response of Epaminondas, one of Greece’s ablest generals, who, when his enemies sought to humiliate him by offering him the office of public scavenger of Thebes, accepted the position with the statement: "If the office will not reflect honor upon me, I will reflect honor upon it.” Gertrude E. Mackenzie. 'How About Us' When are we going to have price ceil ings and wage controls? When is the Council of Economic Advisers going to st-op talking about "voluntary" controls holding prices down and recognize that Mr. Baruch was right some weeks ago in advocating immediate controls? When will the President cease to be "gravely concerned” about rising prices and do something about them—employing the broad powers which the Congress has given him? Just as soon as the railroad men, the steelworkers, and all the rest of organized labor gets its next W’age increase and not before. Naturally, farm parity will then have to be adjusted so that farm income won’t be diminished by the inevitable price increases that will follow the above wage increases. And so it goes, on and on and on. But when is this overgrown Govern ment of ours going to have some con sideration for the millions of us in the low income group who are not fortunate enough to belong to the new aristocracy, which the present administration ap parently considers the sole foundation of the Republic. I refer to the millions of us who are secretaries, civil servants, soda clerks, store clerks, bookkeepers, copywriters, teachers, bank tellers, ac countants, shipping clerks, the people living on fixed pensions, etc. When will we again have government of the people, by the people, and for the people—all the people? H. Blakely Harvey, Jr. Dogs and Children It is good to see the citizens of this area taking up the cudgels for the dog owning residents of a section of Alex andria now being subjected to the “get rid of them or else" type of landlordly blackmail. One point, however, has not been made by those who rightly see this as perse cution, and not so petty. That is—that the success of any fanatic drive against something leads to the next step, in a greater degree of intensity. It is easy to make the misbehavior of one or two hungry, roving strays or one noisy, badly behaved, privately owned dog (for there are such) an excuse for decreeing the extermination of several hundred well-trained pets and guardians of as many families. Next—if the Hous ing Authority succeeds with this fiat— comes what? Children. It has happened before and can hap pen again. Children can be noisy, badly behaved and destructive of property. Ou with them, says the fanatic. Let their parents move somewhere else, and that includes the parents of well-behaved youngsters—of all youngsters. Just as there is an affinity between dogs and children, so they are linked. as nuisances in the minds of the “antis." Alexandria's reputation as a city of homes is in jeopardy—if its citizens do not realize that success of the eviction threat of controlling the private lives of community residents will only encourage greater stringency on the part of the victorious fanatics. Gabrielle E. Forbush. Steady, Gentlemen! In your issue dated October 13, there appears a letter from Mr. Modjadidi of the Royal Afghanistan Embassy, in which he has “officially” stated that no Afghan troops took part “in any action against Pakistan. Although allegedly Afghan troops have taken no part in the action, the action came from the Afghanistan side of the border, and when the raiders were pursued they fled back into Afghani stan territory to seek shelter. It is a strange movement for freedom which speaks with no voice except that of the Afghan official clique, and has no existence except in the fevered imagina tion of these champions of liberty who keep their own people under an anachro nistic medieval tyranny, and who run the government of Afghanistan not as a public agency but as a family business. U. Ahmad Ansari, Press Attache, Embassy of Pakistan. Fifty Years Ago in The Star . . . ine society column ot The Star for October 23, 1900, led off with an account n „ of the wedding of Helen jj-rnS Dunn and William Galt Wedding Burns at St. Patrick's Church on the previous day. "As the bride entered the church with her brother-in-law, Addison A. Ashburn, who gave her away, Prof. Armand Gumprecht. the organist of the church, rendered the wedding march from ‘Lohengrin.’ The four ushers (George Edward Boyd, Edward Lacey Burns, brother of the bridegroom; Leroy Whitley Herron and Frank Fish Rogers) led the bridal procession to the altar. The bridesmaid was Annie Dunn, sister of the bride. At the entrance to the chancel the bride was met by the bride groom and his best man, Harmon Burns, another brother. . . . The Rev. Dr. Staf ford performed the ceremony. The bride wore a becoming gown of white taffeta and mousseline de soie, with pearl trim mings, and a tulle veil.” Mr. Burns was an employe of The Star for half a century. He started selling papers at 13 and was circulation director when he died at 68, March 14, 1946. His photo graph is in the gallery of Star nota bles in the clubroom on the eighth floor of The Star Building, but his practical memorial is the circulation department, which he spent his lifetime developing and which is carried on in the tradi tion of service which he established. * * , On October 24, 1900, The Star an nounced: "Gilbert Grosvenor, son of Prof. . , Grosvenor of Amherst jj- College, and Edith Bell, Wedding daughter of Prof. Alex ander Graham Bell, were married in London yesterday morning. Mr. and Mrs. Grosvenor will spend their honeymoon traveling and will not return to America until some time in December. Prof, and Mrs. Bell, with the relatives of the bridegroom and the family, were in London to attend the wedding. The bride was attended by Marian Bell as maid of honor and Helen Bell and Miss Crossman as bridesmaids.” A golden wedding anniversary reception is to be held at the present home of Dr. and Mrs. Grosvenor in Bethesda, Md„ tomorrow evening. Dr. Grosvenor celebrated his 50th anniversary as editor of the Na tional Geographic magazine last year. * * Former Secretary of State John Sher man died early on October 22, 1900, and The Star of that day John Sherman contained a lengthy Dead obituary article about him. He had been a younger brother of the famous Union Army leader, Gen. William Tecumseh 8herman, but had developed his own * career along independent lines and with great success. He served in the House of Representatives from Ohio, from 1855 to 1861, and in the Senate, from 1861 to 1877, then was Secretary of the Treas ury for four years and returned to the Senate for the period between 1881 and 1897. His term as William McKinley’s "premier” was spoiled by “humiliating weakness of memory which incapacitated him for functioning out of his usual rou tine.” But despite his relative failure as head of the State Department, Mr. Sher man left a name which has endured—if only in regard to the Anti-Trust Act which he sponsored in 1890. The Star's verdict on his life was that "he was a man worthy to stand in the front rank of the Nation-makers.” * * The Star of October 16, 1900, said: “Shortly after 7 o'clock last night Mar . , garet Gast finished Useless and her ride of 2,000 Brutal Contest' miles on a bicycle at Valley Stream, Long Island. She has been paced throughout in this useless and brutal contest by friends and members of the Century Road Club of America, all of whom assert that she has covered the distance she is credited with. If so. Miss Gast has broken all road records for that distance, made by either man or woman.” Time consumed was 222 hours and 5V2 minutes. The Star's correspondent seemed to believe that the public dis approved of women exerting themselves on long-distance bicycle rides. His com ment closed with the statement that: "Miss Gast's trainers denied that in jections of cocaine or morphine had been given to the woman.” When Miss Gast attempted to ride an additional 500 miles, a deputy sheriff stopped her with a threat of punishment under a State law prohibiting racing more than 12 hours in 24. The actual distance she traveled on her bike up to the moment when the law interferred was 2,625 miles. * * The Star for October 18, 1900, report ed: “At last evening’s weekly meeting of the Board of Educa No More tion it was decided to Home Work! do away with the re quirement for home study in the case of all pupils under the sixth grade and to reduce the hours of study in the higher grades, including the high school, as much as possible. This action was the outcome of a long dis cussion held behind closed doors and was said to have been based on the recommendation of Supt. Stuart and his assistants, who have had the subject under consideration for some time. It was the general sentiment of the school authorities that the present system de * velops the mental faculties of the chil dren to the detriment of their general health and that too much study is in jurious. The average age in the sixth grade is 12 years, and it was the opinion of the board that no good resulted from compelling children at that age and under to study at home.” A different philosophy prevails in 1950. Teachers are authorized to assign home work and parents expect them to do so. * ★ An editorial in The Star of October 19, 1900, said: ‘‘A New York jury has . , just awarded the value or widow of the victim of Human Life' a street railway acci dent $37,000 damages. The husband's income was $10,000 a year. On the same day in the same court a jury awarded the widow of an other victim of a street railway’s care lessness $1.500,. his income having been about $1,000 a” year. The disparity in the two cases is attracting marked at tention, particularly in view of the fact that the usual practice in these damage ca^es is to limit the award to $5,000 maximum.” * * "The fourth continuous automobile trip from New York to Washington,” an nounced The New York to Star on Oc Washington by Auto tober 20, 1900, was completed at 5:30 o’clock yesterday afternoon, when Dr. W. H. Stemmerman of Passaic, N. J„ accompanied by W. J. Lampton, formerly of this city but now residing in the me tropolis, reached the east front of the Capitol in the doctor’s runabout steam carriage. Tire trip between the two im portant cities in the new style of con veyance has attracted much interest among automobilists throughout the East and its successful completion is excep tionally gratifying to them. The jour ney was replete with entertaining inci dents. . . . Dr. Stemmerman was at the lever and guiding bar the entire distance over and will direct the vehicle through out the .return trip. . . . The doctor is an experienced automobilist and pilots the carriage with adeptness.” His machine, it was explained, was "driven by steam, generated in a gasoline-burning boiler.” The car weighed 750 pounds and the load about 400 pounds. During part of the trip. Dr. Stemmerman and his passenger “did” 10 miles an hour. They were en route from Monday morning until sun down Friday. The first motor trip from New York allegedly was made by George E. Scott, the second by Capt. Frank T. Avery, U. S. A., and the third by Mr. Weston. Wonder if Mr. Weston was Ed ward Weston, the electrical engtneer? * i Hoover's Speech Praised As Basis for Peace Writer Says Former President's Views Should Be Popular By Frank R. Kent If we are not to drift steadily into an impossible situation, it seems essential that some one should clarify the collec tive mind of the American people as to the international facts that now confront us. Admirable in some respects as Mr. Truman’s San Francisco address was, he gave neither a clear nor a complete pic ture. Yet there was never r time when real understanding was more vital than now'. That is why the speech of Herbert Hoover on Thursday night ought to be read by every citizen everywhere. Devoid of partisanship or any suspicion of per sonal ambition, by reason of his experi ence and character, Mr. Hoover is one of the few men in the country whose views carry weight with the people, re gardless of party. Calmly and clearly, he reviewed the history of our Russian relations from 1933 to now. Realistically, he appraises our military weaknesses and made certain suggestions, the sound ness of which it seems difficult to dispute. Four Presidents and five Secretaries of State—Democrats and Republicans alike —prior to 1933 had refused to invite Communist representatives into this Nation on the ground that all Com munists carried germs of conspiracy in tended to turn America into a police state, destroy all religious faiths, over throw' the freedom of men and the in dependence of nations. Since 1933, American statesmanship became lost when it came to the borders of communism. Mr. Hoover recites the acquiescences and appeasements pf Russia after we entered the war in 1941 —Moscow in 1943; Teheran a month later; Yalta in February, 1945, and Pots dam in August of the same year. The results of “lost statesmanship” in this period are presented and documented. So. too. is the lack of guns, men and ma terial which now afflict our armed forces. He speaks with enthusiasm of our indus trial energies and of the brilliant. per formance of Gen. MacArthur in Korea. But, he points out, the great danger is in the overrunning of Western Europe be fore adequate resistance can be or ganized. w * "The time has come,” Mr. Hoover says, when the American people should speak out in much stronger tones than the dip lomatic phrases of conference halls. We should be willing to aid, but if Western Europe wants defense from the Com munists’ tide they must do most of it themselves—and do it fast. Some one proposed that we at once increase our forces in Europe to 10 combat divisions. That would be only a slaughter of Amer ican boys unless many times that num ber were standing by their sides. We should say, and at once, that we shall provide no more money until a definitely unified and sufficient European army is in sight.” Nor is such an army in Europe, even with American forces, alone sufficient to dull Kremlin ambition in Europe and Asia—according to Mr. Hoover. He re calls that five months ago, and again three months ago, he urged that the United Nations be so reorganized as to permit the mobilization of the non-Com munlst world on military, economic and moral lines to meet Soviet aggressions. The impotency to which the Soviet vetoed had reduced the United Nations made this impossible. 1 The step taken on Wednesday tb change the rules of the United Nations by which Russian obstructions within that organization might be defeated is applauded by Mr. Hoover and is along the lines suggested by him. "To get ac tion.” Mr. Hoover now says, “either the potency of the United Nations under Chapter VII should be so restored, as to take over a real job, or, alternatively, we should enlarge the North Atlantic Alli ance into a world alliance, which could in this fashion implement Chapter VII. In either case we should ask all nations who want to stop Russian aggression to join—and to specify what they will join with and when. We should further say at once that the United States, with all its resources, cannot long endure the present drain on our economy.” Thesb suggestions from Mr. Hoover are bold but concrete, specific and understand able. They should get a very large and favorable response from the American people as a whole. All Himself By Bruce Barton A man died recently who was one of the most conscientious I ever have known. He was. in fact, so conscien* tious that he hurried himself Into an early grave, and nearly Jiusted the com pany he sought so earnestly to serve. - As president he had personality, judg ment, initiative—every executive quali fication but one. He never could stop worrying, never could conquer his moth er-hen complex. He tried to do it ail himself. All of his subordinates respected him, and their grief at his funeral was genuine. But every one of them knew in his heart that the business would make better progress under his less bril liant successor—a quiet, easygoing man. who would be content to call the signals and let the team carry the ball. Moses, the great law giver, came close to killing himself by trying to do it all. The story is in the 18th chapter of Exodus: “ it came to pass on the mor row, that Moses sat to judge the peo ple and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening. "And when Moses' father-in-law < Jethro) saw all that he did to the people, he said, the thing that thou doest is not good. "Thou wilt surely wear away, both thou, and this people that Is with thee: for this thing is too heavy for thefr: thou art not able to perform it thyself alone. “Hearken now unto my voice, I will give thee counsel . . Jethro’s counsel was that Mos'es should appoint able and honest assist ants, to be "rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.” These would be the people's judges, hearing "every small matter," letting only "every great matter” come up to Moses himself. “So,” said Jethro, “shall It be easier for thyself, and tliey shall bear the burden with thee.” In my early business life I hearkened unto the voice of the then brilliant young sales manager of a big publishing house, now the president of a bigger one. He had hired me as his assistant. "What do you expect me to do?” I asked him. "Take over as much of my job as you can, and as fast as you can.” he an swered, “and when ygu have taken it all over I shall expect to continue to draw my salary just for having been smart enough to hire you.” (Copyright, 1950, King Features Syndicate, Ins.) I A