OCR Interpretation


Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, March 15, 1951, Image 18

Image and text provided by Library of Congress, Washington, DC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83045462/1951-03-15/ed-1/seq-18/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for A-18

flje fuming Jto
With Sunday Morning Edition
WASH I NGTON, 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 ..45e
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
6 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—18 ««__THURSDAY, March 15, 1951
Nonessential Park Encroachment
Edward J. Kelly, superintendent of National
Capital Parks, has good cause to protest military
encroachment on park areas under the guise of
defense urgency. Washington has had some sad
experiences with these periodic invasions in the
past. We have learned that “military necessity”
can be stretched to cover strangely nonessential
projects. Take the polo field in West Potomac
Park, for example. The Navy took it early in
World War II for a parking lot, on the ground
of military necessity. But after covering it with,
concrete and marking off parking places, nothing
happened. The hundred^ of cars which were
supposed to park there failed to show up. The
polo parking lot was a complete flop. But the
field never was returned to park use.
During World War II part of Anacostia Park
was taken over out of “military necessity” for a
coal dump. After the war the area, badly needed
for recreational purposes in the Southeast, was
to be restored to the park authorities. Recently,
according to Mr. Kelly, thousands of tons of
coal were dumped there once more. Is this park
land to become a permanent coal pile?
Most disturbing of all is a report, as yet
unconfirmed, of a threatened seizure by military
authorities of the Washington area’s most im
portant camp site for underprivileged children.
This is in the beautiful Prince William Forest
Park, in Virginia, where last year more than 4,000
needy or otherwise deserving boys and girls
from this city were given healthful vacations.
Of this total, 719 children, from 9 to 12 years
old, were selected from low-income families by
the Summer Outings Committee of the Family
and Child Services of Washington. The Star for
several years has sponsored fund-raising cam
paigns for these camps. More than 100 physically
handicapped children were sent to camps in
the forest by the Washington Heart Association.
If the rumors concerning plans to convert
Prince William Forest Park into a restricted
military reservation are true, one of nearby
Virginia’s few public parks will be closed to the
public and a serious blow will be dealt the city’s
underprivileged children. Of course, if the
security of the Nation is at stake, the closing
of Prince William Forest Park would be justified.
But defense officials ought to make sure that
no more polo-field mistakes are made at the
expense of public parks. With all the money
they have available and all the non-park land
to choose from in the Washington area, it should
be easy to find plenty of suitable sites for
defense activities without destroying Prince
William Forest Park as a children’s summer
haven.
Atomic Secrets in Court
In late 1946 three young men were arrested
In Baltimore on charges of having tried to sell
pictures of highly restricted atomic equipment.
Though espionage was not involved (the accused
apparently were foolish rather than sinister),
their act was described as a serious breach of
national security. But they were not prosecuted.
The reason for that, presumably, was that if the
case had been pressed against them, the Gov
ernment would have had to reveal in open court
—to judge and jury—the very secrets that were
supposed to remain secret. Hence the decision
to drop the whole matter.
But now, in the far graver case of the in
dividuals being tried in New York on charges of
atomic espionage, the Government has lifted the
veil a little. In support of the charges, there has
been a direct introduction of evidence revealing
—for the first time in public—a lot of data about
the make-up of a certain type of A-bomb. The
evidence, involving sketches and technical in
formation, has been seen and heard not merely
by the judge and jury but also by members of
the press. In other words, in keeping with our
American system of justice, some of the secrets
that the accused are said to have handed over
to the Russians have been uncovered by the ac
cusers in order to prosecute; secrecy in this in
stance could not be preserved without at the
same time paralyzing the processes of law.
According to reports on the New York trial,
the Atomic Energy Commission probably will
reclassify as restricted everything that it de
classifies for the purposes of prosecution. But
this raises the question whether secrets—once
revealed, even though only temporarily—can
ever be made secret again. Possibly the ones
that are involved here are already well enough
known to the Russians to make the matter rela
tively unimportant. But the issue still remains.
As long as security demands an iron curtain in
this field, the Government—given future cases
of A-weapon espionage—will continue to face
the difficult choice of either telling all to the
court or letting the accused go free. The law
seems to provide no easy way out of the dilemma.
Setback for the President
House rejection of the President’s request
for emergency reorganization powers is more of
a setback to presidential prestige than to the
defense program. The President still has wide
reorganization authority under the 1949 govern
mental reform law, but the procedure is con
siderably slower than it would have been under
the emergency legislation.
The Senate-approved bill which the House
defeated by a surprising 227-to-167 vote would
have enabled Mr. Truman to effect emergency
consolidations or revisions of Federal activities 18
days after submission of a plan to Congress—
provided neither house vetoed it. The 1949 law
gives Congress 60 days to make up its mind
about a veto. Mr. Truman argued that this was
too long to wait in a time of national emergency.
There was merit to his contention. There was
no merit, however, to the argument heard on
the floor to the effect that the proposed legisla
tion would have given the President unlimited
powers to institute social reforms, including his
controversial FEPC plan. The bill specifically
prohibited creation of new departments or
assignment to agencies of activities not provided
by law. It is true that under a somewhat
similar grant of authority in 1941 the late Presi
dent Roosevelt created the wartime FEPC, but
the new grant would have been a conditional
one, with either house able to kill any plan by
an adverse vote. >
It is to be hoped that failure of tha emer
gency reorganization bill is not a portent of
similar resistance to long-range reforms under
the Hoover program. The reorganization job
outlined by the Hoover Commission has been
only half completed. This is not an emergency
task, but the sooner it is done the stronger the
Nation will be economically and militarily.
Example, Not Codes, Is Needed
Hamlet: What's the news?
Rosencrantz: None, my lord, but that the
world's grown honest.
Hamlet: Then is doomsday near.
Judging from the day-to-day headlines on
the first page of The Star there is still time to
spare before doomsday. The world, around these
parts, shows no signs of growing honest. But
we do have the unusual proposal of a distin
guished Senator, fresh from his delvings in the
political underworld of influence peddling, for
a commission of eminent men charged with the
task of investigating the “moral and ethical
level” of Government and perhaps of trying to
lift it.
One infers from what Senator Fulbright says
in this connection that in the course of its inves
tigation the commission might draw up a code
of ethics for men in public life, spelling out for
them the difference between what is right and
what is wrong in fields not covered by the
statutes. This might be a good idea. Had
General Vaughan, for example, had access to
such a code his activities in behalf of John
Maragon might have been inhibited by what
he read in the book. Judging from his unspoken
declination to appear voluntarily before the Ful
bright committee and clarify the references to
his name in RFC matters, Donald Dawson, the
White House aide, could discover helpful hints
in such a code. And, of course, there would be
a canon, in bold-face type, relating to mink coats
and White House stenographers.
Senator Douglas of Illinois, responding per
haps to the suggestions implicit in Senator
Fulbright’s commission proposal, ' is already
working on some amendments to the Adminis
trative Procedures Code. The purpose of such
amendments is to furnish a guide for Govern
ment officials on what to do when invited by
the next 5 percenter to come up and look at
his etchings. Senator Douglas, a bold man,
would even apply the code to members of Con
gress—but allow that it is proper for them to
write letters in behalf of constituents, if such
letters conform to a you-know-how-it-is spirit
and are not taken too seriously by the bureau
cratic recipients.
These efforts at reform are laudable. But
somehow they leave a sinking feeling with those
who ponder their significance. For up until
recent years, at least, it has been generally
accepted that if a man serving his Government
lacks an instinctive appreciation of ethical con
cepts, which are much older than our own
Government or .even of our own country, then
he has no business being in public service and
is not going to be helped by any written code
of ethics.
Perhaps we need an example, in Washington,
much more than we need a commission to inves
tigate moral and ethical levels and much more
than we need a written code of ethical behavior.
That, of course, is no new idea. It was Cicero
who wrote that “What is shown by example, men
think they may justly do.” And in much the
same vein, another Roman reminds us that “The
people are fashioned by the examples of their
kings, and edicts are of less power than the
life of the ruler.”
A 'Fair and Honest Gambler'
It is not because of the police that things
are getting tough all over for Washington’s
reputed gambling kingpins. First Sam Beard
finds himself indicted for income tax evasion
and now Emmitt Warring, who has operated in
the western part of the city for many years, has
a $160,000 income tax lien slapped on him. All
of the recent commotion in local gaming circles
was stirred up without benefit of the Police De
partment, which is supposed to suppress gam
bling in the District. Warring, incidentally, is
the man whose friendly relations with certain
police higher-ups aroused the “deep concern” of
the Davis Crime Committee. He is the man de
scribed to the committee by his attorney as a
person with a reputation of being a “fair and
honest gambler.”
There is no doubt that Warring has such a
reputation in Foggy Bottom and across the creek
in Georgetown. But being fair and honest in a
gambling enterprise does not make the enter
prise legal, or less subject to police interference.
A gambler’s reputation for always paying off
his clients in full does not qualify him to be a
pal of precinct commanders or higher officers.
It is pertinent to recall a portion of the Davis
Committee’s comments with respect to Warring’s
remarkable ability to avoid trouble with the po
lice: “Granting the difficulty of securing evi
dence necessary for successful prosecution, it
would appear that little, if anything, has been
done to scratch the surface. This probably ex
plains in large part why it is that as notorious
a character as the alleged fair and honest gam
bler, who, by his own admission, for 20 years had
followed no business about which he could testify
without incriminating himself, can circulate
freely, not alone without fear of the police, but
also mentally disposed to friendship toward im
portant police officials.”
The committee pointed out in its report
that “In recent years few, if any, leaders of these
(gambling) enterprises have been molested by
District law enforcement authorities.” Beard,
who once testified that he was a “racetrack
gambler," has been as free from serious police
interference in late years as has Warring. It was
not until United States Attorney Fay launched
an independent drive on gambling two years ago
that gambling circles began to become disturbed.
Mr. Fay and the Internal Revenue Eureau co
operated in digging into the financial affairs of
both Beard and Warring. The results indicate
that a little digging by energet'r law enforcement
officers can be profitable. The Police Department
should take note. As the Davis group suggested,
some real digging is needed—not just half
hearted, sporadic attempts that “scratch the
surface.” *
The Tax That Makes the Birdies Sing
By Arthur Edson
THIS is the day millions of Ameri
cans swear: “Never again! “Never
again, that is. will they put off making
out their income tax returns until the
last day.
But they—or other putter-offers—
will. Every year, the income tax people
say, millions don’t get the dismal chore
done until the last minute.
It would be worse if it weren’t for
the fact that so many are entitled to
tax refunds. “I-don’t know why,” said
the income tax man coyly, “but people
who have money coming to them usually
get their returns in early.”
Although the income tax has grown
into its present size only fairly recently,
its roots go far back.
In 1692, England had a tax on farm
land income. But not until 1799 did
William Pitt put through an outright
income tax.
When the proposal came up for a
graduated income tax in England, sucn
as we have here now, it met with con
siderable criticism. Under a graduated
tax, of course, those with higher in
comes not only pay more taxes, but
they also pay at a higher rate.
The United States had its first na
tional income tax during the Civil War.
Its biggest year was 1866, when 460,170
persons paid $73 million.
Compare that with the 1950 collec
tions. Some 50 million made out re
turns and paid nearly $18 billion. Cor
porations chipped in close to another
$10 billion. We have advanced (or re
ceded—take your pick) a long way.
States have had income tax levies
since 1789. Massachusetts, South Caro
lina, Pennsylvania and Virginia had in
come taxes before the Civil War. But
it remained for Prohibition to put most
States into the income tax business.
They made up in income taxes what
they lost in liquor revenue.
The national income tax died after
the Civil War, but it had a revival in
1894.
When it was passed, as part of a
tariff bill. Rep. David Albaugh De
Armond, Democrat, of Missouri, purred:
"The passage of the bill will mark
the dawn of a brighter day, with more
of sunshine, more -of the songs of birds,
more of that sweetest music, the laugh
ter of children, well fed, well clothed,
well housed.
"Can we doubt that in the brighter,
happier days to come, good, even
handed, wholesome democracy shall be
trimphant?”
The birds didn’t sing for everybody,
though. According to Mark Sullivan
in “Our Times”—from which I’m getting
most of this information—it was Sen
ator John Sherman, Republican, of Ohio,
who said: "This attempt to array the
rich against the poor ... is Socialism,
Communism, Devilism.”
Joseph H. Choate, a prominent law
yer, sniffed that it was nothing but a
“communistic march.”
The Supreme Court finally ruled the
graduated income tax unconstitutional,
five votes to four. The New York World
called this “the triumph of selfishness
over patriotism.” But the New York
Tribune happily cried: “Thanks to
the Court, our Government is not to
be dragged into communistic warfare
against rights of property.”
The Republicans, as the party of the
outs, naturally blame the ins for every
thing. Listening to the arguments, one
might get the idea the Democrats in
vented taxes.
But it was a Republican President,
William Howard Taft, who asked for a
constitutional amendment so that we
could have a graduated income tax. He
got it, too. It became official when
Wyoming ratified the amendment on
February 3, 1913.
At that time it was considered a soak
the-rich measure, of academic interest
to the laborer. The feeling was summed
up by a humorist, George Fitch, who
said: “It will be an exclusive circle, this
income tax class—one which the ordi
nary wage-earning class cannot hope to
enter.”
Humorist Fitch probably never guessed
it, but in view of developments it turns
out he never wrote a funnier line.
(Associated Fress.)
| . . i -pi O . Pen-names may "be used if letters carry
PltPr^s TO I n P iTOT writers'correct names and addresses.
I—UL/I J l W 1 i iv^ y^iui Zetters are subject to condensation.
'Natural Engineer'
I am surprised that no one has written
you yet about the escaped prisoner who
dug himself free through a 70-foot tun
nel. In my opinion it is one of the most
unusual news stories of the year. The
patience, endurance, and ingenuity
shown by this man deserves the sym
pathy and help of your reading public.
Naturally, none of us condones crime.
But this man is a natural engineer. He
should be pardoned by the Governor.
Only one man in 100.000 could have du
plicated this feat. He may have been
a “bad” man, but he’s a man’s man.
Abe F. Kirschbaum.
♦ *
The misguided genius of this man,
who has been captured and returned to
his cell, could perhaps even now be
directed into a constructive channel for
his own good and the good of the com
munity into which he will be released if
he survives his sentence.
When we think of the murderous war
criminals who for political reasons have
been pardoned, would asking for leniency
be asking too much in this case?
Rae A. Magruder.
Pioneer
I noticed in The Star a few days ago
a very laudatory account of the develop
ment of the business of Mr. Harris of
Harris & Ewing, in which the statement
was made that he was the first news
photographer in Washington.
This deprives The Star and the writer
of credit for pioneer activity in news
illustration which we carried on a few
years earlier than the time of Mr. Harris’
initial work in the Capital.
Some time in 1902, I was making pho
tographs for the paper, and while I was
an assistant in the Washington bureau
of the Philadelphia Public Ledger, I also
operated an illustration service supply
ing pictures of events and subjects in
Washington to newspapers through their
Washington bureaus. Sam Blythe of the
World, Richard Oulihan of the Balti
more American, and other famous cor
respondents were my patrons. I cov
ered the trial of Admiral W. S. Schley
at the Washington Navy Yard, although
I was not admitted within the yard.
There was considerable inertia in
many newspapers of that day to the use
of half-tone illustrations of news sub
jects, and this was true of The Star
until 1903, when I was induced to return
to the paper at an advance in salary
which was adequate for the moment.
The Star’s offer was occasioned by my
supplying the paper with a photograph
of the fall of the enormous chimney of
the Capital Traction Co.’s powerhouse
at Fourteenth and E streets, which had
burned down some time earlier.
The whole city was alerted when ar
rangements were made to dynamite the
old chimney, and a large group of pho
tographers was present to photograph
the event. Crowds lined the north side
of the avenue, and stood in streets
about the block, which had been wholly
occupied by the powerhouse. A large
force of police had been provided
by Maj. Sylvester to restrain the too
eager spectators.
I had two cameras set up and focused,
to include the path which I estimated
the chimney would take in its fall.
When the explosive was detonated at
the base of the chimney, most of
the photographers immediately operated
their camera shutters. I delayed oper
ating the shutter of my 8x10 plate
camera for about seven seconds, and as
a result obtained a creditable and in
formative showing of the structure well
on its way down, with characteristic
fractures and segmentations plainly
evident.
The files of The Star can verify the
occurrence and its illustration.
Horace Woodward.
Editor’s Note: Quite so. Herewith,
Mr. Woodward’s picture:
Decentralized Pork
Decentralization of Government agen
cies was bom of war hysteria with the
assistance of pork-barrel politicans. They
are anxious to divide the spoils.
Decentralization of non-defense agen
cies will not make Washington any less
attractive as a bombing target. It will
always be a target. It would be more
sensible to decentralize the factory area
of Baltimore.
Many of the small agencies must of
necessity maintain Washington head
quarters. Moving these small agencies
means less efficient operation. If the
Hoover Commission recommendations
were put in effect, there certainly would
be no point to decentralization.
H. F. L.
To Avoid War
A visitor from California, I have en
joyed reading The Star while in Wash
ington. But I do have to take vigorous
opposition to your editorial in praise ol
Dr. Vannevar Bush’s thinking on na
tional preparedness. On the surface,
Dr. Bush might seem to be right. This
is about the best the world has been
able to do to date—but it is not good
enough. We have come to that point
in history where at last we have to
admit, unless we are completely naive
and unrealistic, that armed force is out
moded and utterly ineffective in settling
international problems.
How can you possibly imagine that
in the face of our arming, “the Kremlin
will not attempt to attack . . . that in
due course the danger will fade away
and make possible the organization of
a decent peace.’’ What kind of wishful
thinking is that?
Being more realistic than Dr. Bush, I
take quite an opposite viewpoint. Since
the dawn of history, there has been no
exception to the fact that arms races
always lead to war. We fatuously tell
ourselves that this time it is different
because we are arming for defense, not
aggression—or, as one Congressman told
me, we have never before faced a situ
ation like this with a country like
Russia. This arms race, like every
other one, will end In war. No other
conclusion is possible.
So—we will have a war no one wants.
In such a war, according to every re
sponsible person, there can be no vic
tory—not even for the victor. All that
will result will be millions of young men
and civilians killed—property damage
beyond imagination. All we could expect
would be new problems of staggering
magnitude, and conditions of misery
under which communism would be accel
erated 100-fold. So we end with an
increase in the evil we set out to combat.
Let's not destroy America with the mili
tary system that ruined Europe.
You speak of a defeatist point of
view. To espouse a military program
in this day and age is to give up com
pletely. Well I’m not willing to accept
that. I want a new approach to world
problems, something so dynamic and
creative that it will rally all the nations
around us and stop communism in its
tracks. We have to eliminate the causes
of communism: Hunger, insecurity, serf
dom, ignorance, disease, fear. Let Ameria
rise in a mighty moral crusade against
war, and these evils that breed war. Let
us do this creative thing, and watch the
nations of the world come over to our
side with a great shout of relief. Let
us use our billions to build the world,
and give all men new hope.
Against a tremendous force of this
kind, communism would lose its hold
on men’s minds—and without their
minds you cannot have their bodies to
fight. In this great moral upsurge,
democracy would be victorious. If wre
place our faith in the swprd we will die
by it—either physically, or spiritually,
or both.
Elinor Ely Ashkenazy.
Glendale, Calif.
This and That . . .
By Charles E. Tracewell
One of the penalties of growing older
—and there are many of them—is the
inability of the thermo-dynamic powers
of the body to keep one comfortable.
It is this, of course, that is responsible
for so many oldsters lighting out for
Florida and California.
They find that summer at home is too
hot, and winter too cold.
Autumn is not what it used to be, and
as for spring, even that wonderful
season strikes them as a bit chilly!
* *
Even Florida and sunny California
probably would be cold if there were not
some sort of heating devices.
Those who have arrived at the age
where they contemplate retiring, a
rather sad word, feel that no location
would do unless the temperature re
mained permanently at 74 degrees.
The fabulous 70 degrees is a mite too
cool.
Perhaps if one were always “dressed
up,” and always busy, one might tolerate
the sufferings of 68 degrees.
That these temperatures are difficult
for many to endure is not always real
ized, especially by hardy persons whose
skin temperature always remains high.
These are those whose thermo-dynamic
powers are at peak. Not all persons are
so, at any age. Hence the large numbers
of colds and coughs every winter.
* *
Efforts of some investigators to di
vorce the common cold from the effects
of drafts and wetness leave many non
plussed.
If there is anything in the world they
think they know, it is the danger of
getting cold and wet, especially the feet.
Now comes an English experimenter
who declares he subjected many young
persons to standing in drafty places with
wet feet for hours without ill effects.
Well, maybe so. But the individual
knows, through long years of personal
investigation, the close relationship be
tween wet and cold and his own respira
tional diseases. Here, if ever, the indi
vidual can be his own physician, at least
until he begins to run a fever.
* *
It would seem to the layman that
old age is partly, at least, a matter of
drying up.
Hence drinking more water, but not
to excess, should be on the personal
agenda. Not that this dryness is alto
gether to be prevented by such means,
but surely it could be helped.
Water supply now makes the news.
Gigantic reports, beautifully printed (at
your expense) are put out every now and
then, showing the situation for all the
major water basins of the country.
There has always been the problem of
all sorts of inimical agents in water.
These include not only waste from the
large cities, but even poisons from
manufacturing plants. Some of these
corrosive agents will eat steel.
Water purification is a science, but
some of the older residents will look
askance at too much chlorine in water,
especially after a heavy rain or snow,
but probably these are the times it is
needed most, even though it makes even
coffee unpalatable for a time.
* *
Oldsters will wonder, too, at these
modern ideas of making every one en
dure something just to give certain por
tions of the populace benefits. Take this
thing of putting a chemical in every
body’s drinking water in order that chil
dren’s teeth will benefit. Isn’t this a
sort of communism in disguise?
Why make the old people endure it,
just to get at the young people?
Why make countless persons get up
early, just to give a theoretical “extra
hour” to those who w§mt to play tennis?
The old folks have lessened abilities
in many lines, among them inability to
respond as quickly to sudden changes in
temperature.
Do they find Florida the heaven they
thought?
We know one Washingtonian who ran
from Washington right down into sub
freezing temperature in Florida, and an
other who set himself up in a fancy new
home at Coral Gables, only to give it up
in a year and come back to Washington.
The Political Mill
RFC Probe Spotlights *
Whole Subject of Loans
Federal Credit Restriction
Could Aid Inflation Curb
By Gould Lincoln
The drive to abolish the Reconstruc
tion Finance Corp., in Congress, brings
into the spotlight the whole subject of
Government loans and credit. In this
connection, it should be stated at the
start that the authority and money for
the huge lending programs all have been
approved by Congress. It was the 80th
Republican Congress which extended the
life of the RFC for eight years in 1948.
This does not make these programs right,
but it nevertheless indicates that reasons
and arguments for the establishment of
the lending agencies have appealed to
the Congress and been acted upon.
Whether the country would be better off
without these agencies is the real ques
tion at issue, aside from immediate
political advantage.
Take a look at the picture as it stands
today, with Government lending agencies
in full flower. There are 64 Federal
corporations and nine other agencies
subject to business-type audits, many
of which are concerned with Govern
ment credit. The Government’s invest
ment in Federal corporations now totals
more than $20 billions. This is approxi
mately 10 per cent of the Federal or
national debt. Among the Government
credit agencies outside of the RFC are
the Farm Credit Administration, the
Federal Crop Insurance Corp., the Hous
ing and Home Finance Agency, the
Export-Import Bank, the REA and the
Farmers’ Home Administration.
Job of Providing Credit.
The administration has been urging
private lending institutions to restrict
credit as a means of curbing inflation.
It might be wiser to curtail Government
lending and let the private agencies take
over the job of providing credit. But
the administration is pressing for new
commitments, contained in the Presi
dent’s budget, for these Federal lending
programs, to the tune of $13.3 billions.
Of this more than $10 billions are for
housing and agriculture.
How the administration can hope to
accomplish much against inflation while
it continues to advocate these great Gov
ernment loans is a conundrum—but one
of its moves has been to try to curtail
private credit—loans by private banks,
etc.
How far Congress is really ready to go
in the way of denying Government loans
and credit is still a question—but the
odds are against curtailing loans to
agriculture and for housing. However,
the RFC, which has been under fire for
weeks because of political favoritism and
the big fees collected by lawyers who
have obtained loans for their clients_
not to mention free fur coats (one at
least) and free hotel rooms in Florida,
is an immediate and apparently vulner
able target. Not because its loans have
been less sound or that as an agency it
has cost the Government more than
other lending agencies, but because of
the black eye it has taken in the open
through the public hearings of the Ful
bright subcommittee of the Senate Bank
ing and Currency Committee.
Competition in Big Way.
The question arises, will the private
lending agencies really fill the places
which the Government agencies now
occupy in the credit structure and econ
omy of the country? Nobody really
knows. It’s time some one inquired
into that angle of the question. Gov
ernment housing programs have been
attacked by private business, to be sure.
But housing for the use of low-income
groups has been the prime reason for
Government credits. Too much of the
private housing construction has been
for persons above the really low-in
come families.
Every time the Government goes into
business—and it has gone into busi
ness in a big way—it goes into com
petition with private business—and the
excuse advanced is that only the Gov
ernment can or is willing to do the
business in question. The New Deal
ers, and later the Fair Dealers, have
been persistent advocates of putting
the Government into business activities.
It was not long ago they were urging
the Government to get into the busi
ness of providing more steel produc
tion. No one yet, however, has had
the temerity to suggest the nationaliza
tion of any industry in this country—
except the railroads and waterpower.
Those are steps for the future, per
haps.
When Government lends money it be
gins to exert a hold and power over
business. The progress of Government
control and operation of business has
not yet been of major proportions. But
if there should come a great depres
sion, the Government would be found
holding the bag and forced into the
operation of large businesses.
At present there is no depression in
sight—though a ruinous inflation may
be around the comer. The supporters
of the abolition of the RFC say that
its loans should be liquidated and that
those functions which remain neces
sary should be turned over to the Com
merce Department and other govern
mental agencies. What they really
mean is that there should be no more
direct loans of money to business made
by the Government, at a time when
the banks have plenty of money to
loan. The RFC, however, has been
useful, in recent years too, to private
corporations—and how—some of them
operated and owned by loud critics of
Government in business.
Give Them a Chance
(Written for the Children's Hospital campaign)
Annie Laurie stood poised, and very still.
With a puzzled look on her eager young
face;
Dancing for her was always a thrill,
But she never had danced in such a
place!
Then out of the silence the music came
And caught her up in its rhythm and
swing;
She moved through the air like a leaping
flame,
With the ease of a soaring bird on
wing.
Children in wheel chairs watched en
tranced—
Little white faces lit up with awe ...
Stiff little feet that had never danced ...
Eyes filled with wonder at what they
saw!
Give them a chance, these children of
ours,
To some day walk, and grow, and
dance . . .
To roam the fields and gather the flowers.
They are future America! Give them
a chance!
Mattie Richards Tyler

xml | txt