The Charlotte News

Friday, July 4, 1947

THREE EDITORIALS

Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that the President, in an address at Monticello, termed as "folly" the nationalistic refusal of Russia to cooperate in the Marshall Plan, albeit not referring to the Soviets by name. He described as "fallacious" the notion that American aid would be used to interfere in internal sovereign affairs of the aided nations, as charged by Russia. He urged a recognition of the principle of government by the consent of the governed, common respect for human rights, acknowledging that much needed to be done even in America toward this end, a free and full exchange of knowledge between countries, and policies which would support a world economy rather than separate nationalistic economies.

Greece and Denmark announced that they would participate in the July 12 conference with Britain and France to discuss the needs for aid in Europe, to be transmitted to the State Department.

The Communist Premier and Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia were heading to Moscow, apparently to discuss the implications of the rejection of the Marshall Plan by V. M. Molotov two days earlier. The Polish Premier would also accompany them to the Russian capital.

At Vicksburg, Miss., General Eisenhower stated at the third annual Carnival of the Confederacy that unless the nation set up a plan for world peace, it could suffer "the golgotha of a third world war." He cited the example of the unity forged between the North and South after the Civil War as a pattern for international cooperation.

In Paris, a general and former resistance leader was taken into custody the previous day by French officers for his alleged role in a Rightist revolutionary plot by the Black Maquis to overthrow the Government.

A bill was introduced in the House of Commons in Britain to give independence to India, setting up two independent states, Hindustan and Pakistan, the latter for the Moslems of India.

Also in London, a young British woman sought intervention by Queen Elizabeth in the case of a German prisoner of war sentenced to a year in prison on a charge of improperly associating with the young woman. She wanted to marry him as she was having his child. The case was referred to an M.P. who referred it to the Secretary for War for further review.

A fourteen-year old British boy was on Ellis Island in New York, about to be reunited with the family who sheltered him in America during the war, now as their adopted son, with the consent of his father. The family lived on a 50-acre farm in Marion, N.Y.

A tornado ripped through 80 miles of territory in the Red River Valley, from Southern Manitoba in Canada into North Dakota and Minnesota, killing at least ten persons and injuring another 30. Seven of the dead were in North Dakota. A worse death toll was averted by the fact that the tornado was visible for miles across the plains before it hit. One group of 400 persons were attending a baseball game at Oslo, Minn., when they spotted the twister and evacuated.

Northern coal operators and steel companies with captive mines reached agreement with John L. Lewis and UMW on a new contract. The Southern operators were still considering the contract, said to be the most liberal ever negotiated for the miners, including a 44.5 cent raise in pay per hour and doubling of the royalty contributed to the health and welfare fund of UMW under the Government contract, to 10 cents per ton.

Republican leaders claimed that they had the votes to override a second veto by the President of the new tax bill, identical to that previously vetoed and sustained in June.

In New York, two men who had admitted robbing a 67-year old man of $2 on May 13 were freed because the victim was dead and unable to provide evidence against them. He had been left on a street corner by the two men in a dazed condition and was then run over by a car. The Magistrate correctly ruled that the two men could not be convicted solely on their own admissions. Called the corpus delicti rule, any confession or admission requires corroborating evidence that a crime was committed.

Presumably, it was determined that causation was too remote to try to convict the two men for felony-murder, that is a death which occurs during the course of commission of a felony. The report does not indicate how long after the robbery the man was hit by the car, but apparently the robbery was deemed complete and so not causing the death. The driver of the vehicle was not charged with negligence in the death of the man. It appears, moreover, that New York did not recognize at the time the concept of homicides, whether deliberate or accidental, committed by third parties during the commission of a felony as falling within the ambit of felony-murder, as some jurisdictions do, for instance, in a shoot-out with police officers where one of the accomplices to a felony is killed by the officers and the other accomplice is charged with felony-murder, a rare but potential scenario. Had, for instance, the man in the case at issue suffered a fatal heart attack during the commission of the felony, it appears that the New York statute might have included it as a felony-murder, though the word "killing" rather than "death" implies some direct action by the felon, resulting in death, not admitting of the supervening fortuity of death from another causative agent even if during the commission of the felony. Query whether putting a gun to the man's head, though, unknown to him, empty of bullets, and pulling the trigger, immediately after which the man suffers a fatal heart attack, would result in a proper charge of felony-murder under the New York statute, at least as worded in 1937?

In Hollywood, actress Pat Dane was planning to take up temporary residence in Reno to obtain a divorce from bandleader Tommy Dorsey. They had been married four years.

SODDI.

On the editorial page, "Notes on the Fourth of July" reminds that the United States was born in revolution, and that the signers of the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776 believed it to be their obligation to revolt under the circumstances confronting them.

The colonists engaged against the most powerful military apparatus then in existence. It was a revolt against deprivation of freedoms, not, strictly speaking, an economic revolt, even if that lay in the background with some of the colonists. The Declaration denounced "Despotism and Tyranny".

They were blessed by Providence in their venture, and after it was done, they had an ocean and vast stretches of largely empty frontier to the west to insulate them during the first century of the experiment in freedom.

But liberty, it reminds, was not cheap and never is. "Its price is still eternal vigilance—at home and abroad."

"Bird's-Eye View of the World" tells of a trip around the world in thirteen days by Christian Science Monitor editor Erwin D. Canham, finding that democracy-in-action should be as vigorous and revolutionary as communism appeared to be.

The editorial thinks that the observation started with the erroneous assumption, too high in his airplane fly-over, that American democracy was not so vigorous as communism. Some of the trouble in the world, it opines, was the result of the American belief that it had to organize a world campaign for democracy. But democracy was not an exportable product. It had to be homegrown wherever it flourished or it became a form of imperialism to those on whom it was impressed.

Moreover, it did not need to be sold, as people the world over wanted it.

The piece suggests that Mr. Canham's remark should be revised to read that the country needed to make democracy as effective as possible at home to stand as a beacon for those abroad wanting to emulate it.

Mr. Canham had discounted the impact of financial aid, in favor of assistance in establishing democracy, a concept which the piece also thinks erroneous.

It thinks that the President had it right when, in an address before the N.A.A.C.P., he stated: "Our case for democracy should be as strong as we can make it. It should rest on practical evidence that we have been able to put our own house in order."

"How Effective Are the Lobbyists?" tells of Senator Glen Taylor of Idaho agreeing with the President that there should be an investigation by Congress of the real estate lobby to determine its influence on the passage of the rent control extension with the provision for 15 percent increases in rent under leases with a term through 1948. Senator Taylor had introduced a bill to that end, but Republicans would, it predicts, defeat it.

Senator John Sparkman of Alabama had urged that all lobbying be examined by the Senate.

Representative Estes Kefauver of Tennessee, in his book, A Twentieth Century Congress, had pointed out that members of Congress lacked adequate technical assistance, leaving each member reliant on the prejudiced testimony of those for or against particular legislation.

The piece thinks that Senator Sparkman's suggestion should not be forgotten after the 1948 election. The people should be informed as to who was influencing their elected representatives in Congress.

It should be noted that the piece happens to refer to three future vice-presidential candidates, Senator Taylor, who would run with former Vice-President Wallace on the 1948 Progressive Party ticket, Senator Sparkman, to run with Governor Adlai Stevenson in 1952 on the Democratic ticket, and future Senator Kefauver, who would run with Governor Stevenson in 1956 on the Democratic ticket.

Drew Pearson tells of the bulk of the President's harsh message accompanying his veto of Taft-Hartley having been written by White House adviser Clark Clifford, along with NLRB chairman Paul Herzog and Solicitor of the Department of Labor, William Tyson. The message had been erroneously attributed to CIO counsel Lee Pressman, whose report had apparently influenced some of the language.

On June 25, two days after passage of Taft-Hartley over the President's veto, Attorney General Tom Clark set up in the Justice Department a committee to attempt to enforce the Act, despite reservations in the Department that it was unconstitutional. Mr. Clark had decided that the best way to obtain change of a bad law was to enforce it rigorously.

Mr. Clark had turned to J. Edgar Hoover for advice on selection of a new prosecutor to head the Criminal Division, and Mr. Hoover recommended tough Brooklyn prosecutor Vincent Quinn. The President then nominated him, but the appointment had languished in the Senate Judiciary Committee since April. Its Republican members did not appear to trust the judgment of Mr. Hoover.

Mr. Pearson adds that, at the same time, the Republicans were jamming through the appointment of Congressman Robert Jones as a member of the FCC, despite his prior membership in the racist, violent Black Legion of Ohio.

Major Alexander de Seversky was honored for his contributions to the American Air Forces effort during the war with the Harmon Trophy, presented at the White House. Long an advocate of air power, he had, before Pearl Harbor, badgered General Hap Arnold to build long-range pursuit planes and put armor on the B-17's.

When he received the trophy, he was asked to kiss his wife for the photographers, as it was their wedding anniversary. He declined, saying that he should only do so at home.

He praised President Truman for his prior service on the Senate Investigating Committee, contributing greatly to the efficiency in producing airplanes during the war, and urged that he should be the one receiving the trophy.

Samuel Grafton predicts that a statement issued by the Emergency Committee of Atomic Scientists, that unless war is eliminated, civilization would perish, would be ignored, with hearts, minds, and bellies. It had to be so because most people would go out of business as thinkers as soon as they admitted the existence of atomic energy. With it out of mind, the people could concentrate on border disputes, reparations, standard armies, the Balkans peace traties, all the traditional concerns.

But as soon as atomic energy was admitted to the equation, a different set of concerns had to be taken into account. Then world government became an issue, elimination of war, a goal. Thinking of atomic energy qualified one as a dreamer.

The Committee's report therefore would either not be read or read as if it were news from Mars. The scientists argued that since atomic warfare was futile, there was no purpose in preparing for war. The present discussions among nations were premised on anticipation of war, not expectation of peace. It urged both East and West to rise to a "higher realism", that any future war would result in total annihilation, leaving only the beasts of the jungle to sort through the ruins.

It stood as a challenge to statesmen of both America and Russia to face the problem of living in a world, part of which was anti-totalitarian and possessed the bomb.

But, Mr. Grafton resignedly concludes, the report would be thrown out with yesterday's newspapers.

Marquis Childs discusses the right to pursue happiness, as embodied in the Declaration of Independence. On the 171st Fourth of July, sleek new cars were jammed up in traffic trying to get by the old jalopies of yesteryear. The pursuit of happiness would ring cash registers this Fourth of July to the predicted tune of six million dollars. Each family spent an average of $100 on their summer vacation. The National Park Service expected 12 million visitors, ten percent more than in 1946.

He wonders whether the pursuit was truly of happiness, or simply the desire to move about. In earlier times, happiness had to be achieved closer to home. The United States was practically the only nation in the world still able to achieve this kind of happiness.

In Europe and Asia, happiness was defined as staving off homelessness and starvation. Many Americans would go abroad during the summer, many for the first time, and would be welcomed because of their contribution of dollars to the ailing economies. They would not be popular, however, if they complained about the many inconveniences they would find. The hotels, by comparison to the way the people lived, were luxurious, even if by American standards, shabby. The foreign tourist trade would likely burgeon over the ensuing years, some predicting as much as six billion dollars worth per year. But Americans seeking pleasure for the sake of it would not be greeted with open arms.

He concludes that liberty was the first essential freedom if there was to be any happiness to pursue.

A letter thinks the President's desire to reduce the national debt to be a salutary goal, but the method of doing so, by maintaining high taxes rather than reduction of spending, erroneous.

He appears oblivious to the facts that most of the Federal spending of which he complained was going to the military and that virtually all of the debt accumulated had come from the war. His implied notion that it had been run up during the New Deal is simply inaccurate. As previously pointed out in the editorial column, the New Deal years accounted for only about ten percent of the national debt. The Republican Congress, which had come to power on the premise of reducing taxes and paring down the budget, however incongruous in the premises the goals were, had managed to knock only about four billion dollars off the President's 37.5 billion dollar proposed budget. And even that amount was further reduced when analyzed for fluff.

The canard of big-spending Democrats and fiscally conservative Republicans has been passed off for decades as an established truth. It is bunk.

It is best to study history closely rather than contribute old sayings passed down from the uneducated to the uneducated.

A letter from A. W. Black, recurringly reactionary in print, opines that President Roosevelt was a "shallow politician, mediocre in native capacity, devious in intellectual processes, unintelligent in his prejudices, deficient in experience, and emotionally juvenile—a gaudy, noisy cockatoo attempting to direct traffic at a crossroads of civilization—in brief, a fifth-rate man utterly unfitted for the powerful office and weighty responsibilities bestowed upon him." He thinks he would have made a better receptionist in a stock brokerage firm.

He is happy that James Farley, in explaining in Collier's why he broke with FDR in 1940 when the President sought an unprecedented third term in office, was exposing the Roosevelt Administration for what it was and regrets that it had not been done sooner. He concludes that President Roosevelt would be recorded in history as "America's public enemy number one".

We take it that he may have voted for President Hoover, Alf Landon, Wendell Willkie, and Thomas Dewey. Or, given his other letters, he may have simply written in the name Hitler.

A letter writer thinks that P. C. Burkholder, in writing on July 1 that FDR had been less of a job creator than Herbert Hoover, was engaging in some form of humor. He reminds that President Roosevelt had led the nation from the depths of the worst Depression in the history of the country. He tells of the fact that there were no functioning banks between Charlotte and Charleston on March 4, 1933 when FDR took the oath of office. Tobacco was selling at 10 cents per pound, cotton at 7 cents, corn at 15 cents, and wages were $1 per day.

He concludes that FDR had saved the capitalist system without reducing American freedom, witnessing the freedom enjoyed by Mr. Burkholder to say as he pleased in print.

He might have added that creating jobs selling pencils or the like for the college educated was not exactly a sterling record established by Mr. Hoover. Nor were the Hoover-villes which dotted the landscape, tent cities for the homeless and unemployed. Facts are inconvenient intruders sometimes.

Framed Edition
[Return to Links
Page by Subject] [Return to Links-Page by Date] [Return to News<i><i><i>--</i></i></i>Framed Edition]
Links-Date -- Links-Subj.