The Charlotte News
Monday, March 10, 1952
Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that in Korea, allied negotiators warned the Communist negotiators this date that threats and intimidation would not force the U.N. command to accept Communist terms for the armistice. The spokesman indicated that U.N. negotiators were not going to "sit and listen" any further to unfounded charges and repeated accusations that the allied delegation was "telling lies". He stated later that the threat was not meant to imply that there would be a cessation in the negotiations, but that the next move was up to the Communists. The allies were objecting to the Communist claims that they held no more than the 11,500 prisoners whose names they had provided the prior December 18 and their denials that they had ever held any of their prisoners outside Korea, in indoctrination camps in Manchuria, despite the allies' possession of clearly contradicting evidence on both counts.
The negotiators considering truce supervision met only for six minutes, long enough to agree to meet again the following day. They had met for two minutes the previous day, a record for brevity.
In the air war, seven Communist MIG jets were destroyed by the U.S. Fifth Air Force, as the enemy planes sought to break through a screen of U.S. Sabre jets protecting U.N. fighter-bombers. Three other enemy jets were damaged. It was the largest bag since January 25, when Sabre jets had shot down 10 MIGs in four battles. A total of about 60 enemy jets had been observed. Allied losses were not reported yet, those being reported only weekly. In other air action, Far East Air Forces planes attacked gun positions and supply routes in nearly 1,000 sorties flown this date.
Ground action had flared at only scattered points.
From Havana, Associated Press
reporter Ben F. Meyer tells of Fulgencio Batista having returned to power three months before Cuba's scheduled presidential election, in
a palace coup
Sr. Batista, secretly known in some quarters as Jose Jimenez, would remain as El Presidente until overthrown in the revolution
It was Mr. Meyer, incidentally, who, in 1941 in Mexico City, had befriended W. J. Cash in the last days before his death on July 1, and it was he to whom Mary Cash, Cash's wife, turned after she and Cash had checked in during the afternoon of July 1 to the Geneve Hotel, after Cash had frantically insisted that their lives were in danger from Nazi espionage agents, returning after seeking out Mr. Meyer to find Cash missing. Mr. Meyer and his wife then sought to comfort Mary and assisted her in locating Cash, finally ascertaining at around 10:00 p.m. that he had checked into the Reforma Hotel earlier in the evening. The Meyers remained with Mary when, with the hotel manager's assistance, they entered Cash's room and found him dead, hanging by his own necktie from a hook on the bathroom door. Mr. Meyer, when contacted around 1965 by Cash's first biographer, UNC Professor Joseph L. Morrison, had indicated that his memory on the entire episode was very vague and that he could offer no helpful information. His responsive letter, indeed, could be considered curt and dismissive—as if to say that he did not wish to discuss the matter.
The Supreme Court this date ruled 6 to 2 in Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, 342 U.S. 580, a case delivered by Justice Robert Jackson, that aliens could be deported if they had once been members of the Communist Party. Justice Felix Frankfurter filed a separate concurring opinion. Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas dissented. Justice Tom Clark took no part in the decision.
The Court also held 5 to 4 in Carlson v. Landon, 342 U.S. 524, an opinion delivered by Justice Stanley Reed, that the Government could hold aliens without bail after detention for deportation on the ground of being Communists. Justices Black, Frankfurter, Douglas and Harold Burton dissented.
The Court also upheld, 5 to 3, in Sacher v. U.S., 343 U.S. 1, an opinion also delivered by Justice Jackson, the contempt citations and sentences imposed by the trial judge on lawyers who had defended the 11 top American Communist leaders in their trial of charges under the Smith Act for advocating the overthrow of the Government by force or violence. Justices Black and Frankfurter separately dissented and Justice Douglas joined those dissents. Justice Clark, who had been Attorney General at the time the cases were initiated, took no part in the decision.
The U.S. placed a 20-mile radius travel limit on Soviet officials and their families from both Washington and New York City.
Senators investigating the oil trade with Communist China found that the Nationalist Chinese company which had so transacted had been fined $847,000 for using foreign radio operators, but that an $8,000 settlement had been worked out through the law firm of Newbold Morris, the newly appointed Government ombudsman ferreting out corruption in the executive branch.
In Chicago, strikes by 10,000 workers, affecting nearly 15,000 employees, paralyzed most of the New York Central's inland service this date and snarled rail connections in the St. Louis area for a second straight day. Engineers, firemen and conductors were striking in defiance of the Army, nominal operator of the rail carriers. Wholesale layoffs had begun on the Central system, shutting it down completely west of Buffalo. Several railroads had canceled their trains to St. Louis until further notice. The Army had ordered the unions to call off the walkouts or face "appropriate action". The strike, however, of the Brotherhoods of Railway Conductors, Locomotive Engineers and Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen appeared possibly to be spreading. According to one union official, if the strike continued for several days, it would force as many as 50,000 workers off the job. Strike leaders indicated that there was no particular reason for singling out the New York Central. The strike was over higher wages and shorter hours. The Army had been custodian and nominal operator of the railroads since August, 1950, when the same unions had threatened a nationwide walkout. Stranded passengers had been shifted to other railroad lines, airlines and buses. A carrier spokesman said that the wage and hours issues had been virtually settled but that there were still unresolved issues regarding rules, which had held up the final formulation of a contract and putting the pay increases into effect.
In Lumberton, N.C., a cross had been burned the previous night at the home of Solicitor Malcolm Seawell, who had ordered the misdemeanor arrests of 16 Klansmen the previous month. The cross had been made of tobacco curing sticks wrapped in gasoline-soaked rags, and apparently had been the work of pranksters, Mr. Seawell's wife having indicated that she was not at all frightened by the sight of the burning cross outside her window. Mr. Seawell had been in Washington at the time, in connection with his work as a member of the loyalty investigation appeal board for the Department of the Army. Of the 16 arrested on February 27 under the 1868 statute prohibiting membership in a secret military or political organization, 11 had renounced their membership, enabling, pursuant to the statute, their cases to be dismissed. One other had explained satisfactorily his connection with the Klan and his case was also dismissed. The remaining four had denied that they had ever been members of the organization, and when the matter had been called the previous Saturday in Recorders Court, the State took a nolle prosequi, or "nol pross", of the cases for the time being on the basis that members of the SBI who had been slated to testify in the matters were busy with another anti-Klan drive in neighboring Columbus County. Those four cases, however, would be brought up again by Mr. Seawell, seeking indictments before the Superior Court grand jury in the term of court commencing March 24—in so doing, preventing the defendants "two bites at the cherry", as Mr. Seawell had put it, one in Recorders Court without a jury, and then on appeal de novo to Superior Court, where they would have the right to trial by jury, thus skipping the Recorders Court stage.
We have to observe that while the police believed that the cross-burning was not the work of the Klan, the fact that it occurred on a Sunday night did fit the Klan's pattern of activity, often favoring Sunday nights for their recreational pursuits, both the comedy and the pathos.
Another Gallup poll appears, assessing the popularity of the President in comparison to General Eisenhower and Senator Taft among Southern voters. General Eisenhower was preferred by 62 percent to 30 percent for the President, and Senator Taft was preferred by 46 percent to 42 percent for the President. The poll was taken among respondents from 13 Southern states, including Oklahoma. There had only been one presidential election since the Grant Administration in which the Democratic presidential candidate had failed to poll a majority of Southern votes, that having been in 1928 when New York Governor Al Smith had been the Democratic nominee and received 48 percent of the Southern vote to his victorious opponent Herbert Hoover, who had received 52 percent, in that election Governor Smith's Catholicism and his opposition to Prohibition having been primary issues in the South. The respondents had also said, however, that they favored the Democrats by a 5 to 2 majority over the Republicans in Congressional elections. Only 25 percent of the Southern respondents approved of the President's handling of his job, while 63 percent disapproved, the same result as tabulated nationally. About two years earlier, the approval rating had been 51 percent, and during the President's period of initial popularity in 1945, had been 89 percent, in 1946, 77 percent.
In New Hampshire, in the lead-up to the primary scheduled for the following day, supporters of General Eisenhower were arranging last-minute rallies for this night to sway as many votes as they could in the expected close race with Senator Taft. The Senator, after making a three-day campaign swing through the state, the most intensive to that time ever conducted, headed for Texas. His last speeches had emphasized the notion that the General would not be a strong candidate after he stated his political views and that the majority of farmers were against the Truman Administration and the Brannan agricultural plan. Governor Sherman Adams, a supporter of General Eisenhower and his future chief of staff as President, accused Senator Taft the previous day of being an "isolationist" who had no understanding of current problems. He would speak this night at an Eisenhower rally, while Senator Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr., of Massachusetts would address another rally. It was expected that about 75,000 Republican voters would turn out in the primary and that about 25,000 Democrats would vote.
In Charlotte, James B. Marshall, 60, an engineer and former City Manager between 1935 and 1940, who had been active for many years in the affairs of City Government, died suddenly at his home the previous day of a heart attack. During his time as City Manager, he had envisioned the clearance of the Brooklyn area of slums and constructing a parkway, recreational areas, parks and schools in its place. That project was on its way to partial realization and Mr. Marshall had been instrumental in that movement.
A new feature begins in The News this date, to be included each Monday afternoon, the Children's News, "a special section for the little men and women of primary and grammar school age", including stories, puzzles and other features specifically designed for that age group.
We thought the whole newspaper was that way. Us kids must not s'posed to be reading it, guess.
On the editorial page, "Something to Talk About" indicates talk on both sides of the Atlantic by the NATO nations' legislatures regarding the proposed NATO budget formulated at the recent Lisbon foreign ministers conference. These legislatures would ultimately decide the course of NATO, several hundred billions of dollars over a three-year period having been projected as necessary by the NATO planners properly to provide for necessary European defense against Communist aggression. While the various military leaders, economists and diplomats of the NATO nations met regularly, the legislatures did not so meet, suggesting the possibility that many of the legislators in Europe and North America were not in tune with the planners and administrators.
Legislators from many countries had long gathered at meetings of the Inter-parliamentary Union to exchange general ideas, such as in Strasbourg the previous fall, attended by 14 U.S. Congressmen, discussing the common problems with European legislators at the Council of Europe.
Senator Guy Gillette, speaking in Charlotte the previous fall, had proposed creation of a North Atlantic Assembly which would bring persons from the Atlantic nations together for debate. The piece suggests the proposal as sound, but until such an assembly were established, urges that it would be helpful if ranking majority and minority members of the Armed Services, Foreign Relations and Foreign Affairs Committees of both houses of Congress met with their counterparts of the other NATO nations for free and open debate. That would allow for better exchange of information and better public understanding of NATO and its objectives.
"Revolution A La Form 1040" tells of the Federal income tax, when it had been authorized by the 16th Amendment in 1914, having been originally conceived as a revenue raising measure, but over the years had developed into a means of redistribution of wealth in the country. A recent survey conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research had shown that the U.S. had gone about half the way toward eliminating inequities in income, such that while three out of four families had incomes of less than $2,000 per year in 1939, only one of three fell into that category in 1949. Meanwhile, the wealthy had become more numerous, such that in the late Thirties, one family in about 50 had earned more than $5,000 per year and one out of 100 had earned more than $10,000, whereas by the late Forties, one family in six was in the former category and one in 20, in the latter. In the same period, the rich had become poorer, as the portion of the upper one percent of income recipients had declined in the previous 35 years from 16 percent to 9 percent. But after-tax income was much higher in 1947 than in 1941 in each income group.
In the view of Dr. Arthur F. Burns, future Fed chairman between 1970 and 1978 and chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers under President Eisenhower between 1953 and 1956, who had directed some of the Bureau's research, the country had nearly reached the limit of the usefulness of the income tax as a device for redistribution of wealth, a position with which the piece agrees. Yet, this "silent revolution" had been quite beneficial to the American people. As found by Bill Lissner of the New York Times, in reviewing the Bureau's findings, neither the Soviet Union nor any of the Soviet satellites had a record which bore comparison to that of the U.S., a record which was approached only by the other English-speaking democracies and the Scandinavian democracies.
It indicates that the Bureau's figures could be challenged on the ground that they did not make allowance for differences in real value of the dollar in 1939, but that the trend was still evident even after adjusting for inflation. In addition to the income tax laws, contributing factors to these trends were progressive management, free trade unions, liberal credit policies, technological changes and large increases in productivity.
"Radicals or Robots" discusses the Supreme Court decision of the previous Monday, Adler v. Board of Education, which had upheld New York's Feinberg Law, passed in 1949, requiring the N.Y. State Board of Regents to list subversive organizations, which, according to the law, would result in membership in any one of those organizations constituting prima facie evidence of disqualification for any state job, including that of a public school teacher. The 6 to 3 decision, delivered by Justice Sherman Minton, indicated that the law would not deprive school employees of the right to free speech and assembly or, because it afforded a hearing to any individual whose rights were impacted by the law, did not deny procedural due process. One of the three dissenters, Justice Felix Frankfurter, had pointed out that the law had not actually been used against anyone since it had been passed, Justice Frankfurter dissenting on the bases that the case was therefore not ripe for adjudication and that the plaintiffs, who had not yet been harmed by the law, lacked standing to bring it.
The piece indicates that many prominent Americans had belonged to organizations which had been listed as "subversive" by the Attorney General under the Federal analog to the New York law. For instance, Senator Homer Ferguson of Michigan, publisher of Time, Life and Fortune, Henry Luce, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Virginius Dabney, editor of the Richmond Times-Dispatch, had each belonged to such "subversive" groups, although none of them could be suggested as disloyal to the country. It therefore hopes that the New York Board of Regents would demonstrate care in compiling their list of subversive organizations and, in the process, consider time of membership and degree of participation by any teacher, before refusing or terminating employment. If they did not, the fears expressed by the other two dissenters, Justices Hugo Black and William O. Douglas, might be realized. Justice Black had indicated a danger of chilling thought and speech except regarding that which was approved by a transient majority, and Justice Douglas had said that the law turned the school system into a "spying project" which searched for "hidden meaning in a teacher's utterances".
It suggests that the Court's
upholding of this law was important to all Americans as it set a
precedent for other legislatures and school administrators to be
provided great authority over the views teachers might voice and the
organizations which they might join. It urges that such powers should
be used sparingly and wisely, as it was "better to have a few
A piece from the State, titled "We Doubt He Can", indicates that Republicans and some Democrats believed that the President could not be re-elected and that the only thing necessary to defeat him would be to maintain the story of Government corruption before the people. It indicates that while that might be true, Senator Taft could not carry North Carolina against the President or any other Democrat. The Senator, during his recent trip to the state, might have picked up some delegates on the Republican side, but he had not, according to astute political observers, gained any votes. It suggests that if the GOP expected to win in North Carolina in 1952, it needed a more appealing candidate.
Governor Adlai Stevenson would carry North Carolina, as most of the rest of the South, in the general election—as he would again in 1956, both times running with a Southerner on the ticket, Senator John Sparkman in 1952 and Senator Estes Kefauver in 1956.
Drew Pearson tells of the President, in having allowed his name to be placed on the ballot in New Hampshire, having preserved a Democratic national committeeman who consistently was cooperative with Republicans. Had he withdrawn his name, as he initially intended, Emmet Kelley would have lost his job as national committeeman for New Hampshire. But now the Democratic race appeared so tight that he might lose it anyway. Mr. Kelley was so close to New Hampshire Republicans that Republican Governor Sherman Adams, a supporter of General Eisenhower, had consistently appointed him Racing Commissioner for the state. In return, Mr. Kelley had frequently given his support to Republican policies and influenced Democratic members of the New Hampshire Legislature to support the Governor. Mr. Kelley was also supported by the banking interests and utilities, and worked for the Republican Brown Paper Company of Berlin, N.H. These interests had sought to defeat Senator Charles Tobey, who, though a Republican, had supported many of the President's policies.
Mr. Kelley, to preserve himself, was now doing everything he could to achieve a Truman victory in the primary, despite having consistently opposed the President's basic principles. He outlines the steps Mr. Kelley had taken toward this end, in an effort to defeat the candidacy of Senator Kefauver.
Within the appropriations bill for defense passed by the Congress the previous year had been a $100 million appropriation for underground operations behind the Iron Curtain, as Mr. Pearson had been urging for years. That had been one reason for the freedom balloon campaign, initiated by Mr. Pearson, launched over Czechoslovakia and Poland the previous summer, which had achieved positive results in giving hope, through messages attached to the balloons, to people living behind the Iron Curtain. But despite the appropriation the previous year, almost nothing had been done to utilize it for penetration of the Iron Curtain, as it had been snarled in bureaucracy regarding how the money would be spent, partly because of a controversy over Russian refugees. Recently, Senator Pat McCarran of Nevada had been applying pressure to break the stalemate, throwing his support behind the Ukrainians in the country, though they were opposed by other Russian refugees for being so rabid that they played into Stalin's hands. But, more than any other group inside Russia, the Ukrainians were possessed of the nationalist urge and for years had sought to be independent of the Soviet Union.
A piece from U.S. News & World Report, reporting from Concord, N.H., indicates that the candidates for the presidency were placing great store in the outcome of the New Hampshire primary the following day. But the primary was conducted under such narrow rules that the outcome would scarcely present an accurate picture for the general election. Party lines could not be crossed and independents and absentees could not vote. The voters were making their choice for 14 Republican delegates and 12 Democratic delegates—the front page indicating 8—to the conventions in the respective party primaries.
On the Republican side, General Eisenhower was contesting Senator Taft and former Governor Harold Stassen. But in the New Hampshire primary, only delegates for the General and the Senator, along with General MacArthur were on the ballot.
On the Democratic side, the President was contesting Senator Kefauver, but in the New Hampshire primary, in addition to those two, there were delegates on the ballot for former national Democratic chairman and FDR kingmaker James Farley and Governor Stevenson.
Of the 530,000 residents of New Hampshire, 311,000 were registered to vote but no formal breakdown had been made regarding their party affiliations. In the past, the primaries had generally shown more Republican voters, by margins of 2 to 1 to 4 to 1. The winning Republican candidate would poll far more votes, therefore, than the winning Democratic candidate, but that did not necessarily mean that the Republican would win the state in November. FDR had won New Hampshire three times while being outvoted by the Republican winner in the primaries. The President had lost New Hampshire, however, in 1948. Persons voting for the first time were permitted to register up until the day before the primary. The Democrats were concentrated in a few cities where there were no local elections on primary day to help bring out the vote, whereas the Republicans were strong in the rural areas and towns, where there were town meetings held on primary day in which the people voted on town officials and other local business, helping to swell the Republican vote.
General Eisenhower, therefore, could be hurt by the same factors which hurt the Democrats, as Senator Taft had most support in the rural districts and towns. And because of these factors, the Democratic winner would appear as a loser.
Joseph & Stewart Alsop, in Manchester, N.H., consider the candidacy of Senator Kefauver of Tennessee, stumping New Hampshire tirelessly and without stint, despite the fact that few believed he had a chance to obtain the Democratic nomination for the presidency. "Yet the case of Estes Kefauver, an able, honorable, but too ambitious man, is worth considering all the same. For it tells a good deal about the way American politics, and especially Democratic Party politics, works."
When he had originally announced his candidacy, the New Hampshire regular Democratic organization had received a slap in the face, for if the President had not allowed them to continue in his name, they would not have had a place at the Democratic convention. They were able to prevail upon the President to retract his original statement of withdrawal from the primary, to allow them a place on the ballot. The national committeeman from New Hampshire, Emmet Kelley, was predicting a landslide for the President's slate in the primary.
Such a result would be ironic as the President's hold even on his own party had never been weaker. Labor, the Democratic job holders and professionals were, nevertheless, working hard to defeat Senator Kefauver. That might be difficult if all Democrats went to the polls in the primary, but only about a third normally voted. Thus, the Democratic organization could exert control with ease. They would turn to the President because he controlled the jobs, a fact which would be true nationally. By challenging the President, Senator Kefauver had automatically alienated almost every regular Democratic organization in the North.
Marquis Childs indicates that if those who had access regularly to the President were correct, he had still not made up his mind whether to run again. If he did not run, it was almost certain that he would throw his support to Governor Adlai Stevenson. In a long evening session between the two men at Blair House a month earlier, the President had covered all the possible candidates within the Democratic Party, indicating for each potential candidate the handicaps in terms of electability. He concluded that the Governor would be the best of those available and expressed the hope that he would be ready to serve if the Democrats called upon him. Governor Stevenson, in reply, said that he would prefer to be Governor of Illinois, but did not preclude acceptance of the nomination.
Since that time, there had been a great amount of effort directed at the President to dissuade him from support of Governor Stevenson, from the friends of Senator Robert Kerr of Oklahoma and from those who wanted the President to run again. They were indicating that if the Governor was so reluctant to run, he would make a weak candidate, that they did not want "another Eisenhower".
Mr. Childs indicates that Governor Stevenson was more of an introvert than the usual politician. There was no reason to believe that the President had been influenced to change his mind in support of the Governor, that he was a practical politician who understood that every candidate had handicaps and limitations, and that he believed the handicaps of the Governor were fewer than any other Democrat except the President, himself.
The entry to the race by Senator Richard Russell of Georgia had injected the issue of the potential for a Southern revolt. But unlike the Dixiecrats of 1948, Senator Russell did not hate the programs of the New Deal and Fair Deal, understanding that they had benefited the South more than perhaps any other region of the country. Regarding civil rights, he was far from being a "professional rebel" and two and a half years earlier, the President might have reached a working compromise with him and a sizable number of the Southern delegation in Congress regarding an educational FEPC, free of criminal penalties.
Mr. Childs indicates that former ERP administrator Paul Hoffman, a supporter of General Eisenhower, in his recent New Hampshire speech, as covered by Mr. Childs the previous Saturday, had said that the party should seek the man who is best qualified for the job.
Links-Date — Links-Subj.