![]()
The Charlotte News
Monday, August 18, 1958
TWO EDITORIALS
![]()
![]()
Site Ed. Note: The front page reports from the U.N. in New York that the emergency General Assembly meeting this date received a Western-supported plan calling on Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold to work out arrangements to ease tensions in the Middle East. The new plan, embodying several points of President Eisenhower's peace program presented the prior week, had failed to win the support of key Asian and Arab countries, but its sponsors predicted that it would be supported by the necessary two-thirds majority of the Assembly. The initial sponsors were Norway, Canada, Colombia and Denmark, with others expected to join subsequently. The U.S. and Britain, although not formal sponsors, had a leading role in drafting the proposal and were prepared to provide it support. Secretary of State Dulles and British Foreign Secretary Selwyn Lloyd had submitted letters to the Assembly president, Sir Leslie Munro of New Zealand, giving formal assurances that the U.S. and British forces would be withdrawn from Lebanon and Jordan, respectively, when stable conditions were restored in the region. A key part of the letters, designed to ease Arab opposition to the Western resolution, had declared that U.S. and British forces would be withdrawn as soon as the Assembly determined that the U.N. had taken action which made their presence unnecessary. Diplomatic sources said that India would vote against the Norwegian plan despite the assurances. Asian and Arab nations objected particularly to the absence of any direct resolution for U.S. and British withdrawal. The main points of the Norwegian resolution were that Dr. Hammarskjold would make such arrangements as he would find adequate to uphold the principles and purposes of the U.N. Charter in relation to Lebanon and Jordan, taking note of the letters from Secretary Dulles and Secretary Lloyd; that the Assembly would reaffirm that all U.N. members ought refrain from acts, direct or indirect, aimed at fomenting civil strife in other countries or subversion; that Dr. Hammarskjold would be asked to continue his studies on a possible standby U.N. peace force for the Middle East and would also be asked to consult with the Arabs on the possibility of setting up an economic regional development agency, points put forward by the President's proposed plan.
In Amman, Jordan, the Government had announced this date the arrest of the head of the Jordan Moslem Brotherhood, Mohammed Khalifi, for security reasons. He was a member of the Brotherhood's four-man delegation in the Jordanian Parliament.
In Taipei, Formosa, it was reported that the Defense Ministry had said this date that the Chinese Communists had increased by eight or nine divisions the strength of their ground forces in the coastal areas of Fukien Province, directly opposite Formosa.
Julian Scheer of The News
reports from Cape Canaveral, Fla., that the U.S. was confident of
successfully launching a rocket in the direction of the moon, though
it might not be for another decade. The abortive 77-second flight
The House had called up a
Senate-passed labor bill, sponsored by Senators John F. Kennedy of
Massachusetts and Irving Ives of New York, requiring public
disclosure of labor union finances and giving union members a bigger
voice in union affairs. The procedure on the bill would allow for
little debate and no amendments, and require at least a two-thirds
super-majority for passage. Supporters of the bill had decided on the
last-ditch effort after the House Labor Committee had refused to
consider either the Senate measure or a substitute backed by
Republican Committee members. It had been passed on June 17 in the
Senate by a vote of 88 to 1. The controversial bill had resulted from
the hearings before the Senate Select Committee investigating
misconduct of unions and management. Nine House Democrats had joined
during the weekend in a circular letter to other members, urging
passage of the Senate measure, which they conceded was not perfect.
Representative Clare Hoffman of Michigan called the Senate bill "a
quack remedy, not only reckless but harmful," objecting to the
procedure for considering it in the House and urging that it be
defeated. The bill was given little chance of passage
In Pontiac, Mich., Herman Kierdorf, former Teamster Union official who had been sought for two weeks in the fire death of his nephew, who had also been a Teamster local official in Flint, had given himself up the previous night, saying that he had nothing to hide. Otherwise, his most frequent remark during interviews with police and the press this date had been that he had no comment. The 68-year old ex-convict and one-time business agent for a Teamsters local, had surrendered to authorities at a drive-in restaurant by prearrangement. He said he wanted to cooperate, "but being innocent, I don't think I could be connected." He had disappeared on August 4, refusing to say where he had been hiding. He had been sought on a warrant charging him with possession of a gun equipped with a silencer and had vanished the same day that his nephew, Frank, 56, had stumbled into a Pontiac hospital with burns over 85 percent of his body, initially stating to police, after consultation with his uncle, that he had received the burns from two men whom he did not know who had poured gasoline over him and lit him on fire, the following day having changed his story, indicating that he was burned while trying deliberately to set fire to a dry cleaning establishment in Flint, and that his uncle had been present at that time. Police believed the latter story, indicating that the initial story had been disproved by their investigation. Herman said, however, that Frank had not torched himself, accidentally or otherwise, asking rhetorically why he would have set the place on fire, indicating he believed that his nephew would not do a thing like that. He also said that a second reason he had turned himself in was because the chief assistant prosecutor of Oakland County was "taking a rap" for having released him on August 4 after questioning him. He apologized for having caused so much trouble. He was booked on a formal charge of possession of a pistol equipped with a silencer. During questioning by the press, his statements varied at times, at one point indicating that he had vanished because he was "shaken up by the death" of his nephew, but did not explain why he was missing three days before his nephew had died, four days after the August 3 incident at the dry cleaning establishment, also stating that his heart trouble had made it difficult for him to stay in jail, answer questions and face the general notoriety. He also had not wanted to confront his nephew's wife. Earlier, Michigan Attorney General Paul Adams had called Herman Kierdorf the key to the mystery. But this date, Mr. Adams said that he had no immediate intention of filing a charge against Mr. Kierdorf in connection with the fire at the dry cleaning establishment.
In Unity House, Pa., it was reported that AFL-CIO leaders had met this date to tighten organized labor's quarantine against the Teamsters Union. George Meany, president of the AFL-CIO, said in advance that all AFL-CIO unions had to end their mutual aid pacts with the Teamsters, which had been ousted from the labor federation eight months earlier because of corruption. Walter Reuther, president of the UAW, told the press that he was confident that the AFL-CIO executive council would vote to require member unions to sever all ties with the Teamsters. It was a crucial decision, with most AFL-CIO unions' bargaining power dependent on the help of Teamsters in respecting their picket lines by ceasing deliveries and thus making their strikes effective. The Teamsters had been the target of more than 18 months of corruption charges by the Senate Select Committee investigating misconduct of unions and management. The Teamsters had continued to operate with AFL-CIO member unions even after its ouster and many AFL-CIO unions had accepted or courted Teamster aid. Any formal cutting of Teamster aid, as threatened by the AFL-CIO leaders, could result in retaliation by the Teamsters which would pit union against union and dilute strike cooperation. The issue was whether the AFL-CIO was willing to risk losing the Teamster help in dealing with employers as the price for the federation's stand against union corruption. At issue also was the status of Maurice Hutcheson, an AFL-CIO vice-president and head of the large Carpenters Union. Mr. Hutcheson was embroiled in an Indiana state highway scandal, charges of fixing a grand jury and frittering away union funds on a book lauding his family, having inherited the position as president of the union from his father, the late William Hutcheson. Mr. Meany and other AFL-CIO leaders had faced the decision whether to oust Mr. Hutcheson from the federation's council, just as they had expelled former Teamsters president Dave Beck a year earlier when the latter had been facing corruption charges. Secretary of State Dulles was due to speak to the group the following day regarding foreign affairs. The leaders this date urged the House to pass the Kennedy-Ives bill. The meeting was being held at the Pocono Mountain summer camp maintained by the Ladies Garment Workers Union.
The Senate had voted contempt citations this date against Maurice Hutcheson and 12 other witnesses who had balked in their testimony or failed to honor subpoenas before the Senate Select Committee.
In Winston-Salem, N.C., the City School Board assigned three black children this date to the all-white Easton Elementary School, turning down requests from five other black students for reassignment from Atkins to Reynolds High School for the coming school year. Reynolds, however, already had one black female student who had attended the previous year and already had been assigned to the school again for the coming year. The Board's action had been the first time racial integration had been ordered in Winston-Salem below the high school level.
On the editorial page, Joseph Alsop tells of Senate debate recently on an amendment to the military appropriations bill proposed by Senator Richard Russell of Georgia, forbidding the Defense Department from spending any appropriated funds on plans for surrender of the United States. The amendment was offered in response to a story published in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, by Brig. General Thomas Phillips, who had revealed that the Air Force subsidiary, the RAND Corporation, had been peering ahead into the years when the Soviet Union was due to acquire overwhelming superiority in nuclear strike capability, with General Phillips having stated that contemplation of that eventuality had led RAND scientists to make a study of the circumstances in which the U.S. ought surrender.
The Republicans, led by Senate Minority Leader William Knowland of California, had been indignant at the mere suggestion that the Administration would be studying surrender, as the Russell amendment appeared to imply.
Mr. Alsop indicates that what made the debate eerie was the fact that no one, on either side of the aisle, had sought to contest the grim facts which had impelled the RAND scientists to make their study. Senator Stuart Symington of Missouri had vouched for the accuracy of the facts while Senator Leverett Saltonstall of Massachusetts had replied that, no doubt, the Soviets might have gained the lead over the U.S. in some important ways, but that the U.S. remained ahead in others, the latter having been the most optimistic statement of anyone who had spoken.
Much later in the day, Senator John F. Kennedy of Massachusetts had made "one of the most remarkable speeches on American defense and national strategy that this country has heard since the end of the last war. It was a speech about those same facts that drove the RAND scientists to make their hideous calculations. It was a speech that every thoughtful American ought to read and ponder."
Senator Kennedy had said, "We must realize that the nuclear deterrent ratio during 1960-64 will in all likelihood be weighted very heavily against us." He had provided hard facts in greater detail than had Senators Symington and Henry Jackson of Washington because the latter two were impeded by their access to classified information, whereas Senator Kennedy was not. He demonstrated the gradual weakening of the U.S. nuclear deterrent, the rapid gain in Soviet nuclear striking power during the so-called "gap" years and described the "missile lag" in the period when present U.S. defense policies would concede an immense superiority in missile power to the Soviets. He said: "The Soviets will be as aware of their advantage during the years of the gap as we are… And nuclear destruction is not the only way in which the Soviets will be able to use their advantage… Their missile power will be the shield from behind which they will slowly but surely advance—through 'Sputnik diplomacy', limited both by wars, indirect aggression, intimidation and subversion … and the vicious blackmail of our allies… The balance of power will gradually shift against us. Each Soviet move will weaken the West, but none will seem to justify our initiating the nuclear war that might destroy us."
Mr. Alsop indicates that the debate had caused flesh-crawling, while other facts adduced during it gave encouragement during a time of officially propagated complacency, even more encouraging by Senator Kennedy's "calm but bold call for a much greater American effort to overcome the danger of the years of the 'gap'." He finds that what had made the day stirring was hearing Senator Kennedy, no stranger to war or danger, confidently forecasting that there was no future danger which an aroused and mobilized American public would not and could not overcome. He had borrowed for his closing words from Winston Churchill: "Come then, let us to the task, to the battle and the toil—each to our part, each to our station—let us go forward together in all parts of the land. There is not a week, nor a day, nor an hour to be lost."
Mr. Alsop finds that it was the authentic voice of America speaking the words, charged with remembered glory of the greatest Englishman of the century.
Ironically, Senator Kennedy had mentioned, as transcribed at page 17571 of the Congressional Record, Dr. Henry Kissinger, who had recently appeared in July on "The Mike Wallace Interview", and his notion that the U.S., in its stultified foreign policy, had developed a "Maginot-line mentality" by too much reliance on massive retaliation with nuclear superiority as a deterrent to any Soviet first-strike, "dependence upon a strategy which may collapse or may never be used, but which meanwhile prevents consideration of any alternative. When that prop is gone, the alternative seems to many to be inaction and acceptance of the inevitability of defeat." The Senator then went on to outline courses which were alternative to either inaction or all-out war.
There were echoes in the speech of the Senator's senior honors thesis at Harvard, subsequently published in 1940 as Why England Slept, a title based on Mr. Churchill's While England Slept, published in 1938, a compilation of the latter's foreign policy speeches during the critical period of the Nazi war machine build-up between 1932 and 1938.
Because we have fallen behind, the remainder of the front page and editorial page will not be summarized, and the notes will be sporadic until we catch up.
![]()
![]()
![]()