Wednesday, February 7, 1945

The Charlotte News

Wednesday, February 7, 1945

FOUR EDITORIALS

Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that the Russians had established a new bridgehead on the Oder south of Kustrin, the seventh Oder bridgehead, and had expanded another bridgehead north of the town, about 35 miles from Berlin. The Russians also made gains along the breach in the Oder line in Silesia.

On the Western Front, the Third Army crossed the Our and Sure Rivers and fought a half mile into the Siegfried Line. Part of the forces surged across the Luxembourg frontier by boat and bridge at seven places between Echternach and a point five miles north of Clervaux.

The Allies were now on or across the Siegfried Line along the entire 160-mile front extending from the Dutch border to the shelled-out Saarbrucken.

The First Army also made gains, moving to within 500 yards of Schmidt north of the Roer River dams controlling river levels.

The Fifteenth Air Force out of Italy bombed oil refineries near Vienna, the largest source of oil remaining to the Reich after seizure of Upper Silesia by the Russians.

A Stockholm newspaper reported that Hitler might be willing to give up his role as Chancellor to Franz Von Papen and remain only as the President of the Reich, a position he had abolished when he came to power. The move was viewed by observers familiar with Nazi tactics as a trial balloon to determine whether the Allies would accept the change as a basis for an offer of more favorable terms of peace than unconditional surrender.

In Italy, the largest American attack since the previous October had been launched southeast of Bologna, gaining 600 yards through thawing snow in mountainous terrain against strong enemy resistance.

General MacArthur fulfilled his March, 1942 promise to return to Manila by visiting the freed 5,000 military and civilian prisoners at Santo Tomas amid enemy shell fire. One shell had landed but a hundred feet from where the General spoke to the former prisoners and had even inflicted some injuries to the spectators. General MacArthur announced that arrangements were being made to obtain safe passage for the American prisoners back to the United States at the earliest opportunity.

Operations continued south of the Pasig River in Manila against the enemy holdouts in the city and no indications appeared that the Japanese were ready to give up. They continued to raze parts of Manila to the south of the river.

A photograph appears of Pfc. Henry Weber, sentenced to die in California for refusing to bear arms. He opposed killing on philosophical grounds and had sought transfer to a non-combat role but had been refused by the Army. Presumably, with the end of the war but six months away, Private Weber's sentence was never executed.

On the editorial page, "Anti-Climax" tells of the Georgia Legislature having voted overwhelmingly to eliminate its poll tax. It turned out to be a simple process, with Governor Ellis Arnall having led the fight. Georgia had maintained the tax since the Founding of the country, the only state to do so without any interim cessation of the noxious practice.

There were left seven states with a poll tax. The piece implicitly hopes that Georgia would set an example for the others to follow. It would not occur, requiring the 24th Amendment, ratified in 1964, to accomplish finally the complete eradication of poll taxes.

"Heads We Win" discusses the wisdom of the proposed referendum on alcohol to rid the 25 ABC controlled counties of the State from its legalized sale. The prospect of the dry forces winning would cause, says the piece, the resurgence of bootlegging in those 25 counties as during Prohibition.

But, it asks, what if those forces were to lose? Would it mean that the local-option dry counties would be compelled to allow the establishment of State ABC stores for the purpose of controlled sale of alcohol? The piece ventures that it would not be so, and that it was a poor rule which was not reciprocal in application. If the drys were to lose, they would keep in place the system then extant. They thus bore no risk in promulgating the referendum.

"Post-Berlin?" questions whether the fall of Berlin, appearing imminent within the ensuing few weeks, would be the end of the war in Europe. Some observers thought it would be the case while others disagreed. The latter group of opinion had it that Germany was capable of continuing the fight without Berlin.

The past offered little consistent helpful precedent by which to gauge how things might in fact proceed. Sometimes taking the capital of a war torn country was a significant act which had precipitated surrender; other times, it had little or no impact on the ongoing war. The Continental Army, for instance, continued the fight under General Washington during the Revolution despite the fact that Philadelphia had fallen into the hands of the British in 1777. The same had been true in the War of 1812, after Washington City had been set ablaze by the British in 1814.

So, the piece concludes that whether the Germans would fight on after the fall of Berlin was not susceptible of definitive answer. But, regardless, the end, it believed, would not be far in the offing on the heels of Berlin's capture.

The event, however, would prove the final death knell of the Third Reich. With the Russians pouring into the capital from the East in the last ten days of April, Hitler and Goebbels, fearful of their own propaganda warnings anent the allegedly barbarous and viciously vindictive Russians, decided to commit suicide.

"No Payoff" finds that the CIO had scored few triumphs since their PAC had aided considerably the President's re-election in November, primarily through the registration of thousands of displaced war workers in industrial states. PAC leader Sidney Hillman had admonished CIO members on election day that the victory of FDR did not guarantee the goals of CIO.

While CIO was pleased with the appointment of Henry Wallace as Secretary of Commerce, they had not been pleased with the War Labor Board chair William Davis or its public members, Frank Porter Graham and George Taylor. But they had been retained by the President for the duration of the European war. CIO supported the nomination of Archibald MacLeish as Assistant Secretary of State but not the other nominees to the State Department. It had wanted a new Secretary of Labor but Frances Perkins remained in the post against her own will to resign. Attorney General Francis Biddle continued to try to deport West Coast Longshoremen's Union leader Harry Bridges, powerful in the CIO, for his alleged Communist ties. And the President still did not support the Russian stand on Poland, the Administration continuing its support, albeit tepid, for the Polish government-in-exile in London rather than committing fully to the Soviet-favored Polish provisional government established at Lublin and also favored by the CIO.

Thus, the forecast by conservatives that the President would hand the keys to the country over to labor because of the great power wielded by PAC during the election campaign had proved anything but true. The President, indeed, had behaved as if PAC had done little or nothing in the late election.

The excerpt from the Congressional Record finds Senator Owen Brewster of Maine, a Republican, urging that, should his Senate colleagues continue to seek to defeat the nomination of Mr. Wallace, they would only contribute to his martyrdom and would in no wise insure that the President could not then use the former Vice-President as a presidential adviser, as with Harry Hopkins, without Senate confirmation, to advance and implement Administration policy—just as Mr. Hopkins had recently gone to Rome to consult there with Allied military leaders to convey Administration policy in advance of the Big Three Conference at Yalta.

Senator Robert Taft of Ohio begged to differ with Senator Brewster, finding the argument that to confirm someone they regarded as incompetent to the task of the office because otherwise the process would turn him into a martyr to be quite illogical.

Drew Pearson tells of the furious debate the previous weekend regarding the work-or-fight legislation, already passed by the House, and pending in the Senate. Senators on Friday had voted for an amendment favored by the Army to place administration of the bill in the hands of War Mobilizer James Byrnes, who would inevitably delegate it to the War Manpower Commission headed by Paul McNutt.

But on Saturday, the Senators were informed through Senator Chan Gurney of South Dakota that the Army had changed its mind and wished that the amendment be withdrawn, effectively to leave the administration to General Hershey of Selective Service. Senator Thomas of Utah, chair of the Military Affairs Committee, became upset with the sudden change of policy by the Army and also asked that the Army cease using "back doors" to communicate its desires to the Senate committee at large.

To that, Senator Gurney took exception for his perceiving himself to have been labeled a "back door".

Senator Thomas assured that he was addressing his criticism against the Army and not intending to refer to his colleague as a back door.

Eventually, Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire joined the debate and insisted that it was serving the body right for having neglected to hold public hearings on such an important issue, impacting all men from ages 18 to 45.

Samuel Grafton discusses the attempts to ferret out the reasons for the great success of the Russians in battle during the previous three years. It was not that they were "Oriental", he concludes, for they had been of the same ethnic make-up for a long time before the war and never enjoyed much military success. Likewise, it was not that the peasants of Russia, who constituted the bulk of the manpower in the armies, were accustomed to winter, as they had been equally accustomed for a long time, without that fact enabling Russia any great victory in battle—Balaklava notwithstanding.

The difference, he concludes, was innovation, primarily the determination by the military leaders in Russia to make friends with winter and use it to their advantage. Utilization of ski troops, sledges, fast-moving horse cavalry, white-clad camouflaged soldiers, special lubricants to enable machinery to operate in sub-zero weather, all had combined to allow for this innovation in making the winter a friend. Indeed, the Russians had launched one of their offensives during a blizzard, making it nearly impossible to resist.

Making winter a friend would persist, unfortunately, in a different manner, into the post-war environment, nearly causing the world to be blown to bits by Old Man Winter and his Winter Wind.

A letter writer from New York informs the reader of everything one ever needed to know about matches. In addition to many statistics imparted, including how many times around the globe a book's worth could stretch if laid end to end, or how many high walls could be constructed from the contents, he tells, interestingly, of the origin of the "safety match". You have seen that on your matchbooks since you first played with matches as a toddler. So, what does it mean? We always thought that it had something to do with the matchbook itself, with the little flap tucking under the scratch plate. But no. Our misperception stands corrected.

Originally, the striking material of matches consisted of white phosphorous. The gases emitted by the substance often poisoned to death or incapacitated the user with its cloud of lethal gas, educates the correspondent. It also was highly flammable and would catch everything else on fire besides that which the user was attempting to light.

Now you know. You learn something new everyday. Matches used to be lethal. Now, they are safe, in the right hands, that is.

Another letter writer complains that an article appearing in The News surveying North Carolina literary lights of the past and present had omitted Thomas Wolfe. The author of the article pleaded guilty to the omission but explained it by the fact that she did not intend to provide a comprehensive survey of North Carolina literati.

The sight of these closed golden houses
With their warmth of life
Awoke in him a bitter, poignant, strangely mixed
Emotion of exile and return, of loneliness and security,
Of being forever shut out from the palpable and passionate
Integument of life and fellowship,
And of being so close to it that he could
Touch it with his hand,
Enter it by a door,
Possess it with a word—a word that,
Somehow, he could never speak,
A door that, somehow,
He would never open.

—from The Web and the Rock, 1939

Hal Boyle, in Germany, tells of one sergeant who lost his lifelong speech impediment after he was struck by a piece of shrapnel during the D-Day landings the previous June. The shrapnel had taken a piece of his jaw and when the wound healed, he could talk for the first time without a lisp.

Two months later, he was driving a jeep along the front lines when he struck an enemy mine, ejecting him from the vehicle, causing a severe scalp wound. He had been partially bald for some time prior to this accident, but when the scalp wound healed, his hair had grown back evenly. A medic informed that it was a popular remedy for loss of hair—presumably the scalping under controlled circumstances, not the entire scenario involving hitting a land mine while driving a jeep.

An Associated Press war photographer was at a USO show in a Belgian town. Marlene Dietrich was in the show. Afterward, she attended a dinner with some of the photographers and eventually turned to the A.P. man, offering that some of the Airborne troops had requested her garters as souvenirs, and wondering therefore whether the A.P. man might wish her "scanties". He politely declined the offer but asked instead for the pilot's cap she was wearing as it was more practical for keeping his head warm as he rode along the icy front in a jeep. Ms. Dietrich readily obliged.

One of the journalists present remarked to the photographer that he had to be crazy to have passed up an offer of Marlene Dietrich's scanties to acquire an Air Force cap.

Honi soit qui mal y pense.

Incidentally, fellows, for the sake of higher understanding: Let us try this one again, taking it a little more slowly, step by step, this time, until we have it engraved on the innermost recesses of the cerebral cortex come March, not but a few weeks away now: Things in materia are never Safe or a Sure Bet, even with two minutes and ten seconds until the Horn sounds, possessed of a ten point lead.

Wethinks Aristotle may have said that, or Hegel, perhaps—anyway, one of the Portuguese poets.

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.