J UN E 29. 1 953 25¢

NO MORE U. N. WARSThe Fiasco in Korea ~)hould Be the Last

The Truth about FluoridationJames Rorty

Denationalize Electric PowerO. Glenn Saxon

How to Regain Purse ControlGov. Christiarl A. Herter

SYMBOL OF A

VITAL ARTERY OF

LIFE, LIBERTY AND THE

PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS

The 1110tor vehicle has expanded the lives of111illions of families, adding literally billionsof hours of happiness each year.

Since the first Chrysler car was built in1924, highways have improved greatly­in durability, surfacing, safety design andnumber of highway Iniles. Turnpikes andexpressways have been added, giving A:;lteri­cans today a highway and byway networknever equaled by any other people.

But, in many areas, the universal use ofmotor transportation has outrun our high­ways, streets and parking facilities. If motorvehicles are to contribute even more effec­tually to better living, arteries of travel Inustbe freed of hazards and congestion.

Your dollars and your interest. Inn1any places, American highway builders,the Inost experienced in the world, are usingyour tax dollars to better your road andhighway system. But at the present rate itwould take years just to catch up on thebacklog of projects awaiting attention.

Your car or truck is subject to many taxes- aillong them, depending on the state in

CHRYSLER CORPORATIONPlymouth, Dodge, De Soto & Chrysle'r cars and Dodge trucks

This heZ,neted figure, bronzewith gold leaf, symbolizes moderntraffic movement. It adornsthe signal lights alongNew York City's Fifth Avenue.

which you live, are a general property tax,a state sales tax, a Federal excise tax, a stateregistration fee, a state gasoline tax, a Fed­eral gasoline tax and others. And direct andindirect Laxes equal over 30 ~0 of the priceof your car.

Farsighted local and state adnlinistrativeprogrmlls, which do not divert your highwaytax dollars to other purposes, can providethe steady roadway maintenance and ex­pansion, and the increased traffic safetyessential to the growing economic and socialworth of your motor vehicle.

It costs less to have good roads thanto support poor ones. It is more pro­ductive to take advantage of the fullusefulness of the motor vehicle thanto let inadequate roads limit its use.

But it takes the active interest of eachone of us in stimulating and encouragingin our own localities a competent, vigorousapproach to roadway improvement.

This is vital if our nation is to have thearteries necessary for its very life, its libertyand the pursuit of its happiness.

Chrysler Marine & Industrial Engines

Oilite Metal Powder Products • Mopar Parts & Accessories

Airtemp Air Conditioning, Heating, Refrigeration

Cycleweld Cement Products

From Our Readers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 688

Poem

Cockcrow WITTER BYNNER 705

Editorials

The Fortnight. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 691N,o M'ore U.N'. Wars 693Fifth Column Amendment 694The German Dilemma............................... 695Italy's Tightrope.................................... 696Calling Mr. Stassen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 696

Our ContributorsJAMES RORTY, well-known newspaperman, mag­azine writer, and author, has in recent yearsthrough his ar,ticles and books gained a meritedreputation as an authority on matters relatingto public health. His most recent book is Tomor­row's Food (with N. Philip Norman).

CHRISTIAN A. HERTER, former editor and for tenyears a member of the United States House ofRepresentatives, was elected last fall Governorof Massachusetts.

ALEXANDER T. JORDAN served for a number ofyears, both before and during the war, in theforeign office of the Polish government in Lon­don. He is a former contributor to Plain Talk.

O. GLENN SAXON, professor of husiness adminis­tration at Yale University, has held a nUlnberof public posts, among them director of re­search for the Republican National Committee(1936-40) and commissioner of finance andcontrol for the State of Connecticut.

ROBERT DONLEVIN has recently returned fromParis, where he has been working as a news­paperman.

MARTIN EBON, a frequent contributor to theFREEMAN, is the author of the just-publishedbiography Malenkov: Stalin's Successor.

ROBERT C. RICHARDSON, as a Lieutenant Generalin the Army, from 1943 to 1946 commanded allarmy and air forces in the Pacific Ocean Areas,and was Military Governor of Hawaii. Follow­ing his retirement in 1946 he became presidentof the Pacific War Memorial.

EUGENE DAVIDSON is editor of the Yale Uni­versity Press.

FRANK H. KNIGHT, professor emeritus of eco­nomics, University of Chicago, is a frequentcontributor to economics journals. His mostrecent book is Freedom and Reform.

VAUGHN D. BORNET is now a member of the De­partment of History at Stanford University.He taught previously at the University ofMiami, and took a year of his graduate studyat the University of Georgia.

NICOLAS MONJO, aNew York writer on thedrama and other arts, makes his first contribu­tion to the FREEMAN. One of his plays was pro­duced by the Columbia University Players, andhe is at present writing a novel.

JUNE 29, 1953

A. Fortnightly

For

Individualists

HENRY HAZLITT

FLORENCE NO'RTON

VOL. 3, NO. 20

Editor

Managinc Editor

THE

.reeman

Contents

Books and the Arts

Romantic Statesmanship MAX EASTMAN 712Security by Air Power ROBERT C. RICHARDSON 714The Industrial Age JOHN VERNON TABERNER 714Quiet Mysticism EUGENE DAVIDSON 715Cardboard Hero R. G. WALDECK 715Time Study FRANK H. KNIGHT 716The Ancient South VAUGHN D. BORNET 716In Brief HELEN WOODWARD 717Lautrec & Cie NICOLAS MONJO 718

Articles

The Truth about Fluoridation JAMES RORTY 697How to Regain Purse ControL CHRISTIAN A. HERTER 701A :Satellite that Can Be Freed ALEXANDER T. JORDAN 703Denationalize 'Electric Power O. GLENN SAXON 706Our Diplomacy Strangled "Operation Strangle"

ROBERT DONLEVIN 709Russia's' Privile'ged Class MARTIN EBON 710

THE FREEMAN is published' fortnightly. Publication Office, Orange, Conn. Editorial andGeneral Offices, 240 Madison Avenue, New York 16, N. Y. Copyrighted in the! UnitedStates, 1953, by the Freeman Magazine, Inc. Henry Hazlitt, President; Lawrence Fertig,Vice President; Claude Robinson, Secretary; Kurt Lassen, Treasurer.Entered as second class matter at the Post Office at Orange, Conn. Rates: Twentyl-fivecents the copy; five dollars a year in the United States; nine dollars for two years;six dollars a year elsewhere.The editors can not be responsible for unsolicited manuscripts unless return postage or,better, a stamped, self-addressed envelope is enclosed.Articles signed with a name, pseudonym, or initials do not necessarily represent theopinioDi of the editors, either as to substance or style.~ 11 Printed in U.S.A., by Wilson H. Lee Co., Orange, Connecticut

New Reprints AvailableTwo articles in this issue, "The Truth aboutFluoridation" by James Rorty, and "Denation­alize Electric Power" by O. Glenn Saxon, areavailable·· in reprints at the following rates:single copies, ten cents; 100 copies, $5.00; 1,000copies, $40.00; 10,000 copies, $250.00; prices forlarger quantities on request.

Ij FROM OUR READERS IIWas Chambers Wrong?

Max Eastman has written a superbarticle in "The Religion of Immoral­ism" [June 1]. In only one place doeshe deviate from sound analysis-andthat is when he claims WhittakerChambers to be profoundly wrong instating that "the issue between SovietCommunism and the free world is be­tween religion and irreligion, or be­tween belief in m,an and belief in God."Eastman goes on to say that the dia­lectic movement is the Communist god.I would call his attention to the proba­bility that Chambers' reference to Godwas orthodox-and not a semantic dis­tortion such as E,astman would classifythe god of Communism. There is a vastdifference between the actual God andthe artificial gods that are erected bymortals to meet their particularnecessities.

Since the Soviet dialectic social sal­vation is akin to the National Councilof Churches' "Kingdom of God," andsince neither theory has any founda­tion in the Bible, I would say thatChambers is right and Eastman iswrong.Washington, Ind. A. G. BLAZEY, M. D.

"Incisive Power"

Thank you for blowing a whiff of san­ity into the political scene. Of courseI know the old maxim that, for one'seducation, ,gneshould read comment atodds with his own opinion rather thancomment which makes him say: "Isn'tthat so?" None the less, I feel boundto say that in the last paragraph andthe one preceding it ("The Fortnight,"April 20), you have attained a heightof incisive power which 'makes me verydesirous of continuing a careful read­ing of your nlagazine.Berkeley, Cal. CHARLES B. COLLINS

Soviet vs. Tsarist Aggression

Your editorial (Toynbee's Little Lamb,April 20) ... suggests that the editorsof your interesting magazine are con­fusing the most important issue of ourtimes: Is it Communism we are fight­ing, or just another form of traditionalRussian imperialism?

As to history, though nobody candeny that old Russia was an imperialiststate, it was no more imperialistic thanany other great nation. You offer aproof of Russian expansion: compari­son of the map of the Muscovite statein the s'ixteenth century with the pres­ent one. How :about comparing themaps of Great Britain? Or of theUnited States, for that matter?

688 THE FREEMAN

Wouldn't you discover some expansionof these states? . • •

By confusing Russian imperialismwith Communism you distract yourreaders' attention from a real issue.No -matter how aggressive ImperialRussia could have been, it never evendreamed of conquering its Europeanneighbors, it never attempted to under­mine its political rivals by means ofsubversion, by fifth columns.... Oncewe identify the Russian people withthe Communists, we have lost the ThirdWorld War before it begins, becausethe Russians, the first victims of in­ternational Communism, would againally themselves with the Soviets in de­fending their native land.

VLADIMIR N. PETROV

New Haven. Conn.

The Bricker Amendment

Garet Garrett's article in the FREEMAN

of May 4 is a masterful presentationof facts regarding the manner in whichsneak treaties can betray our AmericanRepublic into the orbit of the one-Com­mUNist world slave State. We not onlyneed the immediate passage of theBricker anti-treason amendment, butwe need a simple Senate resolution ofwithdrawal from this political death­trap until such time as we can fortifyour constitutional way of life with suchamendments as those proposed by bothSenator Bricker and the distinguishedpast President of the American BarAssociation, Mr. Frank Holman.McAllen, Tex. MARCIA MATTHEWS

Garet Garrett's "Nullification byTreaty" should be answered briefly.The treaty power has never beenabused to abridge our constitutionalliberties. Many other delegated "pow­ers" have been so abused. If anyamendment is needed, it is in otherfiel6ls.... If we fear that two-thirdsof ~he senators might abridge our free­dom or divest us of our sovereignty byratifying a treaty, why not also fearthat a majority of Congress will dothe same?

We need no amendment. We merelyneed 'senators who are not afraid thatwe will vote away our freedoms-andsenators who will read treaties beforethey ratify them.L08 Angeles, Cal. PATRICK H. FORD

"A Substantial Voice"

Your magazine is an inspiration to me.It certainly gives a forceful and asoundly substantial voice to thoseAmerican ideals which in recent yearshave seemed almost to be vanishingaway.

ELIZABETH LYNN WALDBOTT

Wellesle'V, Mass.

The Korean Situation

I have followed your comments on· theKorean truce situation recently withentire approval. Your editorial in theissue of June first entitled "A Test ofHonor" is even more to the point-itis ma,gnificent....

I agree with your recommendationsof what might have been done andcould still be done. The leaflet-drop withall sorts of promises is the basis ofsurrender by thousands. However, asyou pointed out: The forcible return ofpolitical refugees smeared as "fascists"at the time, is one of the many criminalfacets of Yalta. Unless, public opinionrallies, something of the sort is goingto happen again. The repercussions inthe Far East can be imagined-a scorefor the Communists.

The incomprehensible single item isthe bland evasion of a strong talkingpoint in these truce negotiations: Whatabout the known murder of our menbehind the enemy lines, the assassina­tion of our soldiers in enemy hands?The Eighth Army admitted a discrep­ancy of six to eight thousand in pris­oner of war totals; we have photo­graphs of these men, tied with theirhands behind their backs and shot be­hind the ears-a typical Communistexecution method. Why are our nego­tiators silent on this touchy point?They were quick enough in 1945 to setup war criminal tribunals. Let the~set them up in 1953 or raise, the pointfor juridical consideration.

Congratulations on your courage, asthe only reputable paper, to my knowl­edge, to have touched upon the moralissues of this incredi'ble situation.

MAJ. GEN. CHARLES A.New York City WILLOUGHBY (RET.)

From Eva Le Gallienne's Sister

May I be allowed to bring to your no­tice an error made by Helen Wood­ward, the reviewer of my sister's book,With a Quiet Heart, in your issue ofMay 18? In it the reviewer stated,apropos of our late father, Richard LeGallienne: "He had been born RichardGallon."

This is not so. The family name isGallienne, a very old Channel Islandname, which goes back for many cen­turies in the Guernsey archives. Ourgreat-grandfather, a sea captain fromPeter Port, traded with England andadded the prefix "Le," in the samemanner as heads of Scottish clansadded the article "the" to their names-The MacLeod; The Mackintosh, signi­fying the head of the clan. Our grand­father never followed the tradition inEngland, but our father did. . . .

HESPER LE GALLIENNE HUTCHINSON

West Redding, Conn.

FROM THE BAT, this steam-powered airplane

got its name. It never flew, but these

early experiments eventually resulted in successful

flight. From this same animal, the bat,

which possesses a sixth sense, aviation got the

idea and basic principle of radar. Today,

thanks to this modern miracle, airplanes need no

longer depend on the pilot's vision. With radar

they can be flown safely in fog or at night

without danger of collision.

Radar equipment requires very exacting

casting. Methods that were originally perfected

Wat we learneijoTn bats!

Iladar Wave Guide Casting. InThompson's Intricast Method, mercury ispoured into precise metallic dies, then frozenat 125

0

below zero. The frozen mercury isdipped in a ceramic bath, then permitted tothaw and run out. Molds made in this waymake castings of heretofore impossible ac­curacy and in forms not previously possible.

by Thompson to make vital jet plane parts

were adapted for use in casting essential parts

for radar. Using these advanced methods,

Thompson Products turns out intricate

parts that used to be too costly to be practical.

These methods, facilities and all of Thompson's

experience are available to all industry­

transportation, communications or

even to improve a home appliance. Like the

automotive and aircraft industries, you will learn

why you can count on Thompson. Thompson

Products, Inc., General Offices, Cleveland 17.

AIRCRAFT AND INDUSTRIAL PARTS

SELDOM HAS THERE BEEN such an opportunityfor those who invest for income as existstoday through the ownership of shares of thecountry's operating utilities. These stableenterprises offer geographic diversificationand yields of 4.% to 6% for your funds.

The following factors make these securitiesan exceptionally attractive means of build­ing a long-term investment program:

(1) A favorable outlook for expansion of grossearnings-due to an increasing number ofcustomers and increasing use per customer.

(2) Corporate structures and property valuationareconservativee

Own An InterestIn the Company

That BringsElectric ServantsInto Your Home

(3) Liberal dividend yields-with conservativerelation to earnings.

As brokers and dealers we specialize inhelping investors to· select sound securitiesfor investment such as these operating utilitycompanies. We will be pleased to furnishcomplete information about current oppor­tuni ties· and invite you to write to theManager, Utilities Research Department..

Note to Operating Utility Executives:

As underwriters, our services in thedistribution of your securities, ourresearch facilities and the experiencegained over several decades, may provehelpful to you. We invite your inquiry.

CHICAGO

KIDDER, PEABODY &> CO.Established 1865

e.5'¥(embers:A(sw York cStock exchange

17 WALL STREET, NEW YORK 5, N. Y.

PHILADELPHIABOSTON

THE

reemanMONDAY, JUNE 29, 1953

The FortnightPresident Eisenhower spoke at Dartmouth with­out text or notes. This probably accounts for anunfortunate lack of balance in dealing with a sub­ject that above all called for the drawing of carefuldistinctions- if not, indeed, for the recognition ofglaring differences. As it stands, the speech mayonly add to the "hysteria about hysteria" alreadyso rampant here. It can also provide ammunitionfor Soviet propaganda- and we may be sure thatthe Kremlin and its stooges here will not miss theopportunity. "Don't join the book burners," Mr.Eisenhower advised the Dartmouth graduates.This is the same sort of reckle'Ss simile as the Com­munists and those who so foolishly parrot themhave been wallowing in-"witch hunt," "inquisi­tion," and "reign of terror"-all to describe theactivities of congressional committees in having theaudacity to ask a few people a few questions. Isthere really an important group in this country thatis literally burning books or advocating the burningof ,books? Then why give ground for that impres­sion? There is ,a world of difference between de­nouncing people for heresy, and exposing outrightdisloyalty, conspiracy, and espionage. The Pre'Sident'should be careful to say nothing that can causehis audience to lose sight of that difference.

Senator Taft never declared in his May 26 speech,as we pointed out in our last issue, that the UnitedStates should "go it alone" without allies. Butwhen 'President Eisenhower, Senator Wiley, andnearly all the self-styled internationalists continuedto talk as if he had, he made another statementon June 5 explicitly repudiating this interpreta­tion: "At no time did I use the words that theUnited States should 'go it alone' in the Far Eastor anywhere else." The N ew York Times' treatmentof this denial was extraordinary. It succeeded inreporting the new statement without getting asingle hint of the denial into its long headline bank.On the contrary, by reporting it under the mainheadline: "'Taft Won't Budge in His Korea Stand",it managed to give the unwary reader the impres­sion that the Senator still wanted to "go it alone."

President Eisenhower hardly helped matters bytalking on June 10 as if he too were rejecting Sen­atorTaft's proposals when he was, in a curiousback-door sort of way, granting their validity."We all hear," he said, "a good de'al of unhappymurmuring about the United Nations"-as if thismurmuring were something to be deplored. Hethen w~nt on to admit that "to the Communistworld" the United Nations has been simply "aconvenient sounding board for their propaganda, aweapon to be exploited in spreading disunity andconfusion." But this is precisely what the unhappymurmurers are murmuring about. He continued:"To the free world it has seemed that [the UnitedNations] should be a constructive forum for freediscussion of the world's problems." But this isprecisely Senator Taft's recommendation. "TheUnited Nations," he said explicitly, "serves a veryuseful purpose as a town meeting of the worldwhere disputes can be brought into the open andpeaceful means reached to prevent a war."

But what Senator Taft has stressed is that thedivided United Nations should be given no powersof coercion over its individual members; that ithas proved itself "a complete failure as a pre­venter of aggression"; that it is futile and danger­ous to try to use it as a military alliance for war,but that, instead, we should make alliances of thefree world outside of the U.N. to combat the ag­gressions of the Communist world. Why have Sen­ator Taft's proposals been so persistently mis­represented? Because their opponents do not knowhow to answer them on their merits? When is the"internationalist" press going to cease to shout"Isolationist!" whenever :Senator Taft speaks, andgive his proposals, instead, the seTious and urgentstudy they deserve?

One of the most important jobs of the free pressof the world during the next few months will beto keep a steady spotlight of publicity focused onthe proceedings of the so-called neutral commis­sion which is to supervise th~ North Korean andChinese prisoners who are unwilling to returnhome. Prime Minister Nehru of India has said ofthe Indian resolution, which was accepted in sub-

JUNE 29, 1953 691

stance by the Communists after being rejected lastDecember, that "it did not recognize voluntaryrepatriation of prisoners ... It did not recognizethe right of asylum for prisoners of war whichapplies to political refugees." The attitude andactions of a commission, charged with the fate ofthe prisoners, in which India holds the castingvote, should be kept under the closest scrutiny.

One marked feature of the Soviet Union since thedeath of Stalin has been the ,amazing nose-dive ofthe deceased dictator in the field of publicity.Only a few months ago no effort w,as spared inSoviet newspapers and magazines to representStalin as the greatest and wisest man who everlived. He was depicted as a supreme genius notonly in war,politics, and economics, but in as­tronomy, linguistics, philosophy, music, literature,and other subjects too numerous to mention. Onlya few months have passed since Stalin· died; andthe cult of Stalin is in visible decline, if not decay.The tribute to Stalin, the quotations· from Stalinhave become as rare now as they were frequentand inevitable in the dictator's lifetime. Tyrants,after all, are fragile and brittle creations. Thestature of an Abraham Lincoln grows with thegeneration. The time may well come in Russiawhen Stalin's memory will b~ bracketed with thatof Ivan the Terrible and recalled with horror andloathing, and some sense of national shame.

Elsewhere in this issue we publish an article byProfessor '0. Glenn Saxon explaining why it isboth necessary and urgent to denationalize' electricpower. The chief credit for creating an atmospherein which it is possible to discuss re-privatization,not merely as a remote hope but as a living politicalissue, must go to former President Herbert Hoover,who spoke out so courageously and convincingly onthe subject on April 11. Under the initiative offree men, he pointed out, America developed, thetechnology and use of electricity far beyond anyother country. "Stemming from private enterprise,we have created a per capita supply of electricalpower for our people three times that of the com­bined western European nations and eleven times

.the average of the whole fore'ign world." In addi­tion, "household electric power is sold today by ourprivate enterprise utilities at one-third of the priceof thirty years ago . . . while most other com­modities and wages have increased by 50 per centto 100 per cent. 'There is no such parallel in anyother commodity." Yet despite this amazing record,socialization of electric power has grown today toominous dimensions. Professor Saxon explains indetail the burdens and losses that this has brought.

At this season of the year, when universities andc@Ileges are discharging their thousands of grad­uates, some thinking about the design and purposeof American education is not out of place. One of

692 THE FREEMAN

the most important issues in American educationis whether state monopoly in this field is desirable.Before he left the presidency of Harvard to as­sume office as High Commissioner in Germany, Dr.James Bryant Conant declared in favor of thecomprehensive public high school system and at­tacked a dual system of schools as calculated tomaintain group cleavages. But Dr. Harold Dodds,President of Princeton, seems to have spokenwith more realism when he recently voiced a pleafor the maintenance of the independent privateschool and remarked that too many public schools"play down academic scholarship ... in favor ofuniversality at a level of intellectual aptitudesadjusted to a common denominator." For a societywhere many forces work in the direction of massuniformity, cultural pluralism seems to be thedesirable educational ideal.

Few statements in favor of the Bricker amend­ment have been more persuasive and compact thanthat of Senator Price Daniel of Texas: "'The amend­ment ... would prevent any international treaty oragreement from superseding the Constitution asthe basic law of the land . . . In the course of re­cent years, our courts have been unable to recon­cile the commitments of certain treaties with thelanguage of the Constitution. On certain occasions,the treaties and agreements have been held to besuperior in effect. Furthermore, certain executiveactions-notably the seizure of the steel industryby Presidential order-have been predicated uponthe authority of treaties as a superior authority tothe Constitution. 'The result is confusion which canbe mitigated solely Iby an affirmative declarationclearly reasserting the superiority of the Constitu­tion in such conflicts. 'This is necessary for theguidance of the courts, the executive branch, andthe legislative branch. More importantly, it is neces­sary to allay the uncertainty "and fear now felt bythe American people'."

The A.D.A. (Americans for Democratic Action)have been charged by such politically naive personsas Senator Joseph R. McCarthy with fellow-trav­eling. Until now the Daily Worker has not agreed.Few who disagree with the Communist line in themost minute particular get a Daily Worker O.K.as bona fide fellow-travelers. In its issue of May 31,however, the Worker advised the faithful that theA.D.A. has been added to its Hit Parade. Reportingon the National Convention of the A.D.A. held inWashington the previous week, it O.K.'d all eighthundred de'legates, with two excet>tions. These wereSenator Humphrey and Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. Itseems they had not toed the line. 8chlesingerand Humphrey are special cases. Schlesinger stillhopes to write spe'eches for Adlai rStevenson.Humphrey may have to run against CongressmanWalter Judd next year in Minnesota. For themDaily Worker approval would be the kiss of· death.

No More U N WarsThere is no cause for jubilation in the truce thathas be'en arranged, after almost two years of futilebickering, at Panmunjom.The best that the UnitedStates, associated, in theory, with the supposedmight and majesty of the United Nations, has beenable to obtain is a no-decision draw in a strugglewith two e'conomically backward Asiatic satellitesof the Soviet Union.

The disappointed bitterness with which the newsof the truce terms has been received in SouthKorea, the only country, beside'S the United States,which has put forth a major war effort, is naturaland understandable. Korea has been devastated andphysically wrecked by the war. 'The' truce leaves ahuge Chinese Communist invading army in occupa­tion of almost the whole of Korea north of the 38thParallel. It represents a retreat from the positiontaken by the U. N'. Assembly in 10ctober 1950, whenthat body authorized the forces of 'General Mac­Arthur to drive' to the Yalu River and demandedof its members "tllat all appropriate steps be takento insure conditions of stability throughout Korea."

The truce hardens and perhaps perpetuates anunnatural, unhistorical, and uneconomic partitionof Korea along the arbitrary line of the 38th Par­allel. The South Koreans have' another well-foundedgrievance. About 35,000 North Korean prisoners,opposed to Communism, wish to remain in SouthKorea. The United ,States proposed that these pris­oners be released as 'Soon as an armistice wassigned. But under the familiar pattern of pressurefrom ,Great Britain, India, Canada, and other U. N.members, this American proposal was discarded,and these Korean prisoners will be transferred tothe dubious custody of a five-nation commission,in which Poland, Czechoslovakia, and India con­stitute a majority.

Everyone hopes that President Eisenhower iscorrect in asserting that the principle of politicalasylum for anti.JCommunistprisoners has been up­held. But India, on the basis of its long record ofyielding to every demand of the Chinese Com­munists, is not, to put it mildly, an ideally qualifiedcustodian of ,American honor, which is deeply com­mitted to the proposition that no prisoner shall besent back against his will. And India holds thecasting vote in a commission of which the othermembers are two Communist partisans, Poland andCzechoslovakia, and two honest neutrals, Swedenand 8witzerland, which have' sent no troops toKorea.

'There is no reason to look with much optimismto the political conference which will follow thearmistice. 'The United States will be' subjected tothe 'strongest kind of pressure to consent to theadmission of Red China to the United Nations. The

nations that have done so much to sabotage theconduct of the war with a view to victory may beexpected to do everything in their power to lose thepeace. 'The two unanimous votes in the Senate con­demning the admission of Communist China shouldstrengthen the hand of the American delegation.

There are several reasons why the United Statesshould stand firm on this issue, if it is not to loseall prestige and influence in the Orient. The RedChfnese regime is a totalitarian tyranny whichboasts that it has slaughtered some two million ofits own "counter-revolutionary" subjects. It hasbeen waging war for almost three years againstthe United Nations, trying to shoot its way intothe organization. It has been actively supportingthe Communist attempt to take over Indo.JChina.To recognize Red China would be a terrific blow tothe Chinese Nationalists on Formosa. Surely atYalta there was enough of sacrificing faithfulfriends to appease implacable enemies.

Much in the past and future of the Korean sit­uation is obscure. But one le'Sson is crystal clear.The United States must never again let itself infor a U. N. war. 'The very title United Nations hasbecome for some well-meaning Americans a mys­tical fetish, blinding their eyes to the utter im­potence of the United Nations to play any positiverole in resisting aggression.

But the Korean record is brutally clear. Theposition of the United Nations was one of con­fusion, of divided counsels, of almost grotes'quehelplessness. It might recall Voltaire's gibe at theHoly Roman 'Empire, which had ceased to be eitherholy or Roman or an empire. One of the permanentmembers of the' U. N. :Security Council, the SovietUnion, was openly and boastfully supporting a waragainst the United Nations. It was not even officiallycensured for this ,attitude.

Another member of the United Nations, India, anation of some 300,000,000 inhabitants, contributednothing to the fight against aggression except anambulance corps and an infinite amount of defeatistbackseat driving, admirably calculated to strength­en Chinese Communist intransigence. If one weighson one side of the balance the small token contri­butions which a few U. N. members made in thefighting, and on the other side the immense mili­tary and political disadvantages which the UnitedStates incurred by subordinating its strategy tothe fears and whims of a hopelessly divided organ­ization, there can be little doubt that we wouldhave gained by fighting the war in Korea on ourown terms, in alliance with the iSouth Koreans, theChinese Nationalists, and others who had theirhearts in the struggle.

JUNE 29, 1953 693

Under its present Charter (which cannot beamended without Soviet consent) the United Na­tions could only stop the kind of war which couldnot conceivably start anyway. No power, no com­bination of powers, would be so foolhardy as toresort to arms in the face of the combined force ofthe United States, the Soviet Union, Great ,Britain,France, and China. Against the only kind of warthat could, under present circumstances, assumedangerous proportions-a war engendered by Mos­cow's grand design of world conquest through sub­version and piecemeal aggression-the U. N. offersno defense whatever.

The fiasco in Korea should be the last. Neveragain should Americans be asked to give their livesas part of an unequal bargain in which the Ameri­cans do the fighting and dying and the UnitedNations does the appeasing and capitulating. Letthe next war, if Communist aggression makes sucha war necessary, be fought by the United States onstraightforward grounds of national security andself-defense, with as many allies as we can persuadeto join in a common cause, but without the sillypretense and serious practical disadvantages ofposing as champions of an organization that washopelessly divided from the moment when it wasset up.

Senator Taft has given a strong constructivelead on this subject, a lead that American publicopinion will almost certainly find soundly based onthe realities of the international situation. What­ever limited value the United Nations may have asan international forum, it is the worst conceivableagency for conducting a war or negotiating a peace.The U. S. cannot be safely supplanted by theD. N.

Fifth Column AmendmentIf present procedures continue there is a fair pros­pect ,that the Fifth Amendment to the UnitedStates Constitution will be rechristened the FifthColumn Amendment. For this amendment, with itsprovision that "no person shall be compelled in anycriminal case to be a witness against himself," isbecoming the standard refuge of witnesses who areunwilling ·to tell Congressional investigating com­mitteesanything· more than their names and thetime of day, if that.

Individuals who seek shelter behind the FifthAmendment are not displaying a very high degreeof .civic or moral courage. Can one imagine JohnBrown, or William Lloyd Garrison, or WendellPhillips, subpoe'naed by a pro-slavery congression­al committee and asked to S'tate their views aboutabolition, invoking the Fifth Amendment as anexcuse for silence? 'The chances are that in such acase the commit,tee would have been willing to callit quits long before the witness had ,finished statinghis views.

694 THE FREEMAN

It is a favorite theme of commencement ad­dresses that congressional investigations (rituallyreferred to as "witch hunts") are blighting thespirit of free inquiry and free expression in Amer­ica. But one need only refer to the records of theseinvestigations to be satisfied that the members ofthe committees are willing to let the witnesses talkas much as they like. Voluminous testimony byOwen Lattimore is spread out on the records of theMcCarran subcommittee. It is the witne'sses, notthe investigators, who cultivate the spirit of re­ticence.

Indeed, a good deal of oratorical ammunitionseems to ,be fired away. at straw-man targets. Aprominent Presbyterian Church leader, following inthe footsteps of a retired diplomat, has been warn­ing us of the perils of vigorous anti~Communismas

"a form of idolatry, a substitute religion."

Now there is doubtless a lunatic fringe amonganti-Communists, as among' other groups. But is itreasonable to suggest, given the present world sit­uation, that most Americans are overly alert to thenature and extent of the Soviet Communist threat?Does it show a sense of fair perspective to assumethat McCarthy is a greater enemy of Americanfreedom than the me'n in the Kremlin?

Some Americans would find the answer to thisquestion in a simple statement of fact. InternationalCommunist aggression cost us over 135,000 Amer­ican casualties in Korea, with no assurance that theKorean aggression will be the last. Whatever mayfairly be said in criticism of McCarthy, it would bedifficult to prove that he has created or threatensto create any such havoc as this.

An eastern university president warns that "wecannot legislate loyalty." A true observation; butdoes anyone propose to "legislate" loyalty? Whatcongressional investigators have' been trying to dois to expose disloyalty, past and present, and toshed light on the scope andmeihods of Communistconspiracy in this country. The only free inquirythat is endangered by the investigations is the kindof "free inquiry" practiced by Alger Hiss when hesought out !State Department secrets for the benefitof a Soviet spy ring; or by Klaus Fuchs, Alan NunnMay, the Rosenhergs, and other atomic spies.

The same kind of people who were cheeringAlger Hiss and vilifying Whittaker Chamibers afew years ago, who are to :be found in Owen Lat­timore's corner now, try to cast a halo of nobilityand heroism about the invokers of the Fifth Amend­ment. One suspects that they will not succeed inconvincing the court of public opinion.

For there is a widespread and pretty sound in­stinctive feeling that a man who "for fear of self­incrimination" will not say whether he' has beenor is 'engaged in spying against the United State's,is distinctly expendable in the public service andbas no right to hold a position of honor and trustin the community. When a man pleads self-incrim-

ination he is either acknowledging that he has com­mitted some offense, or he is perjuring himself andtestifying falsely if there is no real danger of "self­incrimination." On either assumption he does notappear to be a very desirable citizen.

The German DilemmalChancellor Konrad Adenauer has cast West 'Ger­many's lot solidly and successfuHy with the demo­cratic Western world. But his program of integra­tion with the West is running into serious troubleprecisely 'because of the application of democraticprocedures.

The Chancellor returned from a very successfultrip to the United States. So far, this trip was theculmination of Ger:many's comeback. It symbolizedregained prestige and good will. When his prede­cessor, Dr. Bru~ning, returned from what seemedGermany's greatest success-his first visitto England-he rwasmet by the boos of the N'azimoho But Adenauer was received triumphantly byhis followers. Yet a few days later, the GermanUpper House, the Bundesrat, refused to vote forthe ratification of the contractual agreements andthe treaties providing for Germ'an participation inthe defense of western Europe.

What :had happened was that while the Chancel­lor was on his way to the United States (after theLower House, the Bundestag, had voted for ratifi­cation) ,Moscow had launched its peace offensive.

It seemed probable to ·many Germans that one ofthe next steps in that offensive would be offers onGerman re-uni'fication. Such offers are not new.They have been coming periodi'cally from Moscow,either directly or via its East IGel}man satellite gov­ernment in Berlin-Pankow. The new element wasthat this time the offers seemed to fit better intothe picture of Soviet wodd policy. Faint as suchhopes were, they were enough to make many Ger­mans think twice ibefore putting aU their eggs intothe Western basket.

'The i'mpression has been :created abroad that thefight in Bonn was ,between the Chancellor's con­servative camp and the Socialist opposition. Inreality the front cuts through all existing partylines. It does so even within the Bundesrat. Ba­varia, for instance, ruled by a Catholic-Socialistcoalition, voted for Ithe contracts, but the decisiona'gainst them was brought about by the Minister­President of Wuertemberg-Baden, who belongsto one of the coaHtion parties supporting Ade­nauer's 'government.

It is true that the opposition against the treatiescenters around the Socialist Party, but it does sofor two different reasons, one of which preC'ludesthe other: (1) the belief that Adenauer is "sellingtoo cheaply," that Germany could get better terms,more security, more sovereignty, and possibly even

inclusion in NArrO; and (2) the belief that bysiding with the West and making ,the for1mation ofa western European army possible, !Germanywould prejudice possible' negotiations with Russiaon the re-establishment of German unity. The So­cialist Party has never made up its mind Whichline of reasoning to follow.

'The decisive que,stion in Germany is no longerwhether one opposes Chancellor Adenauer's pro­gra'm :but for what reasons. By no means aU So­cialists share the point of view 'expressed by theMinister-President of Hesse in the Bundesrat­that Germany !cannot afford to ratify a,s long asthe're is any hope for Russian concessions on Ger­man unity. Unfortunately, there are .also somemembers of the government camp who do not shareAdenauer's conviction that Gel}many must sidewith the Weist.

Adenauer's position has been ,strengthened byhis successes during his American visit, but it suf­fers from the basic weakness that so far no clear­cut de'cision has been forthcoming from otherEuropean countries, especially France. There, too,many hope that a change in the Russian attitudemay make it unnecessary to accept western Ger­many as an ally. But while the hope in one case isthat RussiawiH .accept German unification, thehope in the other is that Russia will prevent therearmament of Germany, unified or not.

Meanwhile time is running out, and no Europeandefensecomimunity has been formed. That is thegain Russia has already made. It has done it notby actually launching a peace move in Germanybut by merely hinting that it may.

The only 'governments that have taken a firmstand so far are those of Washington and Bonn.They stand ready to accept any reasonable Sovietoffer based on free elections in eastern Germany,but meantime they are working for the unificationof a western iEurope able to defend itself.

Just as Bonn has to cope with its opposition athome, Washington has to 'Cope at least with ob­struction in Paris and London. There seems to bea vicious cross-alliance bet'ween the obstructionistsboth inside and outside of Germany. This aHiance,as we have already pointed out, is illogical. Onepart is fervently for German unification, the otherdreads it, and both put their hopes in Russia. AFrench attitude that pretends to be afraid of pres­ent-day western Germany but not of are-unifiedGermany on Russian ter,ms is either too· dishonestor too iHogical to be seriously considered.

The one hope for a constructive so'lution is todisentangle these contradictions. It must be madequite clear that European integration does notmake German unification impossible, whereas aneutralized GeTmany, unified or not, does make aUnited Europe impossible.

There is no reason why Russia should alwaysprofit by the confusions and contradictions in theWestern camp, instead of the other way around.

JUNE 29, 1953 695

Italy's TightropeOne of the top operators of the old Communist In­ternational was a man known as Ercoli. During theSpanish civil war, he was one of Moscow's mosttrusted agents on Spanish soil. While the 'SecondWorld War was under way, Ercoli took part inthe Comintern's postwar planning, while makingbroadcasts over the Moscow radio. He made thesebroadcasts in Italian, because his real name isPalmiroTogliatti and he is Secretary-General ofthe Italian Communist Party.

Shortly after American troops landed in southernItaly to ,begin their blood-letting campaign againstthe 'German armies, Ercoli...;Togliatti arrived inNaples in a Soviet army plane. Since then he hasemerged as one of the shreWdest, most successfulCommunist leaders. Outside the Soviet Union, heis second only to Mao Tse-tung of China amongprofessional revolutionaries.

If the Reds should ever manage to gain power inItaly, Palmiro 'Togliattiwould become Moscow'sproconsul and local dictator. This June 7, Togliatti'schances for the job increased slightly. At Italy'sparliamentary elections, which take place everyfive years, the Communist-controlled bloc managedto get 218 out of a total of 590 seats in the Chamberof Deputies. 'Togliatti called it "a victory that isgreater than all forecasts."

Togliatti's Communists increased the number oftheir seats from 131 to 143. Their puppets, theleft-wingISocialists, received 75 seats where theypreviously had held only 52. 'These left-wing Social­ists are out-and-out Kremlin darlings. Their leader,Pietro Nenni, is so much Moscow's boy that lastMarch he shared the rostrum atop Lenin's tombwith top Communist party leaders, when PremierMalenkov made his funeral oration for IStalin.

While the Communists and their stooges arepressing Italy',smoderatePremier Alcide De 'Gas­petri from the left, the neo-Fascists are advancingfrom the right. 'Their seats increased from 6 to 29.At the same time the Monarchists increased theirrepresentation from 9 to 40.

De Gasperi has governed Italy since the end ofthe war. The extreme parties managed to get 84more seats, largely because it is human nature towant a change. ,De Gasperi has governed well, butthere 'is no moderate alternative to his regime. Thatis where Italy's danger lie'S. The Italians can't justvote fora change, and expect to retain a non­tyrannical government. Whenever they turn fromthe center, they are lured by the extremists on theleft and right.

In theory, De Gasperi might make a coalitionwith the Monarchists, but he resents the fact thatthey have split 'and weakened the moderate center;he blamed the election results on their "pettinessand se'l,fish ambitions." 8till, forty seats in the

696 THE FREEMAN

Chamber are worth a good deal of post-electionforgiveness.

Talk about a coalition illustrates that De Gasperifaces five challenging and dangerous years. Italywill have to walk a political tightrope if it wishesto retain the stability and relative prosperity it hasachieved. Americans, who spent $3,000,000,000 toput Italy on its feet, don't want to see this invest­ment go up in the smoke of partisan fires.

De 'Gasperi once again face'S the gray reality ofresponsible government, while Togliatti enjoys thegolden opport~nity of being a disloyal opposition.

Calling Mr. StassenThe Senate Appropriations Committee was quitefight when it asked the Mutual Security Agency tohold off on any new foreign aid ventures. ISenatorStyles Bridges of New Hampshire, in particular,did well to question plans to push industrializationin a number of foreign countries. 'The senator saidin his letter to Mutual ISecurity Director Stassenthat "the real issue in this presentation is whetherthe M'SA falls within the objectives of foreign 'aid,which is now based on defense rather than generaleconomicassistance."

For years the idea of industrialization has beenflung about by socialist-minded economic plannershere and abroad. Whenever and wherever a govern­ment wanted to make a show doing great things, itwould start big, glossy industrialization plans.Dictators, with their personal or national megal­omania, have usually been the first to push suchplans. Usually, .they try to impose industry uponcountries that would 'be doing quite wen if theyjust improved their agriculture and husbandry.

Argentina is a typical case. President Juan Perontried to siphon enough money out of agriculturalexports to finance showy industrial plants, run bythe government and top-heavy with bureaucrats.This prideful,economically unjustified change inArgentina's way of life has led the country to thebrink of ,financial disaster. Argentina was one ofthe world's greatest creditor nations at the end ofthe war. Now it finqs itself in an economic morassof giant proportions.

The Mutual Security Agency and its successoroutfit, the projected Foreign Operations Adminis­tration, 'are heirs to attitudes that developed duringthe years of the ECA, United Nations, and StateDepartment technical aid programs-and the wholeparaphernalia of New De'al foreign planning. Itshould be realized that some countries, particularlyin the Near and Far East, have no business going'into big-time industrialization. Where there is notany coal or steel, or other important metal deposits,the building of grandiose industries is utterly un­sound; any foreign aid program that aids and abetssuch proje'ctscan do more harm than good.

The Truth about Fluoridation

By JAMES RORTYThe program urging fluoridation oj municipalwater supplies is prelnature, and the calnpaignmethods oJ its proponents are questionable.

A substantial number of eminent and highly quali­fied scientists in this country and abroad believethat we are being sold a more or less lethal goldbrick in the form of the fluoridation of municipalwater, a public health measure designed to reducethe incidence of tooth decay in young children.

A much larger number of scientists, includingthousands of highly competent and experiencedphysicians, dentists, biochemists, and water engi­neers take a somewhat less frightening vie·w. Theysay, simply, that not enough is yet known aboutthe cumulative and variable systemic effects offluorine-a highly toxic element, hitherto bestknown for its effectiveness as a rat poison-to war­rant introducing even as little as 1 to 1.5 parts permillion into the tap water upon which all must de­pend: the young, the old, the well, the sickly, theallergic, the malnourished.

Another twenty years of research, say these sci­entists, will be needed before we can be sure, eitherthat fluoridation is safe, or that it will accomplishany nett improvement of the dental-and periodontal-health of the population. Meanwhile they are be­wildered and outraged by the unscrupulous, authori­tarian campaign methods of the fluoridators.

Fluoridation is the dubious bequest to the Eisen­hower Administration of ex-Federal Security Ad­ministrator Oscar Ewing, whose former law firmhas been employed by one of the principal commer­cial beneficiaries of the program. Mr. Ewing gavethe program the green light four years ago, beforethe ten-year pilot plant studies that were to havetested the safety and effectiveness of fluoridationhad even re'ached the halfway mark. Already morethan 3,000,000 people of all ages in about 600 citiesand towns are drinking fluoridated tap water. Im­portant units of the food processing industry havebeen obliged to use deep wells, or to defluoridateexpensively the tap water used in cities that haveadopted the program.

In the April issue of the Journal of the AmericanWaterworks Association, George S. Brattan, tech­nical advisor of Anheuser-'Busch, Inc. in St. Louisurges the citizens of Missouri to go slow on fluori­dation, for reasons that apply equally to othercities. If fluoridation of municipal water suppliesbecomes general, many food processors will beobliged either to seek independent sources of wateror risk prosecution by the Food and Drug Ad­ministration for exceeding the tolerance limits of

fluorine in their products. If fluoridated water isused in yeast culturing, the fluorine content of theyeast, according to Brattan, would exceed the limitsset by at least one manufacturer of baby foods. Iffluoridated water is used in the wet-milling ef corn,the resulting concentration of fluorine in corn syrupwould exceed five parts per million.

Belatedly, the Chambers of Commerce in majorcities like Chicago are realizing that the impressiveofficial "front" of the fluoridators, which boastsendorsements by the United States Public HealthService [USPHS], the American Dental Associa­Non [A.D.A.], the American Public Health As~ocia­

tion, and other professional organizations concealsan incredible lack of the long-term research thatshould precede the adoption of so grandiose a pro­gram.

But although Chicago, Detroit, Cleve'land, St.Louis, and N'ew ,York, have all taken a look atfluoridation and decided to do without-for thepresent at least-the fluoridators have recentlybeen successful in Milwaukee and Cincinnati.

Erxperts Get the Brush-off

Perhaps the most astonishing episode in the hi.s­tory of the great fluoridation promotion is theinsolent brush-off which the professional fluorida­tors administered a year ago to the House' SelectCommittee to Investigate the Use of Chemicals inFoods and Cosmetics. In hearings lasting fromJanuary to March 1952, Chairman James J. De­laney and his se'ven-man committee heard bothsides of the fluoridation controversy. Among thewitnesses were one or more representatives of allthe organizations that have' endorsed the program:the United States Public Health Service, theAmerican Dental Association, the American Medi­cal Association, the American Public Health Asso­ciation, the' Association of State and TerritorialHealth officers, and the National Research Council.

The committee was exceptionally well qualified.It included two physicians: Dr. A. L. Miller, form'erstate he'alth officer of Nebraska, and Dr. E. H.Hedrick of West Virginia. Its counsel, ViRcentKleinfeld, is recognized as one of the ablest andmost experienced food and drug attorneys inWashington.

When all the witnesses had been heard, the com­mittee, which had ,split wide open on all its other

JUNE 29, 1953 697

reports dealing with food, fertilizers, and cos­metics, recommended unanimously that "a sufficientnumber of unanswered que'Stions concerning thesafety of the fluoridation program exists to war­rant a conservative attitude."

This "go slow" recommendation was too mild forDr. Miller, who felt that he had been taken in bythe Public Health Service when it persuaded him,the year before, to sponsor the' bill authorizing thefluoridation of the District of Columbia water sup­ply. In his "additional views" Dr. Miller wrote:

In my opinion the United States Public HealthService has been premature in urging universal useof fluorides in water. They have gone beyond thescope of their duties, or what is expected of themby Congress, and the people, in urging communitiesto adopt the universal fluoridation of water withoutknowing the results of experiments that are now inprogress..••.•

I am convinced that further experiments shouldbe carried on to ascertain what effects fluorides mayhave upon I,the child who is ill or upon the adult whohas chronic illness . . . I am convinced that manyof the groups who now endorse fluorides in waterare merely parroting each other's opinions. Theyhave done no original research work themselves ...In my opinion there is no urgency about the matter.

Normally, the Delaney Committee's "go slow"report would have been enough to halt the program,pending further research. But seemingly the fluori­dators are in such haste that they cannot afford tofollow accepted standards of political, or for thatmatter, ethical behavior.

Propaganda Mills Grind Faster

Instead, hoth the Public Health Service and theDental Association redoubled their promotionaldrive. And in the September 1952 issue of theJournal of the American Dental Association caInethe fluoridators' reply to the Delaney Committee,signed by Dr. J.Roy Doty and ,Dr. W. Philip Phair,respectively Secretary and Assistant Secretary ofthe Association's Council on Dental Health:

It is our opinion that the Congressional Committeereport suffers from a lack of adherence to the properstandards of investigative procedure as evidencedespecially by its failure to substantiate many state­ments which it accepted ·as fact. The committee alsoaccepted misgivings of' a few individuals who ap­peared as witnesses in spite of the weight of evidencefurnished by such organizations as the AmericanDental Association, the A.M.A., the USPHS, theNational Research Council, and the Association ofState and Territorial Health Officers.

The "few individuals" referred to by DoctorsDoty and Phair num.bered seven scientists whosebreadth of training and experience as toxicologists,clinicians, biochemists, nutritionists, and researchdentists qualified them to appraise all the issues ofpublic health and safety involved in the fluoridationprogram. In contrast, most of the eleven witnesseswho te'stified for fluoridation were qualified to talk

698 THE FREEMAN

about only teeth. Being neither toxicologists nordoctors of medicine they were hardly qualified toappraise th-e total physiological effects of fluorineon the human body.

Dr. RO'bert S. Harris, who urged delay and fur­ther research before fluoridation is generallyadopted, is Director of the Nutritional Biochemis­try Laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology. He listed nineteen basic questionswhich have not been answered by the proponents ofwater fluoridation. Most of them have not even beenposed by the' current pilot plant studies in New­burgh, New York, Grand Rapids, Michigan, andelsewhere, all of which still have from two to fivemore years to run. Dependable. answers, declaredDr. Harris, can be obtained only by long-termlaboratory and clinical studies; meanwhile thereis plenty of evidence in the research on fluorinetoxicosis showing that when even such minutequantities as little more than one part per millionare added to drinking water, fluorine interfereswith enzyme systems which are involved in thegrowth of bones and in the functioning of nervetissues.

Fluorine Causes Mottled Teeth

For nearly a century mottled teeth, also knownas "Texas teeth," have been recognized as one ofthe health hazards of living in the Southwest. It issignificant that the two American scientists whoin 1930 discovered that fluorine in the drinkingwater was the cause of this distressing phenomenonare both vigorously opposed to fluoridation. Theyare Margaret Cammach Smith and Howard V.Smith, biochemists at the University of Arizona.The Smiths have made the study of dental fluorosistheir life work. Their investigations in the natural­ly fluoridated areas of Arizona have shown that thelow incidence of caries in young children in theseareas increases sharply after the age of twenty­one; moreover, that the decay of fluorized teeth isexceptionally severe and difficult to repair.

Dr. Margaret Smith challenged the Public HealthService "optimum" level of 1 to 1.5 parts per mil­lion by citing evidence that the continuous use ofdomestic water supplies with a fluorine content ofone part per million causes at least mild mottlingin the teeth of 10 to 12 per cent of the inhabitantsof the community.

Other scientists in this country and in Englandhave put the threshold of mottling much lower-toas little as .5 parts per million in the water. Ac­tually, as Dr. F. N. Exner of Seattle has pointedout, it is futile to try to regulate the concentrationof fluorine in the water, since it is impossible tocontrol the intake of water or of fluorine-containingfood, and ,since the effects of three glasses of waterwith 1 ppm are quite like those of one glass con­taining 3 ppm.

One of the oldest and best known dental research

institutions in America is the Forsythe Dental In­firmary in Boston. Its clinical research director isDr. Veikko Oscar Hurme. His objections to thefluoridation program, as presented to the DelaneyCommittee, are much more than "misgivings." Dr.Hurme declared that fluoridation is neither a publichealth measure nor a preventive procedure; that itis mass medication, undertaken without anythingapproaching adequate knowledge of fluorine toxi­cosis or the widely varying tolerances of young andold in health and disease. Moreover, said Dr.Hurme, the claims for the reduction of caries inthe communities now fluoridating water-from 20to 65 per cent-vary so widely as to call into ques­tion the methods and the objectivity of the ex­aminers.

Dr. Hurme also challenged the basic assumptionon which the whole case of the fluoridators isbased: that sodium fluoride, sodium silico-fluoride,or hydrofluoric acid added to drinking water is the'precise equivalent of similar concentrations ofnaturally occurring fluorine compounds in waterand foods.

The same challenge was repeated and amplifiedby three other opponents of fluoridation who ap­peared before the Delaney Committee: Dr. E. B.Hart, Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry at theUniversity of Wisconsin; Dr. Alfred Taylor, forthe past eleven years re'search scientist at the Bio­chemical Institute of the University of Texas; Dr.Hans H. Neumann, a Viennese clinician well knownas a student of tropical dise'ases and now engagedin dental research at Columbia University.

Ruman Guinea Pigs

Epidemiological studies by the U. S. PublicHealth Service indicate no unusual incidence ofcancer, heart disease, nephritis, or other chronicdisease in the naturally fluoridated areas of theUnited States, although these findings have beenquestioned by the opponents of fluoridation.

But what about the long-term effects, especiallyon kidney-deficient adults and malnourished chil­dren, of adding sodium fluoride, sodium silico­fluoride or hydrofluoric acid to water supplies ofwidely varying chemical composition? The incredi­ble fact is that nobody knows the answer to thisque'stion.Nobody will know until the currentgrandiose experiments with millions of humanguinea pigs have lasted at least twenty years-longenough for fluorine, a cumulative poison, to registerits ultimate systemic effects!

De'spite their defiance of the Delaney Committee's"go slow" recommendation, the fluoridators have infact been obliged to slow down, because they haveencountered mounting resistance from an increas­ingly informed public, from a more and more arti­culate and alarmed group of research dentists, phy­sicians, biochemists, pharmacologists, and waterengineers, and also from lawyers .concerned with

the invasion of constitutional liberties representedby a program of mass medication. But this opposi­tion has also served to spur the fluoridators intonew furies of hurry-up salesmanship, new propa­ganda enormities, and new attempts to suppressand smear their opponents.

In N'ovember 1952, the Council on Dental Healthof the American Dental Association issued apamphlet entitled "Fluoridation Facts: Answers toCriticisms of Fluoridation." The "facts" are anamazing mixture of truth, outright falsehood, half­truth, distortion, and evasion. The "answers" arecalculated to reassure the leaders of Parent TeacherAssociations and other civic groups that have beenpersuaded to endorse fluoridation-and to outrageinformed professional critics of the program.

Recent Research

During the past twelve months new research re­ports have se'rved but to deepen the "misgivings"of these critics and to reinforce their opposition bythat of a growing number of equally well-qualifiedscientists.

,One of these scientists is Dr. Reuben Feltman,research dentist at the Passaic, New Jersey, Gen­eral Hospital. Dr. Feltman has spent the past fouryears conducting studies of children and pregnantwomen to. whom fluoride tablets have been ad­ministered in daily doses designed to provide anequivalent of the 1 to 1.5 ppm water fluoridationprogram, now in effect in some 600 American citiesand towns. Some of the pregnant women, Dr. Felt­man reports, had such bad reactions in the formof skin inflammation and vomiting that even thissmall dosage had to be discontinued. Dr. Feltmanfeels that there are' many questions still to be an­swered, and that when and if fluoridation isadopted it should be done on a study basis.

Neither the United States Public Health Servicenor the American Dental Association seems likelyto heed such counsels. Experiments by Dr. AlfredTaylor with cancer-susceptible rats showed thatrats given fluoridated water had a shorter life spanthan the controls. Experiments by Dr. A. E. Sobelindicated that the effect of fluoridation in prevent­ing tooth decay is inteTfered with by the presenceof magnesium ,in the ground water. When chal­lenged by the Public Health Service on technicalgrounds both scientists took account of the criti­cisms, repeated their experiments, got preciselythe same results-and again, the same brush-off bythe fluoridators.

In England the momentum of the fluoridationcampaign has 'been checked by the studies of Dr.Charles Dinon.He found that sodium fluoride re­acts upon bone progressively in extremely low con­centrations, while calcium fluoride-the usual formin which fluorine is found in ground water-doesnot react but is progressively absorbed. This, asDr. Dillon points out:

JUNE 29, 1953 699

• • . is a completely new statement of ,the facts whichhas not even been touched upon by those who areready to consider their work so satisfactorily com­plete that they are now prepared to fluoridate thewater supplies of the world.

In the ISpring 1953 issue of The Land, Dr.Jonathan Forman notes that it has been shown inthe experimental laboratory that the mental reac­tions in mice and rats who have had fluorides isgreatly lessened. "No such studies have been madeso far as I know," writes Dr. Forman, "of humany'"oungsters."

Can the Use of Fluorides Retard Memory?

'The fact is that precisely such studies, under­taken without bene-fit of the USPHS or the A.D.A.,are now in progress in this country, and that thepreliminary findings of these studie'S are distinctlyominous.

A few years ago the effe'cts of fluorides otherthan on tooth decay became the concern of Dr.Jacob A. ,5affir, a member of the American DentalAssociation and a Fellow of the Ame:rican Instituteof Chemists. At his own expense Dr. Saffir estab­lished an office and laboratory in a locality wherethe drinking water for miles around containedfluorides. Patients and townspeople who came tohim were observed from many angles. Soon he felt

. that one group of patients seemed to vary fromsimilar groups observed in other surroundings­the school children seemed to have more than cus­tomary difficulty in the exercise of memory.

Dr. Saffir decided to concentrate his efforts ondetermining whether he could establish a connec­tion between this difficulty and the use of fluorides.Consultations were had with school teachers andparents, and other avenues of investigation wereexplored.

As a result of these studies Dr. Saffir believesthat fluorides probably cause some mental retarda­tion in children drinking fluoridated water, but· heis not yet prepared to publish his results. Thereshould be other such studies, he feels, subsidizedby research grants that would make possible rapidprogress. Meanwhile, he writes, "In this field,where the proponents of fluoridation will often goto extremes to impose their beliefs, it may be weHto exercise care that the proof against fluoridationis overwhelming before it is presented."

This writer has found no reason thus far to be­lieve that the crusaders----'as distinguished from thecommercial beneficiaries of the program-are mo­tivated by anything except professional zeal, plusthe inertia of an ideological commitment whichthey are unwilling e'ven to examine, let alone re­treat from~ But the intolerance of the fluoridatorsand their reckless slander of their opponants-allthis is disturbing, to say the least.

In vain does Congressman Miller, one-timefluoridation advocate and now one of its most de-

700 THE FREEMAN

termined opponents, demand a clarification of theGrand Rapids health statistics, which despite allofficial discounting, seem to show an abnormal in­crease of heart and kidney disease since the initia­tionof the fluoridation program in that city.

In vain do the opponents of fluoridation pointout the ad hoc tendency of the U. S. Public HealthService reports: itern, the minimizing of the Ot­tawa, Kansas, results, which failed to show theexpected reduction of caries as a result of flu­oridation; item, the glaring errors in the reportsfrom the Marshall, Texas, pilot plant. One of theseerrors, which was hastily corre'cted in a subsequentrelease, transformed an actual increase in dentalcaries after fluoridation into a purported decrease.

In vain do physicans and he'alth officers with longmemories recall the red faces and the scarred repu­tations that have followed the collapse of similarcrusades in the past. For example, twenty yearsago it was urged that all water supplies be iodizedas a preventive of goiter.

Oscar E,wing's Water Baby

In vain, finally, do critics of the fluoridation pro­gram demand an answer to the $64 que'Stion of thisextraordinary controversy: Why all the hurry? Thefact is that there isn't or shouldn't be any hurry.Parents whose children are "being denied the bene­fits of fluoridation," as the Qurrent AmericanDental Association propaganda puts it, can givetheir children these benefits, for whatever theymay be worth, and without risk of harmful sys­temic effects, by having their children's teethpainted with fluoride by the dentist. Or if theydiscount the possibility of systemic damage, theycan have the children swallow a fluoride tablet aday, thereby accurately controlling the dosage',which is impossible when drinking water isfluoridated.

Better still, prevention-minded parents can takethe advice of dentists like Dr. Fred M. Miller ofAltoona, who estimates that 95 peT cent of toothdecay could be eliminated and the general healthimproved if parents would control their children'sdiet sensibly, eliminating sweets, pastries, softdrinks, and refined carbohydrates.

!The U. S. Public Health Service could end thefiuoridation controversy overnight by suspendingthe program pending further research and shiftingits zeal to the development of one or more of thesealternative programs. Why it doesn't do this, inview of all that still rema,ins to be known aboutfluoride'S, and the disturbing import of what is be­ginning to be known, is a mysltery that might wellattract the interest of ·Mrs. Oveta Culp Hobby, ournew Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.The Eisenhower Adm,inistration has enough trou­bles without being embarrassed by the presence onits doorstep of Oscar Ewing's potentially scan­dalous water baby.

How to Regain Purse Control

By CHRISTIAN A. HERTER

Nothing is more unanimous among Americans to­day than the wish that it were possible to cutthe federal budget enough to permit substantialtax reduction. Enough members of Congress havejoined the same chorus to make it seem probablethat there is a clear majority of both branche's infavor of reductions at least to the point of budgetbalance in the fiscal year 1953-54, with tax cuts tofollow in the future.

But budget !balance and tax reduction are veryfar indeed from realization. As time passes thereare more and more signs that the Administrationand the Congressional leaaership are confrontedwith a major dilemma-the emerging realizationthat mere reduction of the Truman budget willneither produce "balance" nor point the easy wayto tax reduction.

The sobering fact is that the fiscal policies ofthe United States in the past twenty years have'been such as to create a situation under whichCongress not only has lost control of expenditures,but lacks the necessary tools with which to regainit. Today not even meat-axe slashing of currentbudget requests would radically affect the over-alldimensions of federal spending.

Why the Problem Exists

The challenge confronting Congress now is no lessthan to devise the machinery for effectively re­asserting its ancient power to control the purseand thus the public tax 'bill. It is well to reviewsome of the major contributions to this dilemma.Most competent observers would agree that amongthem would be:

1. Two decades of inflationary deficit financingwithout provision for debt retirement.

2. The creation of a backlog of more than $80,­000,000,000 of "authorizations" to spend, for whichappropriations are in effect pledged.

3. The estaJbHshment of broad, continuing, andcostly programs which may not be abandoned over­night without greatly endangering the domesticand foreign economic and political balance.

4. A Congressional procedure with respect to fi­nancing government operations which, while deeplyrooted in tradition, currently displays unique quali­ties of confusion and frustration in dealing withthe acute problem of expenditure control.

There are, of course, ma~y other factors of great

The Governor of Massachusetts, a former memberof the House of Repre8e~tative8, exp~ains whatCongress must do to give us a re;sponsible budget.

importance, including bureaucratic resistance toeconomy. But brief considerat'ion of these alonewill merely demonstrate that the Administrationand Congress are in a far worse position than arethe governors and legislatures of the several statesin meeting the public clamor for less spending.

Most of the states have always operated withbalanced budgets because their constitutions de­mand it. What is equally important, their debt isalmost entirely lin serial, revenue, or sinking fundbonds. Term bonds of any dimensions are virtuallyunknown among the state's. Thus the states have acontrollable present and a predictable future.

Not so the federal government. Congress con­fronts an immense debt incurred not only to wagewars, both hot and cold, but to pay part of theordinary annual operating cost of government aswell. When portions of the debt become due, newbonds are issued for old. The total debt swingsconstantly upward. The destructive inflationaryeffect of such a policy, long apparent to manyecono­mists, is now becoming apparent to everybody.

The "Authorizations" Dilemma

The roots of this policy are deep-and strong,as President Eisenhower is discovering. To a little­understood degree they rest in Congress itself.They grow out of the ancient Congressional customof "authorizing" future expenditures withoutfacing up at the time to the problem of revenueto meet them.

Under some circumstances, particularly whenrevenues are large and stable in relation to gov­ernment needs, such a course may be defended.But when "authorizations" begin measurably andcontinuously to exceed revenues, the only recourseis to printing-press money in the form of bondssold to the banks. It is no small part of the dilemmaof Congress and the President that the existence ofsuch "authorizations" to an amount ,somewhere be­tween $80-100,000,000,000 forbids (or at least in­hibits) immediate and substantial tax reduction.

Of course, Congress can repeal authorizations;but the chances of wiping the slate clean to givethis Administration a fresh start are remote ifnot nonexistent. Contracts entered into must befulfilled and partially executed, whether such con­tracts are with suppliers of armaments and goods,or with the states. However, there does certainly

JUNE 29~ 1953 701

exist a large area in which both authorizations andappropriations may be reviewed. And here we cometo the crux of the matter:

Congress must approach the problem of budgetand security balance as a prelude to tax reductionalmost literally without tools and under proceduralhandicaps which hamstring even the best-inten­tioned representatives and senators. While somegestures have been made toward supplying analyti­cal staffs for the committees which must make ex­penditure recommendations, progress in this direc­tion has been slow and faltering, whereas thespending agencies lack for nothing in preparing de­fense of their demands for money. Many of themore responsible' members of Congress are deeplyconcerned that there is inadequate machinery fortheir use lin a critical appraisal of the budget. Ob­viously, the first step in regaining Congressionalcontrol of expenditures must be to enlarge andstrengthen such informational facilities.

Joint 'Congressional Committees Needed

The next step should be to break down some ofthe procedural barriers which now load the dicein favor of the spende'rs. The greatest of these isthe traditional complete separation of the Houseand Senate in every stage of the legislative process.Long ago the states learned that joint committeesof House and Senate members sitting together tostudy important legislative proposals were soundand profitable. Not so Congress. 'Thus far it hasrebelled against even the employment of a commonstaff for ,budget purposes. Each branch insists uponseparate committees dealing separately with everyproposal regardless of its national impact. The sadresult is, that not ,even the most fundamentally im­portant legislation is like'ly to be considered bythe House and Senate on the same terms within thesame informational framework. This means thatlegislation is often written by confeTence commit­tees on a trading basis rather than by concurrentaction of both Houses after competent and similarconsideration of the issues.

The obvious third step Congress should take isto find the means of seeing the federal fiscal pic­ture as a whole, rather than as a series of jig-sawpieces not always related to each other. Long agothe states recognized this necessity, and undoubt­edly many of them, including my own State' ofMassachusetts, owe their current solvency fo thiswise course.

80 vast and complicated is the federal machinerythat devising a method to pull the expenditure pat­tern into focus on the one hand, and the revenueprobabilities on the other, will not be e'asy. Buteasy or not, Congressional control of spending willnot be ,accomplished unless it is done.

Several proposals in' these directions have beenmade by earnest members of both House and Sen­ate. They have not had the consideTatibn they de-

702 TRE; FREEMAN

serve. They have been laid aside or ignored by allbut a minority of members because' inevitably oldprocedures, prerogatives, and privileges would goby the board. VVhere to make the necessary startis of course a matter for debate. A half-dozen plansworthy of consideration are currently before' theHouse and Senate. None of them appears to havesignificant support.

I t is reasonable to forecast that change will come-because it must. Meanwhile the door must not beclosed to progress toward restoration of Congres­sional control. A simple proposal by CongressmanFrederic R. Coudert, Jr. of New York seems topoint the way. His bill eRR 2) would merely requirethat except in real emergencies Congress imposeupon itself the restriction that it not appropriate inany year more money than revenue estimates showwill be available, and it would authorize the Presi­dent to hold expenditures within revenues.

This procedure is neither radical nor revolu­tionary. Its adoption would automatically resolvethe question of which come'S first, the tax cuts orexpenditure reductions. Moreover, a long clear lookby Congress at income and outgo at the same timewill' be the greatest deterrent to extravagance andthe sharpest guide to sound fiscal policy the coun­try has had in many years. Once the harsh factsare apparent, the forging of the necessary tools tocontrol them will be' undertaken.

"Free Port of the World"Mexico is a land of plans. In the course of itshistory many plans, mostly identified by the nameof the city in which they originated, have beenproclaimed as programs for the country's futurepolitical, social, and economic evolution. A smallcollection of essays by Luis Montes de Oca, Mexico'sem.inent economist, hanker,and statesman (recentlypublished in Informador Economico, Mexico City)does not claim for itself the pretentious designationof a plan. Actually, every page of it sketches theoutlines of the economic policies the country shouldadopt. The spirit that pervades these proposals isaptly illustrated by this brief paragraph:

If we really wish to make Mexico a great country,to hasten the day when our people may enjoy ahigher standard of living and to bring about lastingabundance, we should abolish all the paralyzing re­strictions now prevailing in our relations with theoutside world. P~rha.ps most European nations-op­pressed as they are by an economic and social phil­osophy which is annihilating them-could enrichMexico, in these times so adverse to them, with theiragricultural experience, their technical knowledge,and their capital in flight from insecurity anddestruction, if only they could find us ready and ableto make our nation into the free port of the world,where undreamed-of, wealth and prosperity wouldflourish in the coming quarter of a century.

LUDWIG VON MISES

A Satellite that Can Be Freed

By ALEXANDER T. JORDAN

Both in his campaign pledges and in recent state'­ments, President Eisenhower has taken a firmstand on the liberation of oppressed nations, to berealized, he has promised, as soon as the means areat hand. In the case of one satellite at least, themeans of liberation have been available for sometime. But they have not yet been used. To do sowould lift the morale of other nations within theSoviet orbit more than any other single action theUnited States could take today.

That country is Albania. To realize how anoma­lous its situation is, one has only to visualize' itsopposite: a free country situated behind the IronCurtain and surrounded by Soviet-controlled terri­tory. Berlin does not offer an analogy, since it isprotected by special agreements.

It is possible that the Eisenhower Administrationis already planning to remedy this oversight. Failureto do so within the year would seriously underminethe entire campaign of psychological warfare aimedat captive populations in Europe' and elsewhere. Ifthe United States cannot even liberate Albania,what chance is there' for Poland or Hungary?

Albania was the first of the countries freed fromNazi rule to be taken over by the Communists. Itwas, in fact,a model. The machinery was all pre­pared in advance, and there was scarcely a hitchin establishing;within a few short months after theend of the waf¥':i a Communist regime with GeneralEnver Hoxha as prime minister. In November 1945,eve'll before elections had been held, Hoxha's regimehad secured recognition by Britain, the UnitedStates, and of course the Soviet Union. ('The firsttwo broke off relations in 1948, when Albaniajoined the Cominform, and refused admission of itto the United Nations.)

The particular importance of Albania, from thepoint of view of its liheration, is its geographi­cal location. It is a small mountainous countrystretching about two hundred miles north and southalong the Adriatic Sea and about sixty mile'S inlandto meet the borders of Yugoslavia and ,Greece. Ithas a population of 1,200,000-largely pastoral andagricultural. Transportation is primitive, there ishardly any industry, and illiteracy is widespreadamong the Moslem peasants. Albania does possess,however, important mineral wealth: oil and chrome.There are no refining facilities and the small quan­tity of motor fuel required by Albania is importedfrom Rumania, while Albanian crude oil goes to

In the case of Albania the means. are available,the situation ideal for the Presiden,t to fulfillhis pledge on the liber,ation 0/ opp,ressed nations.

Russia. Oil output has been increased by the effi­cient if ruthless methods introduced by the Hoxharegime. When oil production dropped off in 1949,for e'xample, the director of the oil combine, ShukriKellezi, and the party official responsible for itssupervision, Abedin Shebu, were both promptlyexecuted. Since that time there' has been no lackof zeal among managers, and production has risensteadily. Chrome ore extraction in the Bulcizi minesis encouraged with similar methods. Miners workeight hours a day, plus a ninth hour free-formerly"for Stalin," now probably for Malenkov. They arepaid 100 leks-about two dollars-a day, while thecost of food at the works canteen amounts to abouttwenty-four dollars per month, and butter in thefree market costs $7.25 a pound. Not surprisingly,40 per cent of the population suffers from tuber­culosis.

The peasants are no better off than the worke'rs.They have to deliver their produce to the govern­ment at low prices and then buy it back at a higherrate. There is no need to elaborate on the methodsof repression, which follow the now familiar pat­tern of Communist rule. In 1950 the' governmentwas demanding from each peasant twelve kilograms

. of meat per head of sheep. The farmers must alsodeliver 1.2 kilograms of wool peT head. Those with­out livestock are assessed on their acreage-at 4.7kilograms of meat and 1.5 kilograms of wool perhectare. They have to buy these' commodities in thefree market, at exorbitant prices.

Terror by Remote Control

The Communist -terror in Albania has reachedproportions found in few of the othe'r satellitecountries. More than 30,000 have been liquidatedsince 1945. This would be paralleled by the execu­tion of nearly 4,000,000 peTsons in the UnitedState'S in the same period. Many of the victimswere, of course, Communists of earlier vintage. Noless than 12,000 members of the Communist Partyhave been purged since the country's "liberation"by the Soviets.

The Albanian equivalent of the M.V.D. is knownas the Sigurimi, and its head, Mehmet Shehu-aSoviet citizen and a graduate of the Moscow. Mili­tary Academy-has be'en for some time a rival of"Hoxha. 'The entire mechanism of terror and eco­nomic exploitation is operated from Moscow by re-

JUNE 29, 1953 703

mote control, through .sea and air communication.Albania has an army of 50,000 men-an establish­

ment corresponding to a standing army of 6,250,000in the United States if the same degree of mobili­zationwere carried out. That figure does not in­clude the secret police, which is also dispropor­tionately large. There are three divisions, stationedat 'Tirana, the capital, and at Scutari and Vlone,respectively. The troops are armed with the Rus­sian Tokarev rifle, long discarded by the Red Army.There are also two motorized brigades, eight bat­talions of frontie'r guards, and some miscellaneousheavy artillery, coast artillery, mortar, anti-tank,and communication brigades. It is signi1ficant thatthe armor of the Albanian army includes someAmerican Sherman tanks, probably of Soviet Lend­Lease origin, some German tanks, and a small num­be'r of Soviet T-34's. ISpare parts are lacking andrepair facilities are extremely linadeiquate.

Soviet B'ases in Albania

There are many Soviet officers serving at staffheadquarters, but hardly any at the' regimentallevel. 'These Soviet "experts" are paid 25,000 to35,000 leks ($500-700) per month, while Albaniansof the same rank get 5,000 leks ($100). The foodallotments for 'Soviet officer-sare correspondinglyhigher than those for Albanians.. The feelings ofthe Albanian soldiers for their Russian comrade'Scan easily be imagined; they are eloquently illus­trated by the fact that the wives of the Soviet"experts" must be provided with a police escortwhen they go shopping in Tirana.

At .Vione there is a Soviet naval and air base.I t is manned by two regiments of Russian marinesand a Soviet air force division, altogether about5,000 men, under Vice Admiral Igor Rzhevsky. Re­ports about the establishment of a major Sovietsubmarine base, however, have been disproved.There are at Vlone ten midget submarines of the"M" type, which were' transported in parts onSoviet freighters and assembled in Vlone. Theircrews are Russian. Albania has practically no navyor air force of her own. It is interesting to notethat when invasion landing exercises were held onthe Albanian coast in June 1952, the invadingforces won an easy victory. The officers command­ing the defense forces were, of course, severelyreprimanded.

Moscow has evidently decided that Albania's posi­tion is too exposed to be worth the investment ofheavy armament. Furthetrmore, the loyalty of theAlbanian army is doubtful, and there are a hundreddesertions to Yugoslavia every month. All the sup­plies and ammunition have to be transported overseas controlled by enemy navies, and in consequencethe strength of Albania either as an offensive base,or a defense bastion, is' negligible. The countrycould .therefore quite easily be cut off from Sovietpower simply by interrupting the sea traffic, since

704 THE FREEMAN

the Russians could hardly operate an air bridge ofBerlin proportions with planes flying over Yugoslavterritory.

There are only two non~Communist legations inTirana: the French and the Italian. 'The Soviet Le­gation is the actual seat of the~ government, andcabinet meetings are .often held there for the con­venience of the Ministe'r, Dmitri Chuvakhin, whoin the approved manner plays off Enver Hoxhaagainst his police chief, Mehmet Shehu, and viceversa. Both Albania's neighbors, Yugoslavia andGreece, have territorial claims against that coun­try, while ,iBritain has a judgment for $2,363,000awarded by the International Court for the lossof forty-four British sailors and damage to twodestroyers by Albanian-laid mines in the Corfuchannel in 1946. Naturally there are no Albanianassets abroad against which this judgment couldbe se'cured. In 1948 the Albanian Legation was ex­pelled from Belgrade, a:vd diplomatic relations withYugoslavia were severed.

Relations with the Vatican and with Italy havesuffered as a result of the brutal persecution ofthe Catholic Church in Allbania. Out of eightyCatholic priests in the' country in 1946, no less thanfifty-four were killed by the Communists, nineteenare imprisoned, and only a few old prelates arestill permitted to carryon their duties. MonsignorNicholas Vincent Prennushi, Archbishop of Duraz­zo, was arrested in 1947 and died after torture.The 'breaking of bones, rubbing salt into wounds,immersion of feet in scalding water, application ofhot irons, and electric shock 'are among the favoritetorture devices of the Hoxha regime.

Avoid the.Lesser Evil

In considering the liberation of Albania, a Titoistsolution offers the greatest temptation. Tito him­self might help in carrying out such a plan-afteTall, he is an old friend of Enver Hoxha. Very littleoutside pressure would be needed and diplomaticproprieties would be observed. Such an idea maywell appeal to those who want to steer a middlecourse between containment and liberation. All thedirty work would be done· by Hoxha or his succes­sor, while 'Tito would at one stroke enlarge hissphere of influence in the Balkans and appear tothe West in the role of the liberator of a sisternation.

The Albanian exiles might welcome such a solu­tion, since a :Titoist Albania would be the lesser oftwo evils. But the effect on the other enslaved na­tions-and indeed among all the genuine anti-iCom­munists throughout the world-would be disas­trous. All the moral values of a Crusade for Free­dom would be denied by such a cynical policy, whilethe people of Albani-a would continue to be deprivedof individual liberty, as are the Yugoslavs underTito.

If the United States should become, directly or

indirectly~ a party to a "liberation" confined to ashift from one Communist regime to another, theloss of confidence in American motives could begreater than if nothing was done and the presentsituation continued indefinitely. How could Americacontinue to appeal to satellite nations-and to theRussians themselves-to rise against the Commu­nists if such a deal were to be consummated1

On the other hand, a real liberation of Albaniacould have a world significance out of proportion tothe size of this country. It would be the first caseof a Communist-dominated country set free by theforces of the West. 'The economic reconstruction ofA1bania would not be a costly task, and with itsnatural wealth of oil and chrome' ore the countrycould soon become not only self-supporting, butcomparatively prosperous. Its example would givetremendous encouragement to other oppressed na­tions. In terms of psychological warfare alone theliberation of Albania would pay vast dividends andwould be a conclusive evidence of the sincerity ofthe United States in advocating a policy of liber­ation.

Naturally, there is no reason why a free, demo­cratic Albania should not enter into close coopera­tionwith Yugoslavia, on the same terms as Greeceand Turkey. But there would Ibe a vast differencebetween having in the Balkans another country,even as small as Albania, under wholly Westerninfluence and having there another dissident Com­munist dictatorship.

Effect on the Kremlin

The liberation of Albania would inevitably in­volve a clash with the Soviet Union. But it is mostunlikely that Moscow, in its present state of in­terre'gnum, would risk all-out atomic war for thesake. of a million shepherds in the hills of Albania.When Malenkov and his advisers are ready for sucha conflict, they. will start it regardless of what isdone or not done in Albania. The theory of "provo­cation" of Moscow is inspired by abysmal ignoranceof Soviet psychology and tactics. In fact, there isgood reason to think that such an initiative mighthalt Soviet war plans for a while by revising theI{remlin's estimate of the moral courage of theenemy-an estimate which is at present singularlylow.

There are several possible methods of liberatingAlbania. As far as purely military operations areconcerned, the task would not be unduly difficult.The fact that the Communist regime relies almostentirely on sea transport for its link with SovietRussia opens' obvious opportunities. A blockade ofthe Albanian coast could be extremely effective andprobably sufficient to secure the fall of the' Hoxhagovernment. There are in Yugoslavia about 10,000Albanian exiles; there are others in Italy and else'­where ; "\Vhile in America there is an Albanian Na­tional Gommittee. Once the resistance of the Com-

munist regime was weakened by blockade, a smallarmed force would probably be sufficient to seizethe country. That force could be spearheaded by alegion of anti-Communist exiles. If there were notenough Albanians, it is very likely that Poles,Czechs, Hungarians, and others would volunteer forsuch a mission. With full naval support from the'NATO fleets in the Mediterranean, such a forcecould probably capture Tirana within a few days.The important thing is that such a force and notTito's Communist army should be the decisive f.ac­tor in any plan for liberation.

The settlement of the territorial disputes be­tween Albania and Yugoslavia and Greece would bea thorny problem, as would the choice of a govern­ment for the liberated country. A free electionwould naturally be held, but in view of the un­familiarity of the population with the democraticprocess, it is clear that the quality of the new gov­ernment would depend on the liberators rather thanthe liberated. The importance of what could be donein Albania would lie in the fact that a precedentand a pattern would thus be set for other, largersatellite countries.

If the United States, in concert with its NorthAtlantic Treaty allie'S, brought freedom and pros­perity to Albania, the effect on world opinion wouldbe immense. The landing of United States Marinesat Vlone would do more for American prestige' andwin more friends for America than the thirty bil­lion dollars spent on foreign aid since the· war.

Cockcrowo come, announcer, tell me once againThat the sun rises, that the moon· will waneAnd yet still wax, soothe me against the shockIn veins less lasting than a vein of rock.

Ancestral world, face me, I face you.This is your bounden duty and mine too.Open that dumb great mouth and speak at lastThe secret which we both have held too fast.

Eyes, eyes, I see you, raindrops gleaming by,Stars in the far, unconscionable skyAnd people,people, most of them in love.What is this death that we are thinking of?

Give me the clasp that everybody wantsBut not the clutch too close that ever hauntsEach one of us and leaves us with a stareInto our ancestry and into air.

My own estate [ leave to the insane,To any fond possessor of a brain,That useless instrument, that ticking clockLess certain than the crowing of a cock.

WITTER BYNNER

JUNE 29, 1953 705

Denationalize Electric Power

By O. GLENN SAXO·NNational.ization of our public ~tilities has goneforward by leaps and. bO'Ulnds since 1933, ,brut th.epresent Administration can reverse this trend.

In the past twenty years federal power capacityhas grown from 300,000 horsepower to 15,000,000.It now represents 12 per cellt of the total powercapacity of the country. This tax-subsidized andtax-exempt federal power is being sold below pro-

The New-Fair Deal Socialization Program

Since 1933, federal river valley projects in­volving outlays of many billions of dollars of tax­payers' funds have been developed without theconsent of the states. The table below (taken fromgovernment documents and Congressional hearings)shows how the early estimates given Congressgrossly misrepresented the final costs or presentestimate of costs of these eight socialistic federalpower projects:

liberate socialization. It was in 1933 that theTennessee Valley Authority (TV:A) was created.Hydro-electric power was to be produced in hugequantities, but only as a "by-product" of a neces­sary conservation program (to give the project thesemblance of constitutionality). The governmentitself was to sell this "by-product" power at "cost"as a "national yardstick" of value. This "cost,"however, did not include recapture of the truecosts, such as real construction costs, interestcharges, taxes, etc.

So TVA started with one hydro-electric planthaving a capacity of 184,000 kilowatts. The originaloutlay was $47,000,000. Before long, steam power.plants, which have nothing to do with flood control,were added. The government was now openly inthe power business. Today TVA operates twenty­six hydro plants and eleven steam plants with acombined capacity of over 4,000,000 kilowatts. Theover-all cost to the taxpayers has been -more than$1,600,000,000.

EARLY ESTIMATE

FINAL COST OR

PRESENT EST.

$2,300,000,000102,900,00067,460,00084,860,000

302,356,000317,500,000754,500,000

2,500,000,000

$814,260,000 $6,429,576,000

$170,000,00039,000,00020,530,00031,730,000

130,000,00050,000,00063,000,000

310,000.000

TOTAL

Central Valley, Cal.Hungry Horse, Mont.Detroit Reservoir, Ore.Buggs IsI'and, Va.Garrison, N. D.Oahe, S. D.Grand Coulee, Wash.TVA

PROJECT

America's most decided advance toward collectivismto date has been the phenomenal rise, in the pasttwenty years, of socialized electric power. One ofthe oldest vote-getting devices in modern historyhas been the demagogue's promise to the people tonationalize first the public utilities, then all othernatural resource industries. In other nations suchprograms have 'commonly led to expanded nationaldebt, uncontrollable inflation, and national insol­vency. With the new Administration in Washing­ton, it may now be possible at last to halt thisdangerous trend in the United States.

In this country prior to 1933 only a negligiblepercentage of total electric power was produced bypublic authorities-chiefly state and municipalagencies. In' 1930 the federal government ownedan annual generating capacity of only 227,000 kilo­watts of electric power-less than 1 per cent of thetotal generating capacity of the nation. This fed­eral production had been developed as strictly inci­dental to federal reclamation projects. Great carewas taken to prevent unfair competition with pri­vate power enterprises.

In 1928 the first federal multiple-purpose damfor flood control and water powe'r was authorizedby a Congressional grant of a $140,000,000 loan toconstruct the Hoover (formerly Boulder) Dam onthe Colorado River. This project was the result ofa five-state compact. Before construction began,long-term contracts were negotiated assuring reve­nues from the sale of water and power sufficient torepay within fifty years the original capital andall costs of the project, including an annual in­terest charge of 4 per cent, as well as all main­tenance and operating costs. In addition, provisionwas made for full payments to the states in lieuof taxes. Since 1935, when the dam was completed,power and water rates have been held sufficiently,high to protect the federal government's full in­vestment at a fair interest rate. This has beendone without unfair charges to consumers or jeo­pardy to competing private enterprises. The pro­gram established a clear precedent and pattern bywhich federal funds could be used beneficially,where necessary, to develop any number of rivervalley projects on a sound, self-sustaining, self­liquidating, taxpaying, and non-socialistic basis.

Since 1933 the New and Fair Deals have totallyignored the tested principles of the Hoover Damproject, and engaged, instead, in a program of de-

706 THE FREEMAN

duction costs in twenty-seven states in direct com­petition with private companies that pay all taxesat local, state, and federal levels and receive no taxsubsidies from any source.

Federal generating plants, including those nowunder construction or authorized by Congress,when completed at a further cost of more than~4,OOO,OOO,OOO, will supply close to 25 per cent ofthe nation's total electric power generating capacity.'The completion of this alre'ady authorized programwill increase the number of federal plants to morethan two hundred, and will raise their generatingcapacity to 37,000,000 horsepower. This will equalthe total capacity of the nation in 1927, and bringthe total cost of all federal power projects-incapital outlays alone-to more than $10,000,000,000.

The federal government, in addition, not contentwith its own socialization program between 1933and 1939, made outright free grants and low­interest loans totaling more than $200,000,000 to'municipalities, to encourage their development ofelectric generating and distributing plants in com­petition with existing private taxpaying enter­prises. More than 14,000 miles of transmission anddistribution lines have been developed by thesefederal and local projects. The Hoover Commission1

found that "these... lines duplicate existingpower facilities." The House Committee on Appro­priations also found that "the federal . . . trans­mission lines to power markets frequently duplicateand tend to threaten existing and prospective pri­vate investments which do and could further servethe public ade'quately and as full taxpayers."

The Bonneville Power Administration (in theState of Washington) is already generating 57per cent of all power consumed in the PacificNorthwest. It has spent with Congressional authori­zation, more than $25,000,000 to build competingtransmission systems. Many private companies inthat area have already sold out parts of theirsystems to federal and municipal generating ordistributing plants, or to tax-free electric coopera­tives. To all of them the U. S. Department of the In­terior has given preference. It has refused to ne­gotiate long-term contracts to supply power toprivate companies. It has built extensive trans­mission systems to serve federal power diroctly toany public or cooperative body that pays no taxes.

Prejudice Against Free Enterprise

The extent to which prejudice against privatecapital has been carried is evidenced by the factthat the last Secretary of the Interior under theTruman Administration influenced the FederalPower Commission against granting a license to aprivate company to spend up to $200,000,000 tobuild a power dam on the Snake River in Idaho.He declared: "It is my duty to prevent private

1This committee of twelve men functioned from 1947 to 1949 as aresearch and advisory body to the P'res,ident on mattera of organ·ization.

power companies from developing sites whichmight be used for public power supply." In fact,the federal government was planning a much moreambitious project to seek Congressional authorityto spend $800,000,000 on the Snake River. Secre­tary of the Interior Douglas McKay, however, hasreversed that decision for the sake of economy.The license to the private company has bee'll granted-a major step in carrying out President Eisen­hower's pre-election pledge to halt further sociali­zation of industry.

Since 1933 the federal government has directlyadvanced in outright grants or low-interest loans,or authorized by commitments to the Rural Electri­fication Administration, more than $2,750,000,000for the financing of 120 tax-exempt cooperativegenerating stations with an annual capacity of1,142,000 kilowatts. In addition, there are seventy­five state and other local or regional public powerdistricts that are locally tax-exempt, and are sub­sidized wholly or in part by federal funds.

Loss of Tax Revenues

Tax-exemption of private profit-making coopera­tives and governmental projects was not too seriouswhen federal tax rates on corporate incomes wereonly 1 per cent (as in 1913) or even 12 to 25 percent (as in the 1920s). But when they rose to 38per cent in the New Deal prewar era, and to 52 percent at present, with a graduated "excess profits"tax which has raised the over-all rate in manycases to 82 per cent of net income, tax-exemptionof public power projects means certain destructionof all taxpaying competitors. Though cooperativesdoubtless have a proper place in rural electrifica­tion, even when and where they compete with exist­ing private taxpaying power companies, it is hardto find any justi!fication for tax-exemption of theirprofit-making operations.

Federal agencies, the Hoover Commission re­ported, have recommended many other federalpower projects to Congress, and their reports con­tain blueprints for still more. The Hoover Commis­sion stated that all these contemplated but as yetunauthorized projects, "if constructed, would in­volve an expenditure of over $35,000,000,000 andwould have an installed generating capacity almostequal to the whole of the actual capacity of thecountry in 1947." Speaking in Cleveland on April11, former President He'rbert Hoover estimatedthat "if they were all undertaken, it would bringthe total [federal capacity] to almost 90,000,000horsepower" (compared to 37,500,000 on completionof all presently authorized projects).

These contemplated projects, if constructed evenat their estimated costs, would raise the total cap­ital investment in federal power projects to morethan $45,000,000,000-equal to the total federaldebt of 1939.

In the last fiscal year private power com'panies

JUNE 29, 1953 707

paid more than $750,000,000 in taxes to the federalgovernment and almost $470,000,000 to state andlocal governments. Federal power projects paid lessthan $5,000,000 in lieu of taxes to the' state and lo­cal governments-and none to the federal govern­ment. With federal projects now producing one­eighth of our total gene'rating capacity, the prob­able tax revenues lost to the federal governmentlast year exceeded $90,000,000, and the loss to stateand local governments approximated $60,000,000, atotal of almost $1150,000,000. These figures do notinclude the losses in revenues due to tax-exemptionof state and local power projects and power co­operatives. Nor do they include interest charges oncapital investment that are not now being fullypaid by all these public projects.

Under these circumstances, it is only reasonahlethat the President and Congress act promptly onMr. Hoover's proposal thatall federal power pro­jects be denationalized wherever practicable. Wheretheir denationalization is not feasible', in view ofthe functions of flood-control, national defense, etc.,Mr. Hoover proposes tli'at they be leased on long­term contracts to private enterprises, or that theirproducts be sold to private enterprises at rateswhich, where private competition permits, will re­coup all costs properly chargea'ble' to power produc­tion, including amortization of original invest­ments, interest on capital, and all federal, state, andlocal taxes.

The electric and power companies have surpassedall other American industries in weathering thestorms of two wars, spiraling inflation, deflation,high taxation, and governmental interference. To­day there is no power shortage in any area servedprimarily by these com'panies. While living costshave almost doubled since 1939, the cost of elec­tricity has steadily declined. In 1940 the averagecost of electricity to the U. S. domestic consumerwas 3.84 cents per kilowatt. In 1952 this averagehad been reduced to 2.77 cents, a decrease of 28per cent, in spite of the fact that during this periodave'rage weekly wages to electric light and poweremployees had more than doubled, fuel costs hadnearly doubled, and federal, state, and local taxeshad increased to the point where they now takea:bout 23 cents out of every revenue dollar paid bycustomers for electricity.

'This remarkable record of service to the publichas not resulted from federal invasion of the powerbusiness. It was largely the result of intelligentplanning and increased efficiency of operation onthe part of the private power companies, alongwith steady technological improvements in gen­erating facilities and new use's for electricity de­veloped by our large privately owned manufac­turers of electric equipment.

During the last five years alone' these companieshave raised more than $7,000,000,000 in new capi­tal. Approximately 65 per cent of this was derivedfrom sale of bonds, 14 per cent from preferred

708 THE FREEMAN

stocks, and 21 per cent from common stocks. Thebonds and preferred stocks were sold largely to in­stitutional investors. The common stocks were soldprimarily to individuals, including especially thecustomers of the companies in their respectiveareas.

The new capital requirements of the privatelyowned ele'ctric power and light companies for theforeseea'ble future are estimated at $1,500,000,000to $2,000,000,000 annually.

Can Private Industry Take Over?

Private companies can, without doubt, raise overthe next few years all the capital necessary to theirown expansion, as well as the several billions neededfor purchase of that portion of the government'spower facilities that can be sold.

In the first place, it must be remembered thatadditional national savings will not ,be required. Ifproceeds received by the government from sales ofpower projects are used for retirement of govern­ment debt, there need be no net increase in thevolume of the people's savings. A substantial por­tion of the government's facilities might be leasedby, rather than sold to, private industry. If theprivate power companies were to finance 75 percent of the purchase price of the government'spresent power properties by sale of their bonds andpreferred stocks, institutional investors couldreadily absorb the billions involved, especially iftheir holding of government bonds was reducedsimultaneously.

The power companies were able to raise approxi­mately $450,000,000 from sale of common stocksduring the past year. It does not seem unreasonableto expect that individuals, investment companies,and other investors could absorb double this amounteach year-and especially with the new investorconfidence that would be generated by governmentwithdrawal from the power field. Barring variousunforeseeable contingencies, it should be possibleto have the federal government withdraw com­pletely from the power field just as rapidly asnecessary legislation and contractual negotiationswould permit. In the meantime, all plans for gov­ernment-owned,single-purpose' power plants shouldbe abandoned. Private industry will build 'theseplants if they are economically justified. All unex­pended appropriations for multi-purpose projectsshould be withheld, wherever practicable, and nonew projects started, unless provision is made fordistribution of their power by privately owned tax­paying corporations, with no preferences to co­operatives or other non-taxpaying entities.

There are five basic re'asons why the federal gov­ernment should get out of the power business. Theyare as follows:

1. To reduce its debt;2. To reduce its expenditures, including payroll;3. To provide a new source of tax revenu~stO

aid in balancing federal, state, and local budgetsand reducing tax rates;

4. To give consumers the benefit of the moreefficient and lower cost service which the recordhere and abroad clearly shows private managementinvariably provides;

5. To reverse the trend toward socialism and biggovernment in business which, if continued on thescale contemplated, will lead to socialization ofother fields and, finally, to national bankruptcy andthe Welfare State.

Our Diplomacy Strangled

"Operation Strangle"

By RO,BE,RT D'ONLE,VIN

The highly advertised U. S. Air Force plan,"Operation Strangle," was launched in Korea onAugust 18, 1951. Its general purpose was to iso­late the enemy's front lines from supply centersin the rear. But its results provide a footnote toGeneral James A. Van Fleet's recent descriptionin his Life articles of our pussyfooting diplomacy inKorea.

In the spring of 1951 General Van Fleet's vast­ly outnumbered forces had smashed two major ene­my offensives. The brilliant former commander ofour Eighth Army has pointed out: "Though wecould readily have followed up our successes anddefeated the enemy, that was not the intention inWashington; our State Department had alreadylet the Reds know that we were willing to settleon the 38th parallel."

A barrage of criticism greeted OperationStrangle. Foot-slogging ground troops were dis­turbed by the idea that the plan would divertcombat aircraft from tactical support of theiroperations to strategic rear-area targets of allegedlydubious value. Other opponents of the plan assertedthat the Air Force could not have much effect onthe primitive means of transportation used by theenemy in this stage of the campaign.

Nevertheless, Air Force spokesmen repeatedlyinsisted that the operation was paying off. In adispatch from Tokyo on December 26, 1951, Lieu­tenant General Otto Weyland, comm,anding gen­eral of the Far East Air Force, gave notice thatOperation Strangle would be continued at toppriority and not ended after ninety days as hado:riginally been intended. He characterized it asa "remarkable air campaign" that had shatteredrail transportation in .North Korea and caused thedestruction of, or damage to, 40,000 Communisttrucks, preventing the enemy from building up foran offensive.

Brigadier General Dudley Hale, vice-commanderof the Fifth Air Force in Korea at the time, was

not so optimistic. In an 'un.reported speech I heardhim make recently in Paris, he described "Oper­ation Strangle" as a misnomer. "The operation,"he said, "was supposed to be patterned after asimilar operation used in Italy in World War Twowith considerable success. The object of a strangleoperation is to cut the supply lines feeding theenemy's fighting troops, but for the operation tosucceed the enemy must be forced to use thoselines to the maximum.

"In other words, it is not simply an air oper­ation, as the public had been led to believe, butan air-ground operation which, to succeed, shouldcatch the enemy in a pincers made up of the twoparticipating arms. To defend himself against thecoordinated ground offensive the enemy is forcedto draw deep breaths on his supply lines whichare simultaneously pounded mercilessly from theair. If there is no coordinating ground offen­sive, and the front is quiet, the enemy can hus­band his supplies. The trickle that comes throughon the backs of coolies is sufficient to keep himgoing and even to build up a stockpile. No pinceraction is possible because one of the jaws of thepincers is missing."

Doomed to Failure

This was precisely the situation in OperationStrangle. What was lacking in Korea was a co­ordinateel ground offensive. General Van Fleetwrote:

"Instead of getting directives for offensive ac­tion, we found our activities more and more pro­scribed as time went on. Even in the matter ofstraightening out our lines for greater protection,or capturing hills where the Reds' were lookingdown our throats, we were limited by orders fromthe Far East Command in Japan, presumablyacting on directives from Washington. First wewere permitted to use a single division, then thenumber of troops was lowered until about all wecould take was patrol action."

Operation Strangle, by the testimony of bothgenerals, was doomed to failure from the start.Even this half-baked substitute for a full-fledgedpolicy commensurate with our military strengthand our aims for an independent, united Koreawas hamstrung by weak-kneed diplomacy.

Today at Panmunjom we are reaping the whirl­wind. Agreement has now been reached on theprisoner-of-war issue, with at least some assurancetnat the 48,500 Chinese and North Korean prisonerswho rejected Communism will not !be sent Iback todeath and torture. But North and South Kore'a areto remain divided; worse, there is no guaranteethat Chinese Communist troops will be required towithdraw from North Korea. 80 we have settlednothing; Operation Strangle is but a typical in­stance of our general, shameful failure in strategyand diplomacy.

JUNE 29. 1953 709

Russia's Privileged Class

By MARTIN EBQNThe rutopian 'Iblueprint for OJ dictatorship of Itheproletariathas be·en ,slightly' (revised. by Soviet bureaucr~ts, who ha,vedeveloped a 'bourge,ois craving for champagne andCadilla,cs.

When the new Pre!mier of the Soviet Union, GeorgiM. Malenkov, addressed the pseudo-parliamentarySupreme Soviet on March 15, he promised "to in­crease the material well...Jbeing of the workers, col­lective farme'rs, and the intelligentsia." In thesewords he identified the three classes in the farfrom "classless society" of the Soviet state.

Of the thre'e, the so~called intelligentsia is theruling class. It includes the 'whole political, eco­nomic, 'and cultural hierarchy that runs the SovietUnion. It is 'this bureaucratic top 'level that hashugged the slender privileges the Soviet state hasto offer---!better food, 'clothes, 'and housing than isgiven the other classes. Whichever clique loses outin the game of Kremlin power politics loses also itstightly held privileges.

The Soviet Union was supposed to be a "dictator­ship of the ,proletariat," a state of the "workersand peasants." What happened to this utopianblueprint was this: Once the Communist hierarchyhad entrenched itself, it quickly developed thepredatory practices common to all uncontrolledbureaucracies. Behind a pious facade, behind a lotof talk about "Communist ethics" and the "newSoviet man," this bureaucracy adds to its specialprivileges, manages to enrich itself by corruption,and to drain into its black marke'ts the food, clothes,and housing of which the 200,000,000 people in theSoviet Union are desperately short. Corruption inhigh ,places is hushed up, of course. But in thelower ranks of the 80viet bure'aucracy lack ofproper "Communist ethics" does get into publicprint.

Let us take' 'a 'closer look at the 'C'ase of one greedyragweed inspector, 'as reported in the' Soviet press.The time: early last year. !The place: the city ofStavropol. 'The villain : Chief Inspector Solovyev. Itall be'gan when Inspe'ctor ISolovyev, as a memberof the privileged bureaucracy, was given a car forhis private use. Only one in ten thousand Sovietcitizens can sport a car, and so workers at theplant quarantine station at Stavropolgatheredaround, with -admiration and envy, -as Solovyev'ssedan rolled into the courtyard. ,It 'was a momentof triumph in the inspector's life. But it did nottake long for the distinction to lose its luster.Solovyev started to yearn for greater things. "Howwould it be'," he mused, "if I 'got me a privatechauffeur1"

Inspector Solovyev, a keen mind at governmental

710 THE FREEMAN

bookkeeping, asked his chief accountant : "Whichof our budget items is the least strained1"

The' accountant caught on fast. "Yes," he said,"I understand. You need a chauffeur, but it is verydifficult to get one for a private car. We might,however, 'charge it against the ragweed controlaccount."

A chauffeur name'd Yakovenko was hired at theequivalent of t,wo hundred dollars a month. On thebooks the chauffeur was 'given the imposing title of"Technician-Fumigator." Dipping into the rag-'weed kitty, however, was Hkeeating salted pea­nuts. iSolovyev just couldn't stop. 'The car had tobe maintained, repairs made, 'gasoline paid for. Theinspector dipped again into the ragweed fund­this time for 3,500 rubles.

Other men on the Chief Inspector's staff beganto put t!heiir ,fingers in the till. The bookkeepertook 5,800 rubles; 'an inspector helped himself to800 rubles, charged against "fumigation of theorichards in Pyatigorsk." An told, more than 40,000rubles were taken 'by members of the fumigationbureaucracy and charged to the rag/weed account.

Ragweed Nepotism

Meanwhile, ragweed was flourishing all over theplace. Inspe'ctor Solovyevlmew the ans,wer to this:take a trip to Moscow and consult with top brainsin the anti-ra'gweed drive. His travel expenses, andthose of his wife, came from the ra'gweed account.This wa1s only the 'inHi'ation of ragweed nepotism.Solovyev began to put friends and re'1ati'ves on theragweed payroll; they in turn hired wives, sisters­in-Iaw,and cousins 'as "fumigators" and rag'weedofficials.

Finally, the whole scheme caught up with Solov­yev, who thereupon hired a lawyer for his defense-appropriately listed -as a "fumigator."

Judging from the Sovie't press, the Solovyevr'agweed affiair 'is not at all an isolated case. J ug­gling the books, in one way or another, appears tobe the manner in :which a large pe'rcentage ofSoviet officials add to their salaries. Most of thecases publicly reported deal with plant directorsand smaller officials. Rarely do case's of corruptionwithin the Communist Party itself leak out.

One case, however, was apparently too flagrantto be hushed up. It happened in the' Karelo...FinnishRepublic, on the borders of Finland. Fish industry

officials had ,been Iguilty of large-scale embezzle­ment. Ne'vertheless, they were so thick with localCommunist 'big,wigs that they almost succeeded inhaving the investigation squashed.

The chief :bookkeeper in one fishery office triedin vain to draw attention to the juggling of booksthat was going on. He went to several officials inthe local party hierarchy. He was fired.

Finally the whole fishy business came to Mos­cow's attention. As a result, the Minister and theDeputy Chairman of the Republic's Council ofMinisters were kicked out of the Communist Partyand dismissed from their ministerial posts. Otherparty bosses 'received "severe reprimands." When,a few months later, Moscow took a second look, thechief of the Karelo-Finnish Communist Party wasfired, too. 'Thus, the public got a rare glimpse ofcorruption within the Communist bureaucracy.

How Widespread Is Corruption?

How widespread is this corruption among Sovietoffici'als? In Lavrenti Beria's home state, the Geor­gian Republic, official statistics give a clue to theover-all ,picture. In 1948 the Georgian CommunistParty expelled three thousand of its members; 12per cent of the cases involved "embezzlement andother criminal offenses." A similar indication comesfrom one of the smallest Soviet regions, the Mol­davian Republic. There, in 1949, twelve hundredcases of embezzlement were reported from a singlebranch of the bureaucracy.

The facts of Soviet life are particularly condu­cive to illegal dealings. Bureaucratic inefficiency,lack of public supervision over 'government func­tions, and lack of consumer goods encourage shadypractices. The 'bleakness of daily life creates enor­mous pressure toward corruption in order to obtainthe bare essentia'ls of human existence. In Russiathe housing shortage overshadows everything else.Small wonder, therefore, that Soviet bureaucratsuse their official prerogatives to get the jump onthe average citizen who has no high-level pull. Then~w industrial area ibeyond the Ural Mountains ispar~';cularly short; much of Russia's coal is nowbeing mined there. Like every other outfit, theKorkino Coal Mining Trust was handed a buildings'chedule. During the first eight months of 1951,however, the Korkino management reported that ithad 'been 'able to fulfill only 34 per cent of itshousing plan. How did that happen?

According to Pravda, the Korkino iboys had takenmaterials and manpower from the workers' hous­ing program 'and used it to build themselves a cozylittle subu~ban community. 'This is the~ way theMoscow paper described it:

Many three-ton trucks loaded with Trust-ownedtimber, bricks, and cement were coming to the siteselected by Ivan Poluektovich. A Trust architectwith rolls of blueprint paper under his arm becamea frequent visitor in Poluektovich's private office.Carpenters, bricklayers,and plasterers, diverted

from the Trust construction sites, made their ap­pearance on the high-speed construction job forI van Poluektovich. Outlines of a magnificent two­story building be,came visible beyond an impressivefence. His wife, a strong-minded woman, :had provedmost able as supervisor of the construction job,whereby she managed to get for herself a two-storyhouse, a two-story shed, a dog kennel in modernstyle, and a fancy flower bed. She was displeasedwith only one thing~that her house was built on alonely spot, which meant that there were no neigh­bors handy with whom she could gossip or whocould come to visit her.

So Ivan Poluektovich 'went further in order toplease his energetic and demanding wife:

Stacks of bricks and lumber were ordered toneighboring sites, and other houses and cottageswere thrown up with lightning speed. Thus the newNovaya Rakitnaya Street came into being in thecenter of the mining town of Korkino. At the partyconference someone asked: "Whose street and whosehouses are these?" The party secretary simply re­plied: "The managers of the Trust have built aseparate street for themselves." The Trust's workerswere employed in the construction of the houses.and the best building materials were used!

One of the latest stories coming out of Moscowprovides a curious sidelight on the manners andmore'S of the Soviet ruling class. It is the story ofthe missing champagne. It seems that quite a largequantity of alcoholic beverages was being writtenoff as lost or wasted, but the manner of loss orwastage was not known. The Moscow paper Trudwrote that "thousands of bottles of champagne dis­appear in a mysterious fashion from the champagnefactories." Specifically mentioned were the cham­pagne combines in the Don and Bessarabian re­gions; and so the Soviet Ministry of Food set up"norms," fixing how much might legally be "lost."

Wine and Champagne Racket

Trud didn't think the Ministry's "norm" orderwas going to make much difference. Apparently,investigations into the disappearance of wine ,andchampagne had ibeen made each year, but nochange had taken place. As the 'paper put it: "Upto the pre'sent time, the norms for loss and wast­age have been such as to create favorable condi­tions for those who love easy profit."

It would appe'ar rth'at the Soviet liquor bureau­cracy works a neat wine and champagne racket.Officials claim maximum wastage permitted by in­dustry rules, regardless of whether any 'wine orchampagne has actually been lost. The top lossespermissihle are automaticaHy entered into thebooks of the champagne combines, and the differ­ence iseither sold or guzzled. Trud reports that,out of every hundred Ibottles of champagne, twenty­six officiaHydisappear; out of eveTy hundred har­rels of wine,sixteen are used to moisten the throatsor line the pockets of the liquor bureaucracy."What an overflowing sea for lovers of the bubblyliquid!" adds Trud, with ill-concealed thirst.

JYNE 29, 1953 711

~ --..11

Romantic StatesmanshipBy MAX EASTMAN I

Sir Winston Churchill first won distinction amonghis fellows as the stupidest boy in school. For hisentrance examination in Latin he handed in asingle sheet of paper containing a figure 1 inbrackets, two smudges, and a blot. He was admittedon the assumption that the son of Lord RandolphChurchill, a brilliant if erratic orator-politician,could not be completely devoid of intelligence-itmust bea case of "originality." But Winston didnothing to justify this assumption. He "passed intoHarrow the lowest boy in the lowest form, and henever moved out of the Lower School the wholefive years he was there."

I learn these encouraging facts-encouraging toother boys with an allergy against education-fromWinston Churchill: The Era and the Man, by Vir­ginia C9wles (378 pp., Harper & Brothers, $5.00).A blurb on the jacket quotes the London Times ascalling this book "the most useful portrait of Mr.Churchill yet made'." "Useful" seems a strange ad­jective for so fascinating a book, a political historyof our times so concisely and clearly conceived asto make almost a metallic setting for the many­faceted gem of individual genius she has adroitlyplaced in it. It take'S a wealth of knowledge and anuncommon agility of judgment to make a manshine out of an era like that.

However, I did find the book useful also. It helpedto<'solve a problem that has troubled my mind theselast ten years: the problem, namely, how a man ofChurchill's dry ironical intelligence, prolonged ex­perience, and true sense of responsibility for thedefense of "civilization and freedom," could permithimself to say such recklessly blind and foolishthings as he has said at critical moments aboutSoviet Communism and about Stalin. Some of hisstatements have been foolish enough to suggestthat he was as ignorant as Roosevelt of the thingsa world statesman needed to know. But that wouldhardly be possible-and he wasn't. He knew allabout Russian Communism, and in its practicalaspect knew it right down to the ground. You couldhardly find in the anti~Communist press today abetter explanation of what we are up against thanwas written by Winston Churchill around 1930,republished in his Great Contemporaries in 1937:

Communism is not only a creed. It is a plan of cam­paign. A Communist is not only the holder of certainopinions; he is the pledged adept of a well-thought­out means of enforcing them. The anatomy of dis-

712 THE FREEMAN

content and revolution has been studied in everyphase and aspect, and a veritable drill book preparedin a scientific spirit for subverting all existing in­stitutions. The method of enforcement is as mucha part of the Communist faith as the doctrine itself.At first the time-honored principles of Liberalismand Democracy are invoked to shelter the infantorganism. Free speech, the right of public meeting,every form of lawful political agitation and con­stitutional right are paraded and asserted. Allianceis sought with every popular movement toward theleft.

The creation of a mild liberal or socialist regimein some period of convulsion is the first milestone.But no sooner is this created than it is to be over­thrown. Woes and scarcity resulting from confusionmust be exploited, collisions, if possible attendedwith bloodshed, are to be arranged between theagents of the New Government and the workingpeople. Martyrs are to be manufactured. An apolo­getic attitude in the rulers should be turned to profit.Pacific propaganda lTIay be made the mask ofhatreds never before manifested among men. Nofaith need be, indeed may be, kept with non-Com­munists. Every act of good will, of tolerance, of con­ciliation, of mercy, of nlagnanimity on the part ofgovernments or statesmen is to be utilized for theirruin. Then when the time is ripe and the momentopportune, every form of lethal violence from mobrevolt to private assassination must be used withoutstint or compunction. The citadel will be stormedunder the banners of Liberty and Democracy, anrlonce the apparatus. of power is in the hands of theBrotherhood, all opposition, all contrary opinions,must be extinguished by death.

How shall we reconcile this penetrating wisdom,this warning to the free world against every mis­take its leaders have made in the last twelve years,with the part Churchill played, and is still playing,in making those mistakes? How shall we re·concileit with his saying to the House of Commons inNovember 1944, when Stalin was already pre­paring to use "every act of good will, of tolerance,of conciliation,of magnanimity" on the part of thedemocratic statesmen for their ruin:

I believe with deep conviction that the warriorstatesman at the head of Russia will lead the Rus­sian peoples, all the people of Russia . . . into thesunlight of a broader and happier age for all, andwith him in this task will march the British Com­monwealth of Nations and the mighty U. S. A.

Whence came this deep "belief"? Merely fromStalin's adroit pursuit of that policy of deceptionwhich Churchill himself had so clearly seen to bea part of the very definition of Communism? Andwhat could have led him to say-he who had seen

so many citadels "stormed under the banner of Lib­erty and Democracy" and then Hall opposition, allcontrary opinion extinguished by death"-whatcould have led him to utter these words : "We arenot sure [the French Committee of National Lib­eration] represents the French nation in the sameway as the governments of Britain, the UnitedStates and Soviet Russia represent the whole bodyof their people" [italics added].

Miss Cowles does not allude to these monumentalfollies, nor to the earlier wisdoms which wereeclipsed by them. But she does explain in her bold­ly spoken book how such a thing could happen. Shesays of her hero:

Endowed with a highly emotional nature, heusually acts on impulse and intuition rather thanon calculation or even logic. He is incapable of as­sessing a situation dispassionately, but once he hastaken a stand he has never been at a loss to findarguments to support it. . . . This apparent contra­diction has always perplaxed his contemporaries, whoregard him as the most incalculable figure in publiclife.

Yet there is one constant note in his characterwhich is the very essence of his nature and hisgenius, as well. That is his Romanticism.

This trait explains, of course', his seeming stupidi­ty in schQol. He would not study anything, or payany attention to it, until or unless it aroused hisemotions. He never did learn any Latin, or anyGreek either, but because his father was an oratorand he adored his fa'ther intemperately, he studiedEnglish words and the structure of English sen­tences with rapture. He was passionately fond ofdeclaiming, and astonished the headmaster by re­citing twelve hundred lines of Macaulay's Lays ofAncient Rome without an error. And because of hisother great ancestor, the Duke of Marlborough, hestudied military affairs also. He studied them allhis life long, being in his heart's dreams a soldierrather than a statesman. It was the combination ofthese two passions and the'Se two kinds of knowl­edge tha't enabled him to play the truly heroic parthe did in the Second World War. As Miss Cowlessays: "'Marlborough was a commander who as­sumed the role of statesman, while Churchill was astatesman who assumed the role of commander."As to the commander-the inspiring leader also­the world will never have a doubt. But what shallwe say of the statesman?

Miss Cowles corrects the opinion of Chester Wil­mot in his powerful book, The Struggle for Europe,tha't, "during 1943 ... Churchill became increasing­ly concerned ahout the necessity of restrainingStalin's ambitions," and "sought to devise a planof campaign that would ... ensure that victory didnot Ie'ave the democratic cause poHtiGally weaker inany sphere." "There was no foundation for thi5statement," she says. "The truth is that it was not

until 1944, when the great invasion was only a mat­ter of a few months, that Churchill seriously con­cerned himse'lf with the design of the postwarworld."

On another page, she says of Stalin: "From thevery beginning he kept his political objectives wellin view. Seven months af,ter his country was in­vaded he formally asked Bri,tain and the UnitedStates to recognize ... the great territorial gainshe had seized, as Germany's ally. . . . It was re­markable that he could remain calculating enoughto make these reques'ts at a time when his armieswere being hurled back, and the very e'xis,tence ofhis country was at stake."

Miss Cowles does not juxtapose these two re­marks, or seem aware of the' crucial significanceof their contrast. If Romanticism was "the essenceof Churchill's na'ture and genius," cold rational cal­culation was the essence of Stalin's. And that, pre­cisely, is what lost us the' peace-helped out, as itwas, by Roosevelt's more fatuous romanticism.

Thus with all my admiration for her magnificentlyexecuted portrait of the man, I am compelled todissent from Miss Cowles' conclusion that WinstonChurchill will be remembered as a great worldstatesman. Statesmen are judged usually by theirachievements, or at least by the continuity andtenacity of their efforts. Churchill went blindlyalong with our own government, whose attitude'toward Russia Miss Cowles correctly, if restrained­ly, describes as "appallingly ingenuous," on the"great adventure" of giving half the world toCommunism in process of rescuing a sixteenth ofit from Nazism. He went along, at least, up to thepoint of handing over Berlin and Prague to theRed Army. That crowning insanity he did, indeed,valiantly if vainly resist. But it was too little andtoo late.

Before the war Churchill described Stalin as "in­fe'rior in wit if not in crime." After nothing hadintervened but a military alliance forced on thecriminal by Hi,tler, he said: "Personally I cannotfeel anything but the most lively admiration forthis truly great man, the father of his country....""I assure the House that I have a solid faith inthe wisdom and good faith of this outstandingman." "I reached the Kremlin and met for the firsttime the great revolutionary chief and profoundRussian statesman...." If Stalin was a profoundstatesman, then Churchill was certainly not. Forin this mood of exalted admiration for a schemingand blood-dripping tyrant, he was sucked in andbamboozled as no British prime minister had everbeen before him. Far from being remembered asa gre'at world statesman, I think Churchill will berememibered as an abandoned romantic who broughtto an end the great classic tradition of Britishdiplomacy.

JUNE 29, 1953 713

Security By Air PowerWings For Peace,' by Bonner Fellers, Brigadier

General USA, Ret. 248 pp. Chicago: HenryRegnery Company. $3.50

Drawing upon his vast experience, Brigadier Gen­eral Bonner Fellers has written a provocative bookon the threat to the survival of the American peo­ple and the free world, if we should engage in awar with Russia. It is a passionate appeal for imme­diate review of our present military and foreignpolicies. He is alarmed at our danger, and dismayedby the stere'otyped, outdated conception of warfare.He would make an about-face and exploit the enor­mous potentialities of air power. The Air Forceshould be put into first place, relegating the Armyand the Navy to supporting roles, and it should beoverwhelmingly strong. Such a concept would guar­antee the security of America; it would offergreater aid and security to our allies; it is in factthe only means we have of defeating Russia; andit would provide adequate defense of this countrywithout bankruptcy.

Since General Fellers is not an air man, hisarguments carry particular weight. The author isa professional officer of high military attainmentswho has thought this problem through, and he sup­plies startling statistics to prove his thesis. Wecannot defeat Russia with ground armies; neitherwe nor our allies have the necessary manpower, andwe do not wish to have our youth needlessly slaugh­tered. It is, therefore': senseless to waste money,time, and effort in supporting NAITO. The lattermerely adds to our insecurity, because its costsreduce the possibility of having a larger air force.It is such a drain on the resources of all nationsthat our allies are dragging their feet and not doingthejr full share. NA'TO is a ground army conceptionand in that kind of war against Russia and hersatellites the odds are against the free world.

Many officers, both American and otherwise, feelas does the author. Last year in Europe I heardair officers state that our Air Force would disap­pear from the skies after twenty-four hours of war,while everyone' agreed that the ground forces wouldmelt like snow on top of a stove.

'The author discusses present military realities,treating in turn the ominous threat of the Red AirForce; the futility of the policy of containment(propounded by a civilian) which violates a funda­mental principle of war that dispersion of forces isto be avoided at all costs; and the stubborn militarytradition which causes the Pentagon planners tocling to a type of warfare practiced in both WorldWars under completely different conditions. By con­trast, he shows persuasively the' new military capa­bilities which the airplane offers; our genius forproducing aircraft in quantity and quality, theunique role of the airplane as the only militaryweapon which would be able to penetrate the heart

714 THE FREEMAN

of Russia and thus destroy its war industry.Wings For Peace is like a clear beacon of thought

in the rather murky and confused thinking thatappears to dominate the universal military world.It carries a message of vital importance to theAmerican people. ROBERT C. RICHARDSON

The Industrial AgeFord at Fifty: An American Story. 108 pp. New

York: Simon and Schuster. $2.95

"The only history that is worth a tinker's damn isthe history we make today," Henry Ford once said.This was a large statement, but Ford's pronounce­ments were not notable for their diffidence. A manwho out of nothing can build an astronomic indus­trial empire, set up a near-billion-dollar foundationon the side, and revolutionize the living habits of anation is not the sort of man who hesitates to speakhis piece.

Ford at Fifty speaks the piece of the' Ford MotorCompany and of Henry Ford rather eloquently."Two flies can manufacture 48,876,552,154 newflies in six months, but they haven't got anythingon two Ford factories," wrote a humorist in 1913.By that time Henry Ford was well on the way torealizing his dream of a car that all Americanscould buy. It had not been without difficulties andconsiderable opposition. When he started tinkeringin the woodshed of his house, an automobile wasconsidered the work of the devil. Proposals wereseriously entertained that anyone driving at nightshould stop every mile and send up warning rockets.Farmers, now so completely motorized that it ishard to remember the era of the horse and buggy,in those days thought differently. "If a horse isunwilling to pass an automobile," recommended theFarmers' Anti-Automobile Society of Pennsylvania,"the driver should take the machine apart as rap­idly as possible and conceal the parts in thebushes."

Ford brushed all such tiresome nonsense imperi­ously aside, survived a couple of false starts, andin the end made his name a household word. Thougha fair number of foreigners in the twenties mighthave had difficulty naming the President of theUnited States, they knew who Ford was. When Iwas traveling before the war in Morocco my Arabdriver, who spoke some French, always referred toour car as "un ford," and it was useless for meto explain that this particular automobile was nota Ford. It went on wheels, blew out puffs of smokefrom the rear end, and came from America. There­fore it was "un ford."

IThe present book has its hub in the town ofSacramento in California----where the inhabitantsseem to require roughly one car to every one-and-a­half pe'rsons-but it is actually a commentary onthe changes brought about in our social history

by the mass production of autonlobiles. It is full ofinteresting and often surprising facts, figures, andpeople. A number of famous editors, writers, andphotographers collaborated to bring it out, ana-un­like ce'rtain other all-star casts they have produceda winner.

Ford at Fifty might be termed a tribute to freeenterprise. Only in a truly free economy, and per­haps only in America, could such things have hap­pened. Though the book is ostensibly concernedwith the fifty years of the Ford Motor Company,the tall lean figure of Henry Ford the man inevi­tably stride's through it. One of his remarks struckme as having in these times an almost nostalgicsimplicity. He made it when iGeneral Hugh Johnsonwas sent up from Washington to try and talk Fordinto the NRA. Henry Ford listened silently to acouple of hours' dissertation on "economics." Thenhe stood up. "All I know," he said, "is that youpeople are making it awfully hard for a young manwho is trying to get ahead in business these days."

JOHN VERNON TABERNER

Quiet Mysticism

The Explicit Flower, by Louise Townsend Nicholl.49 pp. New York: E. P. Dutton and Co. $2.75

Louise Townsend 'Nicholl writes poetry so .re­strained as to seem heard from a great distance.The title of her book comes from a ·poem called"Organist Practicing," and is characteristic of hercompetence' and point of view:

Organ, over and over go,Until the explicit flower blow,The flower that the stillness makes,Music the shape that silence takesWhen saturate.

Hers is a poetry of quietness and of the spirit,where the unseen as well as the unheard givemeaning to the objects contemplated. It is a diffi­cult kind of poetry to write and, as in the titlepoem, most of the verses succeed only moderatelywell in conveying the sense of regions and formsthat are surely vivid enough to the writer. In"Empathy at Evening" she writes:

At evening everything-a bush, a chair­Becomes aware;... the great world turns luminous and thinAnd sudden fragrance' rises from the flower.

The fragrance of the flower is asserted, but it isnot in the poem. And yet the poem as a whole doessucceed in suggesting the delicate links betweenhuman beings and the rest of the animate andinanimate world with which they surround them­selves and which they share in.

We pass from room to roomAnd what's not woodPartakes the purely human viewOf what is good:

The night takes over and the imagQry continues:

. . . the great world again is massedBetween us and the mystery.Even the brooding house will hardly keepIts vigil now, and beauty must abideOnly within the mind, where soon will slideThe paneled silk integument of sleep.

It is on the whole mystical poetry of a somewhatprosaic kind: "brooding house," "beauty musta:bide"-these are familiar tokens for such voyag­ings into the ultimate mysteries.

EUGENE DAVIDSON

Cardboard HeroThe Eagle and the Rock, by Frances Winwar. 371

pp. New York: Harper and Bros. $3.95

With the facile fluency which has endeared her tothe readers of her earlier historical nove1s, MissWinwar gives us the grand romance of Napoleon'slife from his grave-the story starts at St. Helena-to his cradle at Corsica, as witne'Ssed and told byVictor de Laurestan. A fictitious childhood friendof Napoleon and his confidant to his death, Victorhas the happy ubiquity of a Lanny Budd. He is atNapoleon's e1bow on the battlefield and in the bed­room, when he' is crowned by the Pope and seducesMaria Walewska,when he has his last meetingwith Josephine and his first with Marie-Louise,when he makes his futile attempt at suicide, whenhe is defeated at Waterloo.

More power to Victor! The novelist needs hislike. However, he is rather a displaced character inthis novel. As things are, the extreme loneliness ofNapoleon's exile is an intrinsic part of his tragedy.His companions there were latecomers to his des­tiny; none of them knew the youth from Corsica orthe victor of Italy or even the consul. The Rock ofSt. Helena wouldn't have been quite so rocky for theEagle had there really been a Victor from theglorious past around-one who knew how every-'thing had come about because he was in on it rightfrom the start.

However, the real trouble with Victor is that henever sees beneath the surface. Presented as ascholar, he is distressingly short on thought andlacking in insight. Also his tale is reduced to acartoon of the more flamboyant Napoleonic epi­sodes; his Napoleon is a mere cardboard hero, asflat and static as they come.

For the last one hundred and fifty years his­torians and novelists ha,ve tried to understand andinterpret Napoleon's puzzling genius and the mean­ing of his rise and fall. De Maistre thought that"he came directly from heaven like lightning."Chateaubriand called him the "Michelangelo ofpolitics and war." To Leon Bloy his story was "theface of God in tenebrosity." Unfortunately MissWinwar's novel at no point conveys such wonder

JUNE 29, 1953 715

and grandeur. The prodigious rapidity with whichN'apoleon played the entire keyboard of humanthought, the incredible ascendancy he gained overmen's spirits, the formidable energy with which hemade the task of governing the main function ofhis life, completely elude her. So do the great linesof his tremendous career. ,There is nothing in thisnovel to indicate the mysterious change that tookplace in him after 1807; nothing to demonstratehow, in that fusion of light and darkness in him,darkness finally prevailed. There is no hint of thatdemonic force that made him undo everything hehad done.

Still, even when brought down to the level of apageant, the heroic legend of the penniless boyfrom Corsica who conquered Europe, made hisbrothers and sisters kings and queens, and endedup on a small island in the Atlantic appeals to theimagination. And it's soothing to find the classicalphrases of "The-Old-Guard-Dies, It-Does~Not...Sur­render" variety just where they belong.

R. G. WALDECK

Time StudyEconomic Change: Selected Essays in Business

Cycles, NaNonal Income" and Economic Growth,by Simon Kuznets. 333 pp. New York: W. W.Norton & Co. $4.50

It is a pleasant and heartening experience to read,or reread, these highly intelligent and clearly writ­ten papers; their publication in book form is aservice to general enlighitenlnent in an area whereit is badly ne'eded. Those who have heard of Pro­fessor Kuznets only as a statisti'cian may be reas­sured; algebraic exposition is limited to some twopages in an appendix to one of the papers" andwhile some use is made of illustrative twbles" theargument" as well as the conclusions, is clear with­out them.

The note of propaganda or ideology is also largelyabsent, though the first two papers to some extent"advocate" the <;luantitatjve method or approa'ch ineconomics, as opposed to old-fashioned economictheory. Cooperation, not competition or conflict, iscertainly the proper relation between these· modesof arttack on economi'c problems. However, the at­tentive reader will find the lim,itations of the oneand the merits of the other clearly stated. The re­viewer would take exception to the argument thatthe use of equilibrium-analysis force,s one to as­sume "rigidity" in economic motives-any' morethan is involved in making any statement what­ever, and especially any quantitative s'tatement. Buta few 'pages later the author states quite generouslythe capaci,ty of abstract Q,ualita'tive analysis to an­8w,er those quesitions of interpretation and policyfor which any reasonwble claim can be made.Further, he admits that ",there is no parallel in

7:16 THE FREEMAN

studies produced at present (1930) by use ofquantitative methods." The "at present" is note­worthy, as the author repeatedly stresses the needfor more knowledge, further research. This is welland good, but it is also important not to expect \toomuch from science. Human beings are addicted tochanging their minds unpredictably and disconcert­ingly, in the mass as well as individually, whereasscience has been well defined as the search for in­Nariants.

Son1e of the papers in the present book are nowconsiderably dated" and there is some overlappingof content, but no one will condemn their publica­tion substant,ially as originally written. One' ofthem is partilcularly interesting to this reviewer;it is the longest" and was hitherto "buried" in Pro­ceedings of International Statistical Conferencespublished in Calcutta in 1951. The title, "NationalIncome and Industrial Structure," i,s teehni'callydescriptive, but the paper is in f.act a careful e'X­amination of the import of statistical differencesin per capita national income or product, at the ex­tremes of the scale'. It is some consolation to findthat the ratio of a dozen or more to one (comparingChina or India with tHe United States) can be re­duced by half or more by taking account of variousintangibles. However, living at a fiftfu of the aver­age American income is s'vill no't pleasant to con...template, remembering that the vast majority ofthe poputation in all countries actually consumefar less than their numerical fraction of the na­tional product. The papers dealing with businesscycle theory and economic growth are but littlemore technical in content and appeal.

FRANK H. KNIGHT

The Ancient SouthThe Cotton KingdOt"'1l: A Traveller's Observations

on Cotton and Slavery in the American SlaveStates, by Frederick Law Olmsted. Edited, withan introduction, :by Arthur M. Schlesinger. 642pp. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. $6.75

It is a long, long trip back from the South of 1953to the South of 1853. 'The intervening century meltsaway quickly in the company of observant andconscientious Frederick Law Olmsted, Conne'cticutYankee landscape architect turned reporter. Onceagain, as in 1861, his book The Cotton Kingdomguides the inquiring stranger through the' Southernstates. For reissuing this excellent contemporaryaccount of the Old South as it was on the eve ofthe War for Southern Independence, the publisher,Alfred A. Knopf, and .the editor of the newedition, Arthur :M. Schlesinger, deserve applause.

The' South today is an area of ample electricalpower, hydrogen and atom-bomb installatilons, andaccelerating industrial growth. N·ew plant construc­tion since and during World War 'Two has changed

its rural countenance. Defense contracts and mili­tary training camps since 1941 have made regionalcash registers jingle.

Full parity with the rest of the nation has notyet been achieved. But progress has been steady inrecent years. Racial tensions, for example, haveeased considerably in response to time, local effortsby Southern leaders, and Supreme Court decisions.This process /has been hastened by mid-centurypreoccupation with ideas of abstract democracyborn of the 'world ideological conflict.

Gunnar Myrdal's study of the Southern Negro,An American Dilernma, only a decade old, alreadyneeds updating. Howard 'Odum's mighty statisticaleffort, Southern Regions, rooted in the 1930 census,must be termed past history. With far less assur­ance than in the depressed 1930s can the South becalled the nation's "number one" economic problem.

A present-day meaning creeps into the famouswords of Southern orator Henry W. Grady, ad­dressed in 1886 to a Yankee audience: "There is aNew South, not through protest against the old,but because of new conditions, new adjustments,and, if you please, new ideas and aspirations."

Also new, and more appropriate than whenspoken, are the powerful judgments of Georgia'sBenjamin Harvey Hill, made to a Tammany Hallaudience in 1866: "There was a South of slaveryand secession-that South is dead. There is a Southof union and freedom-that South, thank God, isliving, breathing, growing every hour."

The hook readers of a reunited nation will relivewith Olmsted his journeys through the CottonStates. They will read, as though of another peopleand another world, about the magnolias and themalaria, the contented household servants-in­bondage and the runaway slaves, and the otherstriking contrasts of the Old ISouth. In some of itswhite-columned plantation homes, to be sure, werethe unmistakable signs of the 'culture of Englandand ancient Athens. Yet in shacks of the lowly itwas all too possible to study "astronomy" throughthe roof and "geology" through the floor . Good andevil were curiously blended in that South of slavery-that ancient South. The mixed picture emergesinexorably from the pages of The Cotton Kingdom.

That was as young Olmsted, seeker after thetruth, intended it. The Progressive Republicanbiographer of Lincoln, Albert J. Beveridge, whomade it a practice to choose his words with greatcare, significantly found Olmsted's comment "intel­ligent, without intentional bias, and trustworthy."Most major historians would agree fully in thisevaluation.

'To such high technical praise should be addedthe words engrossing, re'adable, informative, andentertaining. The ISouth as it was before the firingon Fort Sumter lives on in the descriptive prose ofthis chronicle of a vanished civilization.

VAUGHN D. BaRNET

In Brief

The Seventh Trumpet, by PeterJuliano 278 pp.Indianapolis: Babbs-Merrill Company. $3.00

A distinguished physicist, ridden by fear and am­bition, sells out to one' of the Communist satellites.No treachery is too much for him until one comesalong that involves his son. Slick melodrama.

Some Faces in the Crowd, by Budd Schulberg. 308pp. New York: Random House. $3.00

A collection of twenty short stories about suchcharacters as successful disc jockeys, amiable four­flushers on the make, and prizefighters down ontheir luck, told in the fast but smooth manner ofWhat Makes Sammy Run and The Disenchanted.

The Undersea Adventure, by Philippe Diole. 236pp. New York: J ulian Messner, Inc. $4.50

The world below the top of the ocean has plentythat is new and fascinating to tell us. In this ac­count there are too many literary allusions, but thestory is vividly told. It is especially good on thereactions of men under water. Magnificent photo­graphs.

U. S. 40, by George R. Stewart. 311 pp. Boston:Houghton Mifflin Company. $5.00

A trip across the continent in a car. More inter­esting than the trip itself and less tiring. Withglobules of history and scenery. A handsome bookwith lively photographs.

The Great American Parade, by H.-J. Duteil.Translated by Fletcher Pratt. 321 pp. NewYork: Twayne Publishers. $3.75

Many Europeans are reading this book to get itspicture of American life. Amusing, with many hitsand few errors. The author says, for instance, thatwhen Europeans go on about the Negro in America,he stops them by asking what nation has done morefor the Negro than the United States. On the otherhand, he makes the mistake of thinking the com­ics are funny. A little biased by "liberals," butnot mUCh. A conversation piece.

The World of Robert Flaherty, by Richard Griffith.165 pp. New York and Boston: Duell, Sloan andPearce-Little, Brown & Co. $5.00

Flahe'rty is called the father of the documentary,a dry title to give a man who did such exciting pic­tures as N'anook of the North, Moana, Man of Aran,and Louisiana Story. This conscientious biographyunfortunately lacks the space and poetic feeling ofFlaherty's work and life. Even the extracts fromhis journals are dull. The photographs are good.

HELEN WOODWARD

JUNE 29, 1963 717

Lautrec

& Cie.By NI,COLAS MONJO

When a young artist made a pilgrimage to Paris inthe nineties, it amounted to a declaration of faithin the international consanguinity of art, while atthe same time it suggested f)ossibilities of heroicdissipation. Today neither Paris nor any other citycan boast such common meeting ground: the artistshave scattered into various dreary isms which haverobbed them of their earlier zest and purpose.

The contemporary Toulouse-Lautrec boom is partof a larger veneration of the Paris that symbolizedour grandfathers' catholicity. By honoring his lifeand work, we honor a more civilized age-or atle'ast a more comfortable one to live in. The arrivalof the musical Can-Can on Broadway swells to floodlevel the current trilbute to fin-de-siecle Paris. Andbehind the torrent of high kicks, stage-propertycafes, and tinsel lies a profound nostalgia.

Although Toulouse..,Lautrec lends himself to di­verse interpretations, he bridges more contradic­tions than he creates. Descendant of a thousand­year line of artistocrats, he consorted only withdrabs. He could move, unhindered and uninhibited,from the bawdy quadrilles realistes of the l\ioulinRouge to the frosty summits of Proustian snobberyin the ducal hotels of St. Germain. He was a popu­lar painter of commercial posters, yet Degas andthe highbrow critics admired him and saw that hewas hung in the Louvre. His instincts were aggres­sivelyconvivial and gregarious-he loved circuses,bullfights, race tracks, and bals musettes - buthis ugliness and deformity "isolated" and embit­tered him. His work combines astringent satirewith unexpected flashes of beauty. His subjectis usually hen, painted with heavenly care anddispassion.

In 1951, fifty years after his death, a great col­lection of 'Toulouse-,Lautrec paintings traveledthrough the United States. Many smaller exhibi­tions followed in New York galleries. In that yearalso, Art News Annual devoted its cover and mostof its space to him. Biographies, a novel, and astre'am of magazine articles took up the discussion.Last year Cornelia Otis Skinner impersonated fourof his most famous subjects in Paris '90.

At this moment the film Moulin Rouge, directedby John Huston and starring Jose Ferrer as Lau­trec, pays homage to the creative victories of thecrippled genius and provides as well a restrainedcatalogue of his emotional defeats. The genesis ofhis mordant wit and caustic line is explained by hisfailure to find love. His lifelong search for happi­ness in a world of balladiers, "night-birds," andrace-track touts achieves the stature of myth thatis both luminous and modern. It is further en-

718 THE FREEMAN

hanced by Eliot Elisofon's remarkable use of color;this alone makes the movie outstanding.

And then there is Can-Can. Strictly speaking,this musical has no connection with Toulouse-Lau­trec except that it takes place in his beloved Mont­martre, circa 1893. Everyone now agrees that AbeBurrows'book is rather dejected, and that ColePorter has written better scores. The plot is atypically improbable trinket involving La MomePistache (the actress Lilo) , the proprietress of adance hall, in a brush with the police. The lattermaterialize chiefly in the person of Judge AristideForestier (Peter Cookson), who first badgers, andthen marries Pistache.

The subplot relates the rivalry of a sculptor,Boris Adzinidzinadze (Hans Conried), and an artcritic for the favors of Boris' mistre'Ss Claudine(Gwen Verdon) . The nearest thing to comedy inthe show is the duel that results. But I cannot helpthinking what a mistake this Boris is. He shares agarret studio with a painte'r, a poet, and an archi­tect, and the whole business is tiresomely reminis­cent of La Boheme, without its redeeming melodies.The bohe'mians assemble for the Quatz'Arts Ball(Lautrec often attended the real thing), whichgives the designers Motley a chance to put on abrilliant display of costumes. Michael Kidd's clever"Garden of Eden" ballet choreography herds onstage an amusing menagerie of male and femaleinchworms, herons, seahorses, and toads-all suita­bly arranged in pairs-for one of the best-behavedinterludes in a truant evening.

But the oddest thing about the evening is theghost of Toulouse-Lautrec, which insists on ap­pearing and reappearing though (reportedly byorder of the producers) it has been sternly forbid­den the premises. He pops up in the lettering anddrawings of the ads and posters, he is lurking some­where in the sets and decor. The play is not aboutLautrec, say the show's pre'Ss agents-but there heis. His friend Aristide Bruant (who was a singerat Les Ambassadeurs) has given the hero hisChristian name. His model La Goulue, who used todance the quadrille at the Moulin Rouge, was alaundress; Can-Can's Claudine and chorus are alsopart-time laundresses. Even the character of thecowardly and Philistine Boris flickers through asa weird, inverted travesty of iToulouse-Lautrec.

The relentlessly lighthearted Montmartre of Can­Can is spurious; we find ourselves comparing itunfavorably with the real and much more credibleworld which Toulouse-Lautrec captured in hisposters and paintings. Jane Avril, singer and "'but­terfly"; La Goulue doing the split and exposing theheart embroidered on her ruffled posterior; YvetteGuilbert, diseuse, in her eternal elbow-length blackgloves: these are the incorrigibles of the wickedParis which has for us an enduring reality. JohnHuston and Jose Ferrer understand this. Conse­quently we are not likely to be satisfied with thebanalities of Can-Can when the downright scandalsof Moulin Rouge are only an arrondissement away.

Some Rai Iroads may serve a larger territory.

noneservesafineroneIThese are the 14 mid-continentstates directly served by the RockIsland Lines. They are rich in thethings that make for progress andprosperity, and into and out ofthemflow endless streams of products­from field and forest, mine andfactory.

Because of their speed, depend­ability and on-time habits, RockIsland's diesel-powered ROCKETFREIGHTS provide a transporta­tion service which ideally fits intothe requirements of this fabulous

. .

area. "Ship Rocket Freight" is notonly an apt phrase-it is a welcomeservice!

Passengerwise, too, the RockIsland provides a modern, stream­lined, dieselized service. So smooth­riding and comfortable are theROCKET luxury-liners, so per­fectly appointed, they have becomeoutstanding American favorites.

Let a trained Rock Island repre­sentative help you with your indi­vidual travel, shipping or locationproblems.

P. S. FOR INDUSTRIALISTSIf you are on the lookout forsites where present conditionsare "right" and the potential fordevelopment is exceptional, con­sult our Industrial DevelopmentDepartment.

ROCK .ISLAND LINES