PAGE l-A
HERALD AMD NEWS, Klamath Falls, Oregon
' Wednesday, July 31, 196J
EPSON IN WASHINGTON . . .
Farm Bureau Chief
After New Policies
BLIMEY!
Take It Slow And Easy
v Congress is doing some deep soul-searching
on the nuclear test ban treaty.
The picture is not as bleak as some would
paint it, nor is it as jovial and bright as the
administration would paint it.
: Claims of "victory for mankind" and "ma
jor breakthrough in the cold war" are not
only premature, but downright foolish.
: The facts are these: The United States
first proposed an atomic test ban in June of
946 at a time when only we had the atomic
bomb. The Russians rejected this.
We renewed our atomic test ban offer
from time to time, and, in October, 1958, a
one-year "undeclared moratorium" on nu
clear tests went into effect.
Thirty four months later in September,
1961, the Russians resumed testing in the
atmosphere, particularly their 100-megaton
giant atomic bombs. It was obvious they had
been preparing for the test for some months
prior to launching them.
It wasn't until April, 1962, or nearly five
months later, that we resumed atmospheric
testing.
; As recent as earlier this month, Khrush
chev said the Russians wanted a test ban but
it must be linked to a non-aggression pact
between the Reds and NATO.
In two weeks of negotiations, the test
ban which bars testing in the air, outerspace
or underwater was hammered out.' Such
speedy action after so long a delay causes us
some uneasiness.
Last year we heard top atomic scientists
warn of the dangers of another test ban,
pointing out that such a ban enables the Rus
sians to move up in the atomic race. Dr. Ed
ward Teller, known as the father of the H
bomb, warned that the Russians might need
Only one more test ban period to perfect their
anti-missile missile and that they would then
have the defense against our retaliatory pow
er and be in a position to launch a nuclear
assault in a terrifying nuclear "Pearl Harbor."
We weigh this advice by atomic experts
against the well-meaning intentions of poli
ticians intent on improving their image.
In the weeks ahead, we shall hear a great
deal of debate both pro and con on the test
treaty. It may be that in the final vote the
Senate may decide not to approve it.
The question is a pure and simple one,
"Does it benefit the United States to accept
such a nuclear test ban?"
There can be no other meritorious stand
ard. We can talk about world safeguards
against radiation, health hazards, cold war
complications and the like, but it actually, for
you and me, boils down to the calm question
begging an answer, "Does it benefit the
United States to accept this test ban?"
The proposal must be stripped of its po
litical implications and placed up against the
needs of the safety of this nation, it must be
weighed against the past perfidious record of
the Soviet Union on other treaties.
The un-censored opinions of our top mil
itary leaders must be secured, and these must
be candid appraisals, not ones dictated by the
civilian head of the defense department.
When all these facts are in, properly
appraised and evaluated, then the Senate will
come to a vote on the issue. We're content
to accept their decision.
Frankly, while the proposed treaty raises
a faint hope for some sort of nuclear sanity,
there are many many loopholes in it and when
' it is all considered it boils down to a question
of faith that the Soviets will do what they
say they will.
This they will do ONLY if it is to their
benefit. This fact is supported by their past
record. .
Their record also shows that they will
honor the pact just so long as it benefits them
and not one moment longer.
These uncontested facts must also he
taken into account when one is considering
whether or not to place his future nuclear se
curity in the faith of Russia's words.
For nowhere have ve read that Khrush
chev has disavowed his announced intentions
to bury us and force our grandchildren to live
under Communism. ,
Security Threat
(New York Journal American)
The British reacted with shocked sur
prise to the disclosure of threats to security
represented by the explosive Profumo scandal.
But a similar potential to America's se
curity is posed by a ring of international call
girls operating in and out of the United Na
tions. The Journal-American, as a public serv
ice, has exposed how at least one of these
party girls arranged to have a mysterious re
cording delivered behind the Iron Curtain. . .
how these girls have unrestricted access to
the delegates' lounge how they are wel
comed by members of some foreign delega
tions having access to classified documents.
Even more sinister was the revelation
that a former TV producer who fled from a
Federal indictment charging him with procur
ing has now found refuge behind the Iron Cur
tain. We are gratified that U.S. District At
torney Robert M. Morgenthau has shown his
concern over this potential threat to the se
curity of the nation by ordering a full investi
gation. This country cannot afford to risk a repe
tition of the Christine Kceler case.
HOLMES ALEXANDER.
Senate And The Treaty
By .1IOLMKS ALEXANDER
On June 10, 1963, ' President
Kennedy made his famous appeal
to the Soviet Union for a partial
nuclear test ban treaty and Rave
tile pledge that the USA would not
conduct further tests In the air
or in the oceans unless Hussla did
so first.
But two days later, on June
12th, and again on June 13th, our
listening devices picked up acous
tic evidence of nuclear-type ex
plosions within the Soviet Union.
There was no accompanying (all
out, therefore no conclusive
proof that the explosions were
caused by nuclear tests. But Uicse
"i acoustic signals matched three
, .ors which had been detected in
o'uly 1962, from tlte same terri
tory. The Administration did not
announce that any of these five
occurrences were nuclear. The
Atomic Energy Commission has
preferred to believe (or have tlie
country believe) that (he signals
were probably produced by elec
trical storms.
A prominent Senator, who has
majored in nuclear detection and
verification for several years, com
pletely disagreed with the Admini
stration') trustful assumptions.
They are, he feels, colored by
the President's desire to coax
Khrushchev Into a treaty.
Tliis Senator, who wishes to
remain anonymous at this writing,
is convinced, from logic and
science, that the Russians were
atmospherically testing as lale
as the middle of June, and that
t)ioy have developed either a very
refined low-yield bomb or a very
"clean" bomb that drops little
or no debris. In sum, the Russians
have reached an advanced state of
the art in disguising air-tests
and that's one reason why they
arc willing to discuss an itnin
spected treaty.
To this Senator's credit, he has
not sensationalized these convic
tions, lie still favors (lie Dodd
Humphrey Senate resolution
which calls for a ban on tests
that contaminate (lie air and wa
ter. He still favors the general
tenor of the treaty which Ambas
sador ll.irriman has been nego
tiating in Moscow. Nevertheless,
I Hunk it is fair to report that
this important statesman is div
apiwinted in the Adminislriil ion's
solt-on-Reds attitude In failing to
show more suspicion and alarm at
five unidentified explosions in
Russia during l!Xl2-3. Hero Is a
proviso which ho tells me should
lie included in any HussoBrltlsh
American treaty to ban air-waler
testing:
". . . that we shall consider a
series of such signals, originating
in their territory, to constitute
proof that the test ban has boon
violated."
Tlie Senator believes that we
no longer need to find radioactive
debris in order to know that test
ing has taken place. Our acoustic
devices arc now sensitive enough
to be reliable not for proof
positive, hut for proof sufficient.
He also is suspicious of Hie
Khrushchev proiosal that tlie
treaty include space, as well as
atmosphere and water, as areas
where tlie treaty signers agree not
to test Modern techniques make
it feasible to explode nuclear
weapons millions of miles away
from earth. But science has not
yet provided the means of detect
ing or verifying such shots. To
include space in the treaty would
give Russia an area to test-and-choat.
He hopes that Khrushchev '
will he willing to leave space
out of tlie treaty until science
gives us more assurance in that
area.
It would he wrong to take any
thing away from Mr. Kennedy's
achievement in bringing some
sort of partial treaty within the
realm of possibility. But no pig-in-a-poke,
please.
ittft8
Maintaining Union Monopoly
By ARTHUR KROCK
In The New York Times
MIDDLETOWN, R. I July 25 -Every
so often the American peo
ple wake up, like Lemuel Gulli
ver in Lilliput, to find themselves
bound hand and foot. Their fet
ters are the Federal law and
bipartisan politics Uiat created and
have maintained the monopoly
power of the labor unions to
paralyze the national economy.
This power is' now being cur
rently manifest by the railroad
brotherhoods. The agreement by
management to the appeal from
Congress for another month in
which to try to avert a shut
down on the roads by the broth
erhoods is merely its latest dem
onstration. For, although railroad
management has consented six
times to postpone the date when
work rules will no longer require
payment for union jobs not need
ed for operation and has accepted
the findings of two Presidential
boards and also all Administration
suggestions for casing the terms
of dis-employmcnt, a seventh
agreement to postpone was a
Hobson's choice for management
because of the shackles of one
way law and vote-seeking poli
tics. ' Labor Unions Favored
Under tlie terms of that law
labor unions can legally do things,
and on a nationwide scale, for
which management would incur
criminal penalties. They can:
(II shut down an entire industry
on which, as in this instance,
the strength and viability of the
economy depend; (2) do this de
spite their refusal even to bar
gain on the issue with manage
ment, and in total disregard of
the findings of investigators of
these issues who were chosen by
the President of the United States;
and (31 terminate a basic trans
port facility of the nation as a
protest against a responsible man
agement decision whose legality
was certified by the Supreme
Court of the United States.
But politics is responsible for
allowing the situation to drift
to tlie point where the dignity
o.' the American system of gov
ernment has been impaired at
the expense of the public interest
and of the equal rights guaran
teed to free private enterprise
by the Constitution. In his 1960
campaign Mr. Kennedy said and
STRICTLY
PERSONAL
By SYDNEY J. HARRIS
Just as children are getting old
er faster, grown-ups are staying
younger longer. The age-categories
of even the recent past
scarcely apply to tlie present
time.
. I was thinking of this when
reading about the dispute be
tween an airline company and its
stewardesses. The company
wanted to drop its stewardesses
at age 32: tlie union protested;
and a compromise of sorts was
worked out.
What interested me was n o t
the labor aspect of the quarrel,
but the outmoded assumption by
tlie airline that 32 is somehow
"old" (or a stewardess. Actually,
most women of 32 today look
Al
manac
By United Press International
Today is Wednesday, July 31,
the 212th day of 1!H with 153 to
follow.
The moon is approaching its
full phase.
The morning stars are Jupiter
and Saturn.
The evening stars are Saturn
and Mars.
On this day in history:
In 194.1. the French Committee
of National Liberation appointed
(ien. Charles de Gaulle perman
ent chairman of the committee
of national defense.
In 194B, 900 airplanes (lew over
the dedication ceremonies of New
York's International Airport al
ldlewild Field.
In 19.V1, Sen. Robert Toft of
Ohio died. He was majority lead
er of the U.S. Senate.
In l2. agreement was reached
on the Malay Union.
A thought for tlie day Supreme
Court Justice Oliver Wendell
Holmes said: "Knowledge and
limber shouldn't lie much used
till Uiey are seasoned."
(and presumably feel 10 years
younger.
A generation or so ago, a wom
an of 40 had nearly had it. She
was settled into middle-age, and
usually looked it. Today's wom
en are incredibly young in ap
pearance and vitality that is, it
they aren't trying too hard to
look young. Nothing ages a wom
an (aster than that. ,
Much tlie same, of course, is
true of men! Men in their 40s
and SOs are stiU young and vig
orous, whereas their fathers and
grandfathers were often sloping
toward senescence in those dec
ades. It may have something to do
w ith diet, w ith changing patterns
of social life, with attitudes to
ward one's self. Somehow, past
generations become prematurely
stodgy: they not only wore hea
vier clothes and ate heavier
meals, but also settled heavily
into old age long before it was
called for.
If you look at a picture of a
woman of 40 at the turn of the
century, or even two decades alt
er that, and one of today, tlie
difference is striking not merely
in the costumes, but in tlie ex
pression, in tlie posture, in the
whole psychic atmosphere.
Although it is true that Ameri
can civilization today may put
too much emphasis on "youth"
as a virtue, it is equally true (hat
our ancestors committed the op
posite mistake (hey grew old too
last, and often passed from
youth to senility without ever
grasping the fact that maturity
is a time for delight, and not
just for duty.
It is easy to be critical of our
contemporary culture; yet to re
main young in spirit (without re
maining green in judgment! is
surely a positive value that past
generations neglected or scorned.
To see a woman of SO striding
across (lie golf links, lithe and
tanned, is to realize that 32. in
our tunc, Is barely the threshold
of womanhood. No matter wtwit
(lie airline ofticials may think to
tlte contrary.
repeated that "tlie President
should have a wider arsenal of
weapons so that (in a labor crisis
involving the national economy)
neither the union nor the com
pany would be assured his inter
vention would benefit one side
or the other."
But not until the railroad strike
was only a week away did he go
to Congress for this "arsenal."
and then what he asked for was
a weapon of unproved effective
ness and very limited range. Then
railroad brotherhoods had only
to indicate to Congress their con
tinued preference for a wholly
disarmed Government to prevent
the prompt action the President
unrealistic-ally asked (or, and
produced the unfair hut, in the
circumstances, irresistible Con
gressional pressure on the rail
roads for still another postpone
ment. Defusing a Threat
This, however, is about all that
has been accomplished so far
by the political branches of the
Federal Government to defuse an
economic threat which has been
steadily nearing the point of ex
plosion for years. If Congress
should turn the problem over to
the Interstate Commerce Com
mission, on substantially the terms
the President set forth, the rail
roads have now discovered in the
fine print that they can be obliged
to continue for four years, not
two, a $600,000,000 annual payroll
for employes they do not need,
to do jobs that no longer exist.
Hence it will be up to a majority
of the 11 Presidential appointees
seven by Eisenhower, three by
Kennedy and one by both presi
dents who compose the com
mission to determine the pace of
the descent of the railroads into
bankruptcy, or whether and at
what point it is to be halted. Mean
while there is no assurance that
the brotherhoods will not renew
their strike call when the latest
period of postponement of the
work rules had expired. They re
serve the right and have the power
thereby (o do this if Congress
has not legislated to their satisfac
tion. Then Mr. Kennedy w ill be in
escapably faced with the alterna
tive of openly surrendering the
Government to the union monop
oly, or seeking that "wider ar
senal of weapons" in the public
interest that as a candidate he
said he would as President ask
Congress to supply.
By PETER EDSON
Washington Correspondent
Newspaper Enterprise Assn.
WASHINGTON (NEA)-Charles
B. Shuman, American Farm Bu
reau president, ain't mad at any
body any more not even Sec
retary of Agriculture Orville L.
Freeman.
Since the biggest farm organi
zation was generally credited
or blamed for defeat of the
Kennedy administration wheat
program in tlie May 21 referen
dum, it has been assumed that
Shuman is still agin' the gov'
ment because it has done nothing
to get some substitute wheat leg
islation through Congress.
In Washington to testify before
a House Agriculture subcommit
tee on the AFB proposals for an
interim wheat, feed grain and
cotton bill, Shuman was complete
ly relaxed.
He didn't have any particular
criticism of Freeman for taking
his trip to Russia although some
critics have accused him of run
ning away to block new farm leg
islation. "After all." observed Shuman,
"Secretary Benson (President
Eisenhower's Secretary of Agri
culture Ezra Taft Benson) took
his family and friends on a tour
of Russia just before he left of
fice. So why shouldn't Secretary
Freeman go?"
Shuman gives Freeman credit
for being very astute and a good
administrator and he takes no
slock in reports Freeman will re
sign or be fired.
"I'm more interested in seeing
the Department of Agriculture
change directions than change
secretaries," says Shuman. But
he sees no changes coming in
Freeman or Kennedy administra
tion farm policies.
Shuman gets around the coun
try a good bit so he was asked
how farmers generally feel about
Freeman.
"About the same as they felt
about Mr. Benson," Shuman re
plied. .
As for Republican presidential
candidates now being mentioned.
Shuman believes those with con
gressional experience in han
dling farm legislation would be
best qualified. That would give the
nod to Senators Barry Goldwater
of Arizona and Thruston B. Mor
ton of Kentucky.
Shuman gives Gov. Nelson'
Rockefeller credit for being knowl
edgeable on farm issues. New
York State has a big dairy in
dustry and Rockefeller has big
ranches in Venezuela.
Shuman believes that "chaos
will not result if new farm legis
lation is not passed by Congress
this year."
He believes the average price
of wheat next year won't be much
lower if no new wheat bill is
passed. Prices on feed quality
wheat will be down, he admits,
but some of the hard wheat prices
will be up and farm income
won't be far different from this
year.
The Farm Bureau head believes
the new wheat bill introduced b
Sen. George McGovern, D-S.D ,
and the cotton bill introduced b
House Agriculture CommilU
chairman Harold D. Coolcy, i
N.C., may stand in the road of
the AFB program.
The Farm Bureau is opposed
to these measures. Shumaa be
lieves that if they are defeated
and if new farm legislation is
not enacted this year, production
will begin to come down volun
tarily next year.
Contrary opinion is that If no
new controls are imposed this
year, production will zoom and
prices will skid. Estimates on
next year's farm income loss
through defeat of wheat controls
in the May referendum run as
high as $700 million.
Total cost of the AFB plan
has been estimated at $2 bil
lion, including a soil bank scheme
to take 100 million acres out of
production.
WASHINSTON WINDOW
Kennedy Plays Politics
With Racial Situation
By LYLE C. WILSON
United Press International
The resignation of Postmaster
General J. Edward Day offers
President Kennedy another op
portunity to indulge his anxiety
for a Negro in the cabinet. Ken
nedy's first choice for that cabi
net post may have been a Ne
gro. During the 1960 presidential
campaign, the Republicans play
ed politics in stumbiebum fashion
with the idea of a Negro cabinet
member. There was no need for
candidate Kennedy to match that
maneuver precisely during his
presidential campaign. The Dem
ocratic platform and his own
shrewd plays for Negro votes
were ample to offset Republican
maneuvers.
Once elected, however, Presi
dent Kennedy had Negro prob
lems. He and his platform had
promised guaranteed some
instant civil rights. It immediate
ly became obvious that the entire
Kennedy legislative program
probably would be scuttled if the
new President proposed broad
gauge civil rights legislation to
the newly elected Congress. The
decision was to put off the issue.
Negroes Were Pleased
Negroes were pleased by Ken
nedy's selection of Negroes for
well-paid federal jobs. They were
equally pleased by constant evi
dence of the President's concern
for Negro problems. Thus it was
that the President-elect appeared
on the porch of his Georgetown
home in December, 1960, with
Rep. William Dawson, a Chicago
Democrat and a Negro. The
President - elect told assembled
H lit
"I'll bet ibi looks at in clothes!"
newsmen and Dawson agreed
that the congressman had been
offered and had refused the
postmaster general's post.
Here was another evidence of
Kennedy's interest and confi
dence in Negroes but was it? The
question arose: Was the offer to
Dawson for real? The Chicago
Daily News printed an editorial
under the caption:
"We Can't Beiicvc It. Daw
son's record should keep him out
of the cabinet."
The News pictured Dawson as
the absolute political boss in Chi
cago of an empire of corruption,
fraud and crime. It so. the nom
ination of Dawson would have in
vited severe scrutiny and, prob
ably, rejection by tlie U.S. Sen
ale. Kennedy scarcely could have
been ignorant of Dawson's back
ground nor insensible to the atti
tude the Senate might take.
There was suspicion, therefore,
that the announcement that Daw
son had been tendered and had
rejected the job was a political
device and that no real proposal
had been made to Dawson.
Proposed New Department
Thereafter Kennedy proposed
that Congress establish a new
cabinet department of urban af
fairs. He said he would name a
Negro to head the department.
The Republicans almost unani
mously cried "foul." They were
joined by some Democrats from
the South.
This was a political ploy,
these dissenters maintained, to
make it impossible for a non
Southern member of Congress to
vote against setting up the new
department lest he be accused of
anti - Negro bias; of voting
against a Negro in the cabinet.
However that may have been,
Congress did not authorize the
new department. Eut President
Kennedy undoubtedly took a sub
stantial political profit among
Negro voters.
Now comes a vacancy in tlie
Kennedy cabinet, a cabinet job
said to have once been offered
to and rejected by a Negro.
If the President's aaxiety for a
Negro in the cabinet has been for
real all along, here is a can't
miss opportunity. Or, maybe, the
President will decide to give an
other refusal to Chicago's Rep.
Dawson.
QUESTIONS
AND
ANSWERS
Q Is it correct to call Ihr last
book nf the New Testament
"Revelations"?
A No. In various English
translations of the Rible it is
called either "Tlie Revelation"
or "The Apocalypse."
Q How long does ropvright,
last In (he United States?
A For 28 years; it can be
renewed for 28 more.