Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 20 December 1944 — Page 14

The. Indianapolis Time

PAGE 14 Wednesday, December 20, 1944

ROY W.HOWARD WALTER LECKRONE MARK PERREB : (A SCRIPPS-HOWARD NEWSPAPER) Owned and published daily (except Sunday) by a week.

Member of United Press, Scripps-Howard Newspa~

per Alliance, NEA Serv- month. : ice, and Audit Bureau of pa RILEY 5551

" Give Light and the People Will Fine Thelr Own Way

STETTINIUS ANSWERS CHURCHILL

GECRETARY OF STATE STETTINIUS has reaffirmed United States policy in favor of a free Poland, and against any outside interference in her internal affairs or any boundary changes without Polish consent. Unfortunately this American statement, advertising to our enemies the allied policy disagreement, was demanded by Prime Minister Churchill. By his broad hints that the United States had agreed to the Russian-British partition of that country, he made our government speak for Poland ~—or by silence give consent to the partition. To the Churchill claim that President Roosevelt, though informed from the beginning regarding the RussianBritish deal, had never objected, Stettinius replied that our consistent and unequivocal “position has been communicated on previous occasions to the interested governments.” The President earlier had publicly denied making any secret agreements. Stettinius repeated American. support of the allied policy—now scrapped by Churchill and Stalin—“that ques- - tions relating to boundaries should be left in abeyance until after termination of hostilities.” The purpose of that policy was to prevent just such an allied division during the war as has now occurred. Stettinius also repeated the Hull promise of last April ‘that we would not object to any settlement reached by mutual agreement of the disputants,

. » » » » ., BUT THE heart of the Stettinius declaration was the following emphasis on security through a world organization, rather than through separate alliances and guarantees: “The United States government continues to adhere ‘to its traditional policy of declining to give guarantees for any specific frontiers. The United States government is working for the establishment of a wérld security organi- . zation through which the United States, together with | other member states, would assume responsibility for the preservation of general security.” Hi 4 We trust that our British friends will understand that . Stettimius, in reaffirming the traditional American policy ~—which also happens to be that of the Atlantic Charter— is doing all that any American administration or congress can do. By answering the Churchill charges in quiet tone, ‘he is trying to close the division, not to widen it. : Americans hope that the British, Russian and United States governments can postpone diplomatic disputes until complete allied co-operation, now lacking, has defeated the : axis unconditionally. Poland is not*yet liberated. The war is far from won, as the new German counter-offensive shows. vo Let us all concentrate now on speeding victory.

ALL ABOARD

THE interior department has informed the forward-look-ing president of the U. S. Rocket society that it will be quite legal to file a claim for some real estate on the moon under ouf homestead law. All the filer need do is prove that he is acquainted with the land in question and be ready to move onto it six months after his entry is approved. . Maybe we might turn over some of the top axis war criminals to the enterprising rocket man and the versatile Mr. Ickes. Triple-A priority might be given to contruction of moon-bound rockets, with reserved seats for Hitler and his inner circle and the Jap war cabinet on the first one completed. After that, a few trips by the Nippon Express, the Gauleiter Limited and the Gestapo Special and this might be quite a pleasant world again. Only we should probably first. check on the other side of the moon to see that there are no inhabitants. For the company of those rocket passengers shouldn't happen to a dog—or what passes for a dog on our frigid satellite.

SEX, AND THE SHORTAGE

ANTHONY COMSTOCK would have dropped dead if he had been with us at 6 last night—our rendezvous with the druggist—when we went in “line” to get our cigarets. Anthony, long since gone, in his time was the flaming moralist. Around the turn-of the century he was the foe of all fun, the enemy of everything fleshly. ‘The cigaret line was 98 per cent women, by. the count. Each customer got one pack. The old ladies particularly were jubilant. They departed in high exultancy, their eyes gleaming. And the younger gals were happy, too, though more nonchalant. They dropped their packs in their handbags instead of waving them. The whole atmosphere was bargain-hunterish, plus. There was a time when women didn’t smoke. oe But the world do move. Which may go a long way toward explaining the shortage, a : Anyhow, it's nearly 6 o'clock. And this is anothet day. So we close, in haste. ?

TIME FOR STEPS

JAMES B. CAREY, secretary-treasurer of the C. I. O., says “the time has come for the government to’ take 4 whatever steps are necessary to secure effective compliance with all outstanding directives (of the war labor board) involving Montgomery Ward & Co.,, U. S. Gypsum Co., Pullman Standard and all other corporations under the

Business Manager

Price in Marion County, 5 cents a copy; delivered by carrier, 20 cents

Mail rates in Indiana, $5 a year; all other states, U. 8. possessions, Canada and Mexico, 87 cents a

NLECTIONS = > hg \ : Lae Backstairs Gossip

By James Thrasher

bes - THAT WAS a polite quiz sesgion that the new state department, “team” had with the senate foreign relations committee, Many splendid sentiments were expressed. But the session just wasn't very informative, For J{nstance, ‘Senator Murray of Montana asked James C. Dunn, one of the nominees for assistant secretary of state, whether Prime Minister Churchill was “farcing the American state department to play second fiddle in this Greek thing.” Whereupon Chairman Tom Connally of the foreign relations committee chided Mr, Murray for askIng the witness to “disclose backstairs gossip about Churchill,” : It doesn't seem to us that Mr, Murray's question was In the gossip category at all. Rather it was in the category of things that the American people want to, know, Maybe it wasn't expressed in proper diplomatic terminology, but it was a frank and understandable question of a sort that many of us would like to ask. 4

‘Determination’

DURING THE SESSION Archibald MacLeish, another nominee, quoted Cordell Hull's definition of our foreign policy as “the task of focusing and giving effect in the world outside our borders to the will of 135 million people.” Mr. MacLeish also stated that it was the state department's duty to give the people such information on foreign policy as they require. In his statement to the committee, Mr. Dunn said that “in our democracy the basic determination of foreign policy rests with the people.” Well, the people have clearly demonstrated their wishes for a foreign policy that will lead to our membership in an international organization to secure and maintain peace, and that will combat fasc- | Ism and foster democratic freedom for all the world’s | peoples, But having done so, they would also like to keep a check on the way this policy is being carried out. Many of us have been disturbed bys the apparent trendN\of British and Russian foreign policy, though we have had little fault to find with our own state department's actions and have applauded Mr. Stettinius’ recent clarification of our policy in Italy.

Is This the Only Way?

BUT MANY of us have also wondered if our hands-oft attitude might not be construed by our allies as implying approval of a course in liberated countries which most Americans dislike dnd fear. And we have wondered if our government's tender and -unrequited solicitude for the feelings of the allied governments is the only way to- military unity,

Unwise foreign policy here or in Europe can again mean suffering and destitution and death for millions of ordinary people, just as it has in this war, That is why foreign policy should not be a private, secret affair in which pertinent questions by a representative of the people are dismissed as “backstairs

WORLD AFFAIRS—

Pattern of 1918? By William Philip Simms

WASHINGTON, Dec. 20. Field Marshal Karl Von Rund--stedt’'s offensive is characterized by military attaches here as probably the most heavily mounted and most degperately pressed of the war, so far as the Nazis are concerned. By some it js likened to Field Marshal® Von * Hindenburg’s attempt to break through the Western front in March, 1018. That v push was a final, do-or-die effort. In it he put everything he had left, for he was well aware that failure would spell doom for the German empire. Then, as now, the leaders knew that, barring some lucky break, Germany could not last more than a few more months. Peace feelers, put out from Berlin had fallen flat, So Von Hindenburg determined on one mighty last fling. Throughout - the winter of 1917-18 thé German general staff worked tirelessly preparing for “Michael” day. That was to be the name for the start of the big push. They hoarded men and materiel. The idea was to drive a wedge between the British and French armies at Amiens, one wing rolling up the British armies against the channel while the other pushed the French back on Paris and the Seine,

Stopped to Catch Their Breath .

FOR 72 hours after March 21 it looked as if nothing could save the.allies, The Germans smashed everything in front of them, Soon they were on the heights of Villers-Bretonneaux ‘overlooking the vital city of Amiens. At 3 o'clock in the morning a runner brought word to the war correspondents there to get out as the enemy would probably be in by dawn, dr » * We evacuated Amiens, and promptly. But the Germans did not enter at dawn. Nor the next day uor the next. And we marveled why. There was a gap seven miles wide in our lines and a boy on a bicycle could have ridden through. But not a German did. The reasen was, as Von Hindenburg afterwards wrote: “Human nature was urgently voicing its claims. We had to take breath. The infantry needed rest and the artillery needed ammunition.” By the time the Germans got their breath and the artillery its ammunition, the allies had done the same, “Amiens meant decisive victory," the old marshal admitted ruefully, but try as he did to take it, it remained in allied hands. In preparing for “Michael” the Germans had worked out another set of plans for use against the British in Flanders. On April § they shifted northward and fought the great battle of the Lys river, from Armentieres to La Bassee. And’ when that failed, .they switched to the Solsson-Rheiths front only to be stopped in their tracks.

Unless All Signs Fail—

THAT WAS’ the beginning of the end. Von Hin. denburg had thrown in everything, Including the kitchen stove, There wasn't any more. But Marshal Foch kept hitting, never giving the Germans a mo-

ment's respite, night or day. Sald Von Hindenburg: “We could have no illusions; this meant the end of our hopes.”

"The Hoosier Forum

1 wholly disagree with what you say, but will . defend to the death your right to say it.—Voltaire. .

“LOOKING AT FACTS OF AMMUNITION SHORTAGE” By A OC. L. 0. Worker, Anderson

...X feel ,..I should answer the letter by Sarge and Verma Melton, defending myself as a C. I. O, worker, It seems a lot of people would rather face patriotic propaganda than the true facts! Now let us take a look at the facts. It seems as if Sarge and V. Melton lay the ammmunition short age on the union workers. How can C. I. O. workers make ammunition

tion over 50 per cent and laid off over 200,000 workers?’

For almost a year this production has been cut, but just a few weeks ago orders from Washington were to double the production of ammunition.” Some 220,000 workers were ordered back to work in ammunition plants. Now I suppose that these 220,000 men have been out on a strike for almost a year, eh Sarge and V. Melton? These are facts, statements, and figures issued by the U. 8. government! Now I ask you, why blame the ammunition shortage on the C, I. O. workers when our government would not let them work? Why shouldn't the ammunition shortage be blamed on P. D. R. and his political machine in Washington? This administration has more power than any that ever was in Washington. I say that it was their duty to see that our boys were equipped with plenty of everything. When they failed, where could the ‘blame be placed? Only with our commander-in-chief and the “political bosses in Washington. ‘ Never once has America failed to reach her bond quota, no matter how large. In all six drives, American people (and C. I. O. workers) have been only too glad to buy so their boys would have the best of everything. When our commander-in-chief failed, and made a blunder like cutting ammunition preduction 50 per cent or more almost a year ago, then I would say that these -are facts, - not patriotic propaganda. That the blame has been placed where it belongs! . .. Now, Sarge and V. Melton, did you know that our international union (U, A. W.-C. 1. O,) gave its no-strike pledge shortly after. the attack on Pearl Harbor? Also, did you know to this day our interhational union has never broken that pledge? No. strike has ever been authorized by our international union (U. A. W.-C. I. O.). All strikes have been so-called wildcat strikes. If you will read more than just the headlines of your paper, you will find that our international union has always ordered the officers of locals, where wildcat strikes occurred, to return to work. . . . In all cases, an investigation by

when the government cut produc-|

(Times readers are invited to express their views in these columns, religious controversies excluded. Because of the volume received, let< ters should be limited to 250 words. Letters must be signed. Opinions set forth here are those of the writers, and publication in no way implies agreement with those opinions by The Times. The Times assumes no responsibility for the return of manuscripts and cannot enter cotrespondence regarding them.)

the international union has taken place to determine the cause of these strikes. Also, why they failed to consult the international. In many cases, they have found that they have been aggravated by management or by some radical worker. Wildcat strikes are . . . something the union is not responsible for, but does everything in its power to prevent. Now just because several soldiers in the army go A. W. O. L.,, you wouldn't say the army was no good would you? So because of some unfair management practice, or some radical worker leading a wildcat strike, don’t judge all the millions of other union workers by what a few do. You always read about strikes and they are always played up big by some who would like to bust the unions. So, Sarge and V. Melton, my advice to you is to read the true facts and let the propaganda go on by! ‘ v It seems as if you are always willing to lay all’ shortages on the C. I. O. workers. But you never give any credit to the government, which has laid off thousands of workers, and seen fit to cut war production all over America. I would say that the blame has been placed where it belongs, where the Roosevelt administration is blamed because of its own blunders in planning! These, my friends, are facts! » L BR | “HOW MANY READERS CAN HONESTLY SAY , . .» By A. C. P., Indianapolis Congratulations, Sarge, Battle Creek, Mich, on your article of Dec. 11, “They Should .Open Their Eyes” Let's hear more from him and boys like him. . ,. Yes, strikers, think of all the lives you have killed. Think of the boys who may be living today had you stayed on the job that one, two or three weeks instead of feeling sorry for yourself because you didn't get that nickel raise?

Yes, as my husband wrote in one

of his letters,—“There are a lot of helmets over here, but the fellows in them won't have any use for them any more.” Do you, strikers, suppose that one of those boys fell because you didn’t make just one more bullet, plane, or tire that day or that week because you valued that nickel more thap, you did that boy's life? = Yes, you people who quit because you are dissatisfied with the type of work you have to do in the defense plant and because "they just won't give you any more money. Do you suppose that the neighbor boy enjoyed his job of shooting the charging ~ enemy, while his best buddy next to him was shot through the head by that German or Jap bullet? It is a pity he can't quit because he is dissatisfied with his job and say, “I will not shoot that sniper or I will not fire this machine gun until you give me a better job.” It is a pity the private can't say, “Unless you pay me $100 per month, I won't fight your battles and the Germans and Japs can have our country.” How would you fine patriots like that? Would you be willing to do youi present defense job for just $100 per month? t Yes, most of the time I am ashamed to call myself one of the “fighting home front,” when my husband and many others like him never utter that first word of complaint. Never in his 9 months overseas has he complained, yet his was one of the first divisions to land in four invasions in Europe and they are now the furthest inside Germany. After the fourth invasion he wrote home, “Well, I made it through another invasion without a scratch. I think I've been very lucky.” Those boys have lived in stench of death, been bombed day and night—they have fought tanks with nothing for self-protection except tommy guns, they have lived in foxholes and dugouts, which filled up with water and snow; yet they call themselves lucky. My husband doesn’t complain because he has no expectations of coming home until after the war is won; instead he just has faith that we all on the home front are doing what we can to hasten the end of the war. ’ How many of you readers can honestly say: . “I've given all the blood they will take from me; I've bought all the bonds or all the war stamps I can; I've helped in every way possible I know.” Have you ever considered how lucky you are and how much you have for which to be thankful? Give it a few minutes thought.

s 8 = “COSTS LIVES AND ENDANGERS VICTORY”

Side Glances=By Galbraith

TIT

By Ed

dealing with the political setup in liberated nations is an isolationist and a defeatist policy,

In effect it says that we don't care

REFEYE BEdf E |

i jit HH TH th

i |

POLITICAL SCENE—

New: Senalé Bloc

By Thomas L. Stokes

- new political bloc is developing in the senate. -.It may become increasingly. important as the problems of the peace become more and more the concern of the treaty-ratifying body, as they will, Ra It is a rib torn from the left side of the ‘Democratic ‘party which is taking on life and some flesh,

movement really got its start at the Democratic convention during the drive to renominate Vice President Wallace, which had a C. I. O. and left-wing New Deal core, plus much rank-and-file support. That battle was lost. But the election went for President Roosevelt and the leaders of the movement sat back, awaiting their opportunity. This came when President Roosevelt handed out a ready-made fssue with his appointments to the assistant secretariat at the state department, a group topheavy with big business and wealth, really a blueribbon list. ! : These New Deal left wingers wanted Henry Wallace as secretary of state. They didn’t like the gpointment of Edward R. Stettinius, although they swallowed it.

‘How Left Wingers Look At It

BUT THE REST of the crowd selected later by the President was just too much. The left wing thought it had won the election. Now Mr. Roosevelt was turning sharply to the right, and just at the wrong time and in just the wrong place; that is, in the domain of foreign affairs about which so many plain people are deeply concerned. That's the way the left wing saw it. The setup to them was contrary to their ideas of “a people’s peace,” the ideas expoundéd so often by Henry Wallace in the last two years and during the campaign, when he toured the hinterlands and the back country so strenuously. These ideas embrace more representation for the people in the peace settlement, and less influence for international businessmen and financiers who built up the cartel system, and less for the architects of power politics—who seem to be on the loose again in Europe. This is, - basically, the background for the noisy spectacle in the senate. A strange spectacle it is, with ardent New Dealers taking issue with the President, some of them for the first time. :

Will It Be Wallace in '48?

THIS REVOLT from the left—for that's what it is—must be comforting to Henry Wallace, though he cannot be pleased with the unfamiliar figures who are ranged with the leftist side in this fight, for reasofls no whit related to his crusade. This fight in the senate, so far as Mr. Wallace's friends are concerned, both in and out of the senate, may very well mark the opening of a campaign for his nomination in 1948. It's a strangely assorted crew which set off the explosion in the senate foreign relations committee— “The Four Horsemen.” There is Senator Claude Pepper (Fla.), hitherto almost a slavish follower of the Presdent, who got considerable labor help when re-elected. . There is Senator Joseph F. Guffey (Pa.), also hitherto a most devoted follower of Mr. Roosevelt, otherwise a very practical politician of the oid school, who is up for re-election two years from now, and in doubtful status. There is Senator James A. Murray (Mont), one of the wealthiest members of the senate who leans well to the lefi on both domestic and foreign policy, being rich enough to afford it. These are all good New Deal Democrats. The fourth is Senator, Robert M.%a Follette Jr. (Wis.), an isolationist before Pearl Harbor, a stanch Progressive on domestic issues, generally to the left of the: New Deal. He also is up for re-election two years from now, with his Progressive party wellnigh shot out from under him.

An Issue There, But Clouded

THESE FOUR banded together in the foreign relations committee against the nominations, and then took their fight to the floor with a resolution asking the President to withdraw all of them. There they gathered recruits—among iiberals who share their antagonism to the big business-conserva-tive type of appointees; among southerners who don’t like William L. Clayton because he’s a “cotton speculator”; among conservatives who can't stomach

for various reasons such as “Happy” Chandler (D. Ky.), the chief twikter of the British lion's tail. One distressing thing about all this, ag watched from the gallery, is the high glee of the isolationists who pitch in merrily. But that is the price that must be paid in a democracy, for once a subject is opened in the senate, talks runs loose and free, and often irresponsibly. There is an issue here, clouded as it has become.

IN WASHINGTON—

Another Challenge

By Charles T. Lucey -

WASHINGTON, ‘Dec. 20. =

nation’s munitions output today cited the enemy's newest challenge —the German counter-pf-fensive—as underwriting repeated recent urgings for increased arms

WASHINGTON, Dec. 20.—A

This + leftist “Young Turk” °

Archibald MacLeish; and stray support from others _

Army officials trying to speed the

f WEDNE “Hoosi

Pvi. ‘Oscar | Mildred Hill, 5

“* killed Dec. T w __ infantry tn Ge

overseas since Pvt. Hill France, Belgiu entering Germ fouf letters 1 different coun period of only Formerly a tendent of thi Pvt. Hill was ‘army 15 mont! He was the Edward Hill S brother, Arth apolis, Other surv other brothers tain in the ar olis, and Ott, I

7 ters, Mrs. Flor

Ruby Pruitt, t Er ——————————

. “

fre

CH/ with feet.

mat Fire

JEV

the