Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 10 September 1952 — Page 20

.

The

Indianapolis Times

WALTER LECKRONE HENRY W. MANZ * Editor ~ Business Manager

PAGE 20 Wednesday, Sept. 10, 1952

‘ROY W, HOWARD 3 President

Owned and published daily by Indianapolis Times Publish. and Ww Maryland St. Postal 9. Member of Pred Press Scripps-Howard Newspaper Alliance. NEA Serve fce and Audit Buresu of Circulation Marion County 5 cents a copy for daily and 10e tor’ Bandar: Seltverad by carrier daily Ang Sunday 35c . a week, daily only 26c, Sunday anly Mall inl indiana daily and ay $10.00 a year. y 35. sat, fund

A ly $500: all other states. U. Sexico daily $1.10 a month. Sunday 10¢ a copy.

Give Light and the People’ Will Find Their Own Way

lke Calls for a Fighting Team

QO FAR as Indiana is concerned the most important thing ‘* Ike Eisenhower did here yesterday was indorse “the whole Republican ticket"—including Bill Jenner. Already that has brought an anguished outcry that will no doubt grow louder from visiting columnists and pundits . . . nearly all of whom are for Adlai Stevenson anyway, no matter what Ike does .. . that this has cost him the “liberal” vote of the East and the West. We wouldn't know about that. But we doubt if it cost him anything he could have had in any event. The voter who considers Harry Truman a “liberal” and Bob Taft a “reactionary” is going to vote for the nearest thing to a New Dealer he can find, regardless—and that isn’t Ike Eisenhower, with or without the Indiana Republican ticket. » » ” ” . ” HE HAS made it honestly plain that he doesn’t agree, as we don’t, either, with everything Sen. Jenner says and does; He made it equally plain that he doesn’t visualize the party that nominated him as a political strait-jacket in which everybody toes the party line or gets purged. Only the Communist Party is like that. can Party—though not nearly so widely divergent as in the Democratic Party—and in the opinion of most Indiana Republicans the'Middle West has just as much right to send to Washington a Dirksen or a Bricker or a Jenner as the Far West has to send a Morse or the East to send a Lodge or an Ives. -

That was the stand Ike Eisenhower took here last

night. ‘Hoosier Republicans, sick unto death of the fuehrer philosophy that would dictate their thinkihg from Washington cheered it till the rafters rang. w - - . » - » : WHAT IKE asked of Indiana was a fighting team that will fight shoulder to shoulder in the common cause of “a real change in Washington.” :

It was a fighting speech.

He whacked the Truman administration on its sorest spots—corruption, high taxes, inflation, cronies, chjselers and five percenters, bungles and fumbles and stumbling. : He brought down to a pay-window level what ‘these things mean to the average American. He singled out some of the places where inflation has done its worst damage— in the savings of families, in the pension funds of unions, in the endowment of schools and colleges. He called the turn on the enormous federal taxation—how it has cut local services, caused crowded schools, and underpaid teachers, firemen and police. He cited the march of communism “in spite of our thousands of casualties and billions of dollars.”

And he spiked the pretension that just a new face in -

the White House—and the same old regime behind it—can “clean up the mess in Washington.” As he put it: “My distinguished opponent (Adlai Stevenson) ig using every trick in the book to get himself off the hook of the present administration’s récord. “When the hand-picked heir wants no part of the heirlooms—why should we?” The idea wasn't new, in Indiana. But it certainly was welcome.

Sorry . ...

ITS REAL EASY, in election campaign time, to get an

occasional mistake into the paper, no matter how careful you are.

We don’t know who did make this one.

We published a story that Rep. Charles Brownson

said he had been indorsed by the National Alliance of Postal Authorities for re-election to Congress.

What the Alliance did was commend Mr. Brownson’s stand on civil rights. It never does indorse candidates for office, only issues. Mr. Brownson says he didn’t intentionally misinform us, and we're sure he didn't. We might have misunderstood him, and made the error ourselves. : Anyway we're glad to set the matter right, and hope it hasn't caused our friends of the Postal Alliance serious embarrassment.

The Issues

ONE of the best summaries of the issues which ought to be debated in the 1952 campaign was offered the other day by Mrs, Charles P. Howard, the only woman on the 80called “strategy and policy” committee advising the Eisen-hower-Nixon ticket, ; Mrs. Howard listed her issues as those which were most interesting to women voters, and she said they all come under the heading of “security of the family.” * “That means a lot of things,” she said: “Tt means the Korean War. Is it being handled right? Whose bungling caused it? Will my son have to go to Korea? 4 he does, will he come back ? “It means high taxes. How much will father! bring home? v “It means the high cost of living. How much will his take-home pay buy for his family and himself ? “it means protecting the family from the inroads of communism and from fellow travelers in government. "it means rooting out crime and corruption in government and crime and corruption condoned by government.” That's the campaign—in a few pithy questions, Not only for women voters, but for all voters,

Those are the questions voters want to hear about.

If Dwight Eisenhower and Adlai Stevenson make their answers in language as direct and down-to-earth, the voters - will be able to make their decisions with understanding and confidence. {

a @ » . "8 NEW Chairman Mitchell told his first Democratic National Committee meeting that Adlai Stevenson intends to put patronage on a merit basis. He got no applause.

Telephone PL aza 5881

There are some widely divergent views in the Republi-

The Russian assistance envisaged

THREE-TO-ONE SHOT . . . By Ludwell Denny *

War, May S

WASHINGTON—A triple gamble is involved in the American decision to put the Korean armistice issue before the United Nations Assembly. : It gives the Reds the propaganda chance they have been seeking all along, It will turn American public opinion against the United Nations if the assembly falls to support the American position. And it will invite an extension of the war to Manchuria and China proper, as the only effective alternative left to continued deadlock, if the United Nations debate does not advance a

truce.

Why is the administration reversing its long opposition to a United Nations debate on this subject and taking these new risks? After all, the negotiation of an armistice—as distinguished from a peace settlement—is a military matter for the Allled commander-in-chief, who is responsible for security until a final peace is achieved.

TOEHOLD . . . By R. H. Shackford

Russ Will Stay In Manchuria

LONDON-—Whatever else results from the current Soviet-Chinese high-level conference in Moscow, it's a sure bet Stalin will keep a big Russian foot inside Manchuria. Manchuria is too important a strategic position for Russia to trust completely in the hands of the Chinese Reds. : Arrangements for Stalin maintaining an effective Russian position in Manchuria, however, will come only after severe bargaining. No one really knows the temper of SovietChinese relations now. But in the past, Stalin has never hidden his disdain and distrust of the Chinese. During the 1946 Moscow Foreign Ministers Conference, Stalin told the then Secretary of State James F. Byrnes that the Chinese were the “worst liars in the world.” A year later, he was advising Chou En-lal to proceed with caution against Chiang Kaishek and try to make a deal. When the Chinese Reds did the opposite, Stalin wrote Tito—then his ' friend—complaining about Mai Tse-tung's unprincipled ‘behavior.

Four Key Points

IT IS AGAINST that backgrownd--against China's failure in 1950 to make a favorable deal with Russia, against Stalin's go-ahead to start

the Korean War and ultimately involve China,’

and against Stalin's 1950 promises to give up most of his Manchurian privileges this year— that the present negotiations are being held. Speculation on the present Moscow conference boils down generally to these key potential

"subjects:

ECONOMIC MATTERS—The 1950 financial agreement provided China with a niggardly equivalent of $300 million to be drawn in equal amounts over five years. Since then, the Chinese have gotten into the costly Korean War. in 1950 doesn't come close to that Chinese expense alone.

MILITARY AID—Chifla is totally dependent on Russia for important military equipment such as aircraft, tanks, trucks and naval craft. No one knows the terms under which Russia has supplied these items. But the Russians are not noted for giving things away.

POLITICAL POLICY — The Soviet-Chinese treaty binds each side to render military aid to the other in case of an attack by Japan or by any state uniting with Japan, The new Japanese peace treaty with the West, rearmament of Japan, and the ever-present threat of extension of the war beyond Korean frontiers always makes the invocation of this clause possible, No one doubts Russia would decide such an issue only in her own self-interest. But this must he an important part of discussions in Moscow, :

MANCHURIA—This is the most obvious item on the Moscow agenda. But it well may be the least important, regardless of how much propaganda is made of the results of the talks. Under the 1950 treaty, Russia agreed to give back ‘to China the Port Arthur naval base and the Manchurian trunk railways—handed over to Russia in the Roosevelt-Churchill-Stalin Yalta deal—immediately after a Japanese Peace treaty, or “in any case not later than the end of 1952.”

Doesn't Move Out

NORMALLY that would be made to order for Soviet propagandists—Stalin magnanimously tears up part of his side of the Yalta agreement. But Stalin is not a man to move out once he has moved in. The 1950 treaty left him a loophole—Darien, which is apart from the Port Arthur military installations. The Sino-Soviet treaty provided merely that the question of Soviet control of Darien would be “further considered on the conclusion of a peace treaty with Japan.” The Soviets don’t recognize the West's treaty with Japan. So Stalin, if he wishes, doesn't aven hava to consider Darien in his talks now

« with the Chinese.

Diplomats here have grave doubts that Sta{in will withdraw completely his garrison and air force even from Port Arthur. Even if he does decide to maintain only a “civilian” ‘position in Darien, past experience would ‘indicate the Chinese will pay a pretty price. For instance, the 1950 treaty provides that China shall compensate Soviet Russia for the “expense which it has incurred in restoring and constructing installations since 1945” in Port Arthur, And that could be just a starter.

SIDE GLANCES

or al: y

By Galbraith

d gull 9.10 T.M Reg. U. 6 Pat. ON, ; ope. 1962 by NEA Seron, boa. "Shall we pay the finance company or the doctor? Which is « more important—the baby or the car?"

pread If UN

The U. 8. government in agreeing to a United Nations debate does not intend to undermine this position. But it may not be able to prevent that. * & : THE SUGGESTION that the administration is acting in this way because of the presidential campaign is an over-simplification. Obviously the Korean stalemate is unpopular with the voters. Anything which would take the Democratic candidates off that hook would be welcome to party leaders from President Truman on down. But any election profit from this move is doubtful. There are only about three weeks between the opening of the United Nations session and the presidential election. Even if the Korean debate begins during that interval, which is not assured, final action is improbable. And any quick United Nations action is just as likely to be unsatisfactory to American voters

as something which will help keep a Democratic administration in office here. So all the administration is apt to get out of it politically, at best, is a demonstration that peace is desired—but with the certainty that some voters will suspect this as an appeasement, move. eo S AOTUALLY the determining motive Is international. It is an attempt to hold and, if possible, enlarge United Nations support. At the same time it is an effort to increase the strain which some Allied officials sense between the North Koreans and the Chinese and between the Chinese and the Russians. As for better Allied support, many United Nations members think the assembly should have more control over Korean negotiations. They think the U. 8. is partly to blame for the

' deadlock. Washington hopes to disprove this,

and to get a new moral commitment from the

How Long Can a Sucker

Live on His

Mp”

Own

F Er Nira PR

TOUGH ASSIGNMENT . . . By Oland D. Russell Battles Japan-China Trade Plan

TOKYO—One of the busiest men in Tokyo these days is:Chiang Kai-shek's personal envoy and top lieutenant, who's trying to talk the Japanese out of opening up any substantial trade with Red China. It's a tough assignment, he’s not making much headway. Gen. Chang Chun, former Premier 4nd Foreign Minister of China and an expert on Japan, told me he's been here for more than a month, sounding out Japanese in all walks of life. But he has been unable to get a general opinion on the issue between the two countries, particularly on economic co-operation. Therefore, he felt obliged to stdy a while longer for “thorough study.” It is. no secret that Gen. Chang’s job was chiefly to wean Japan away from Red trade temptations, and that he had a considerable setback by the recent Washington conference approval of limited trade between Japan and the Communist regime. Gen. Chang acknowledges that Japan must trade somewhere to survive, Nationalist China, confined to Formosa, can offer little or no market compared with the Chinese mainland in the past.

Two Avenues Open

GEN. CHANG can dangle before the realistic Japanese only two things, both colored by wishful thinking. One is the promise that “Japan will easily regain her markets on the China mainland after the defeat of the Communist bloc if she cultivates the friendliness of the Chinese people and starts now in economic cooperation.” The other is the suggestion that Japan had better build goodwill among millions of Chinese businessmen in southeast Asia if she tackles that area, the principal market now open to her exports.

and admittedly

WASHINGTON — After six months as TV hermits, Hilda and I broke away last night from the giant 21-inch screen and went to the movies. We were amazed. Here were great, big, whopping moving pictures as sharp and clear as Whistler etchings. No fuzz around the edges. No flopover. No heads dished in and (imagine this, TV fans) not one solitary dial to twiddle. I just sat there comfertably, eating popcorn. A good picture it was, too, starring my favorite actor, Bob Hope, and throwing in at no extra charge Jane Russell. This entertainment was entitled, “Son of Paleface.” Hope was extra funny, and whoever expected La Russell to act, anyhow? All this and technicolor, too. Only hardly anybody attended this performance. The theater never was much more than half filled and I think I know why: . ~~fHilda was half an hour late

newspaper (five cents) while waiting out front and succumbed to a street-corner shoeshiner (15 cents more). Mrs. O. ®as apologetic; traffic was

¢

n

Tail?

The Japanese look on both of these carrots as thinly veiled threats. They concede the influence of pro-Nationalist Chinese merchants in southeast Asia could check the Japanese commercial advance into that area. They've had bitter experience with Chinese boycotts. So far as promising lucrative trade in the name of a reconquered mainland, the Japanese say, “Let the Nationalists reconquer, first.” : Confronted with this Gen. Chang says it's certainly going to take some “common planning” to work out the necessary close co-opera-tion and co-ordination by the U. S., Japan and China. In this, he says, “It's up to the U. S. to take the leadership. Everything hinges on what America does. : “It's gratifying to note that both political

. parties in the U. 8. in this election year have

given prominent attention to the Far East,” he said.

Study Japan's Problems “DURING THE past few years, many American experts have gone deeply into Japan's problems, and I think if either side calls on them, they can come up with the ways and means to help Japan and influence her in choosing a course. “The countries of southeast Asia, because of the ravages they suffered from Japan during the war, are far more suspicious of a rival of Japan's militarism than ‘of. aggression from Russia or the Chinese Communists. “The main thing is for Japan to assume a firmer attitude against the Communists, and to do it now by, among other things, renouncing any intention to try to do business with Red China.”

international body. Moscow hopes at the very least to prevent that, and if possible to seat Red China in the United Nations as the price of an armistice as well as of peace, : Much will depend on Britain's attitude. Om the truce issue, including the exchange-ofs prisoners dispute, Britain will stand with thé United States. Likewise London is opposed to giving Red China United Nations membership as long as she is an aggressor, despite Britain's continued diplomatic re~ognition of that regime. Nevertheless, influential groups in London favor admission of Red China after peace if a settles ment can be brought on those terms. . This increases the risk of inviting a Korean showdown in the United Nations assembly now; If Stalin intends to compromise, presumably he will wait to deal with a new Washington admins istration. But in any event he never waits to seize a propaganda opportunity such as is being given to him now in the United Nations, . ASEEROARARANEERARARERS

Hoosier Forum

“| do not agree with a word that you say, but | will defend to the death your : right to say it."

Plenty of Room

MR. EDITOR! In this anxious hour of world crisis, we look

back with mixed feelings of nervousness and

disgust at the fumbling, uncertainty and toleration of corruption in our national government during the past few years. We also look ahead, to and beyond the coming election and the inevitable shake-up which must result, to the hopeful prospect of new confidence in the gov ernment and in ourselves. Of course, all kinds of ways are being point~ ed out to achieve this end. The most hopefully expounded solution is to change to the Republican Party; and thus not only provide the administration with new faces, but preserve our cherished two-party system as well. This sounds like a good solution, and I believe it really has merits. However, we must remember that there are good, honest, capable men in both parties. The Democratic Party can be proud of such men as Adlai Ewing Stevenson, Governor of Illinois; our own Gov. Schricker; former Mayor of Indianapolis Philip Bayt; Sen. stes Kefauver of Tennessee; Sen. Paul Douglas of Illinois; W. Stuart Symington of Missouri, and many others. The party cannot be so proud of Harry 8. Truman, Dean Acheson, Kenneth McKeller, and a few others. The Republican Party can be proud of men like Dwight David Eisenhower, candidate for President; John Foster Dulles; Gen. Douglas MacArthur; Sen. John J. Williams of Delaware; Sen. Wayne Morse of Oregon; our own Congressman from Marion County, Charles B. Brownson, and countless others. But this party also has some not-so-good men like Sen. McCarthy of Wisconsin; Sen. William Jenner of our own Hoosierland, and some others. In plain, simple, every-day language, I believe we should, in a general way, change parties. But in doing so, let’s not throw out the decent, competent public officials now serving us so well. Let's concentrate, instead, upon getting rid of the misfits who are not doing as good a job as they should. We can vote for a capable Republican over a capable Democrat; but voting for an incompetent Republican over a capable Democrat is carrying change too far. We want to change parties this November. But we also want to put well-equipped officials n every office. And there's plenty of room to 0 th. .

—BIll Ridge, City. Not Afraid

MR. EDITOR: - I should like to ask you why you claim to be an independent newspaper when, election after election, for the past several years, you support only the Republican Party and find nothing but fault with the Democratic Party. There is not a single Democratic newspaper in Indianapolis. It certainly is difficult to understand how you can support a man like Jenner against Gov. Schricker, but then it is evident you have swung “whole hog” to the Republicans. : Your editorial in a recent paper entitled “The Farmers Were Hoaxed” is a dirty, malicious falsehood. You stooped so low as to copy

. from the Saturday Evening Post editorial on

the same subject. What's the matter, can’t you get over the fact that Truman was elected in 1948? He didn’t hoax the farmers at all. They voted for him, didn’t they? Print the truth in your editorials and let the people make up their own minds instead of trying to influence them in behalf of the Republican - ticket. I shall appreciate a reply to my charge that you have ceased to be an independent news paper. So far as I am concerned, your editorjae stink and I'm not afraid to sign my name, either.

—Chester D. Apple, 326 W. Faylot St. Pendleton,

REAL VALUES

In your mad quest for adventure . . . and .

success in any form... have you ever stopped to think of why . .. you're drifting in a re have you ever taken time out . . . for a checkup on the way . ..\or are you like most people . , . who don’t see the light of day . .. if you are then I am sorry ... for no doubt you've left behind . . . the real values of this lifetime ... . that will bring you peace of mind , . . you'ye torgotten love and friendship . . . little things in life that count ... and replaced them with Aesires + « « that wil make your heartaches oun

~By Ben Burroughs

NO DIAL TWIDDLING . . . By Frederick C. Othman Nothing Casual About Movies $ Incidentals

!

Truce Move Fails

meeting me. So I bought a

heavy, there was no place to park, and she put the car in a parking lot for 50 cents,

She Was Hungry

SHE was hungry, but she did not want to miss the beginning of the picture. At the corner drugstore we both had fast chocolate sodas at 25° cents each. They came in paper cups and weren't much good. We were still hungry.

But we went to the theater, tickets at 55 cents each, and the lobby was permeated with the lovely, buttery odor of popcorn. So I bought two pasteboard boxes of that at 15 cents each. Small boxes, too. We used to get way more popcorn Yor a nickel in a striped bag from the man who had a stand outside, but he’s been gone these many years.

As I say, we enjoyed “the show. Some of the local critics said it was stupid, but that indicates they are highbrows, or maybe sick of movies. In the long ago, I reviewed pictures, myself, and I saw so many that none of 'em looked good to me. This one may not have been

© art, but it surely did move, par-

ticularly Russell fo

en Hope took Miss a ride in a three-

(5%

wheeled automobile. In addition, there were Miss R.’s legs; shapely. The newsreel was good and clear, too, but about a week late. All the things on it we'd already seen at home. Then

came a cartoon short about a °

stupid cat and a smart canary and that also struck me as

funny. All in all, a satisfactory movie.

We Eat Again

NOW, said Hilda, we could have our dinnér. She also said let’s not make any big. thing of it, but eat at the counter in a nearby grill. So we had hamburgers and pie and coffee at a cost of $1.10 each. Only change I had in my pocket was 50 cents; the waitress got that, Then I paid my bill and now

Barbs— A RECORD Saturday-Sun-day driving is reported over the U. 8. It's a great life if you don't week-end. ” - » X FISH- already have swum away from where it looks lik

a mighty good spot.

I did have change and the boy at the parking lot extracted another quarter from me. On the way home Hilda said we'd certainly had a nice evening and very inxpensive. She said we ‘ought to do this more often.

My own calculations - indie cated our casual attendance at the movies had cost us $5.55; had we eaten a good dinner the bill would have been nearly twice that much. Fgr it’s not the cost of a-movie ticket so much that hurt, but the incidentals.

Hilda was shocked when I showed her my addition. One good thing about TV, she said, is it's free. What the movie people ‘ean do about this, I don’t know. Might help a little if they gave better values in the popcorn department.

HIGH HEELS are making hoofs«of women's feet, says a doctor. Call out the village blacksmith.

TRADE

1)

ett

It has of tim vivid It is Brothe The qu chape gifts; skill o creati

Comf that y votion humar Brothe remen

!

Te 9