The Charlotte News

Friday, April 12, 1957

THREE EDITORIALS

Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that the House Appropriations Committee this date had cut 23 percent from new funding requested by the State Department and the U.S. Information Agency, criticizing both for what it called "amazing and unprecedented" personnel practices. The Committee refused to approve any money for 2,123 new positions to the two agencies and for continuation of 950 jobs established during the current fiscal year without prior consideration or appropriations by Congress. The report of the Committee, written by Representative John Rooney of New York, criticized "fiscal irresponsibility on the part of the State Department" and "irresponsible handling of the taxpayers' money" in connection with foreign programs financed with funds appropriated to the President. The report accompanied a bill recommending cuts of nearly 21 percent from the State Department's budget as sought by the President, 47.3 million dollars less than that sought, and 41.3 million less than appropriated the previous year. From the U.S.I.A., the report recommended a cut of 26 percent, 37.9 million, 6.9 million less than the previous year. The recommendation stipulated that the Voice of America broadcasts were not to be cut and cautioned against "propagandizing the American public". Funds appropriated to the President for international cultural and trade fair programs were cut by 7.6 million dollars or 41 percent from the requested budget, and 7.5 million less than the appropriation for the current year. The Justice Department was cut by 3 percent or 6.8 million from its sought budget, amounting to an increase, however, of 11.8 million over the current year's appropriations. The FBI had been provided all of its sought budget, including a 5.9 million dollar increase over the current year's funding. The Federal judiciary had been cut by 5 percent or 2.2 million dollars from the requested budget, but a 2.2 million increase over the current year. The funding was incorporated in an omnibus bill providing new appropriations of 583.8 million dollars, a reduction of 101.8 million, or 15 percent from the requested budget, and 41.6 million less than the current year's appropriations.

The House Appropriations Committee this date had voted to provide an extra 41 million dollars to the Post Office Department, seeking to prevent prolonged curtailment of mail services which had been ordered by Postmaster General Arthur Summerfield were he not to be provided an additional 47 million dollars for the remaining portion of the fiscal year. Under orders already issued, post offices would be closed on Saturdays and Sundays and all city and rural mail delivery would be stopped on Saturdays, except for special delivery items. Other restrictions also had been ordered. Mr. Summerfield had told newsmen the previous day that he would not be able to restore scheduled mail services which had been cut until he was given sufficient funding. The full House would vote on the appropriation on Monday, and the Senate was reported ready to act as soon as the House sent it a bill, then needing only the approval of the President for passage.

Senator Kerr Scott of North Carolina said this date that he had completely lost confidence in the Postmaster General, repositing in him no more confidence than he had left in Secretary of State Dulles, making clear that he would like to see Mr. Summerfield replaced.

Secretary of the Army Wilber Brucker had offered to members of Congress a free trip to Kentucky, indicating that it was mere "coincidence" that it happened to coincide with the same weekend as the Kentucky Derby, resulting in bitter comments from members of Congress. Representative George Mahon of Texas, chairman of a House Appropriations subcommittee which handled military money bills, stated, "This seductive Army bobble could possibly cost the Army 100 million dollars in reduced appropriations." Congressman Usher Burdick of North Dakota said, "The extravagant excursion is arranged for one purpose and one only—to please Congressmen." The invitation had extended to members of the House and Senate Armed Services and Appropriations Committees, to witness a military demonstration on May 3-4 at Fort Knox, Ky., 30 miles from Louisville and Churchill Downs, with May 4 being Derby day. The invitation included free air transportation, free meals and lodging for the duration of the Army show, and included the statement that any visiting Congressman who desired to remain for the horse race would be flown back to Washington on May 5, indicating the Secretary's regret that he could not arrange for seats at the Derby. Secretary Brucker had said the previous day, in the wake of the criticism, that the trip was "not a free junket to the Derby at the expense of the taxpayers, but a serious expedition." He said that the Army show had been tentatively set the previous fall for May 2-3, without regard to the Derby and that it had been changed to May 3-4 after Representative John Robsion of Kentucky had mentioned in March that the Derby was on May 4. The Secretary said that the change in schedule would not cost the Army anything. Representative Mahon said to the House the previous day that the invitation was not good public relations with Congress and was bad public relations with the American people, most of whom were seeking economy and good management in the Government. He provided a "public warning" to Secretary Brucker to stop that sort of spending. Mr. Burdick added with sarcasm that the Army should not "be so parsimonious about the race tickets—they should pay that, too." (Should Secretary Brucker develop some name for the Army exhibition, such as "Ecomcon", it might be wise to take heed, especially keeping track of the movements of General LeMay for the duration.)

In Raleigh, a bill to separate the State's prison system from the State Highway Commission, one of the major proposals of the legislative program offered by Governor Luther Hodges, had been killed by the State Senate Committee on State Government this date, voting five to three to provide an unfavorable report on the measure, which had been passed by the State House the previous week by a large margin. The movant who had proposed to give the bill an unfavorable report had argued to the Committee that separation was unnecessary as the two entities had been separated administratively by the 1955 Legislature, with executive authority over the prisons transferred to the director of the Prisons Department, and that there had been complete cooperation thus far between the prison system and the Highway Commission.

Donald Macdonald of The News reports that Charlotte's Recorder's Court Solicitor, James Walker, had said this date that he had asked the Legislature to repeal the Goodman Act, a special law which related to carrying concealed weapons in Mecklenburg County, prescribing a minimum sentence of a year on the roads or a $100 fine for carrying a concealed weapon with a blade over three inches long, named for its sponsor, State Representative Arthur Goodman of Charlotte, which had become law in 1953. Mr. Walker said that the law had been ineffective as a crime deterrent, citing totals of convictions on concealed weapons charges in City Police Court during a six-year period, showing no appreciable decrease in the number of cases charging concealed weapons. His request for repeal of the law was endorsed by two police chiefs, two Recorder's Court judges and two other court prosecutors. Mr. Walker indicated that the punitive requirement of the law was extreme in some instances, not allowing each concealed weapons charge to be examined on its own facts. He indicated that the regular concealed weapons statute used in every county except Mecklenburg allowed a discretionary penalty by the judge, enabling him or her to look at each individual case and provide punishment accordingly. He said that he had discussed the matter with former Representative Goodman, who had suggested making some sort of amendment to the law.

In Charlotte, J. P. Hobson, senior vice-president and trust officer of the Commercial National Bank, and for seven years, member of the City School Board, had announced for re-election to the Board this date, the third incumbent to do so.

Julian Scheer of The News reports of David Ovens, Charlotte's "sharp-witted merchant and philanthropist", for whom Ovens Auditorium was named, having announced the publication of his book this date, but would not say what it concerned, that it started in 1903 and ended in the current year, covering a "colorful period", titled If This Be Treason, which would go on sale in Charlotte bookstores on April 25, costing $3.50 and running to between 250 and 300 pages. The publication would be celebrated by a formal dinner at the Charlotte Country Club on April 24, before 90 assembled guests, including U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge John J. Parker and Dr. Chalmers Davidson of Davidson College, both of whom would make brief talks. Mr. Ovens had helped to build the Ivey Department Stores into one of the South's most successful retail merchants. He indicated he had written all of the book himself and that it was not a business story, but would say no more, indicating, to dissuade further questioning, "You've got the story, and now you want to lick the cake pan!" He had written thousands of speeches and all of the early advertisements for Ivey's. He eschewed a typewriter in favor of dictation, with his typist-nurse indicating that he did not know one end of a typewriter from the other. On that statement, the interview by Mr. Scheer had ended.

Charles Kuralt of The News reports that it was "the season of green grass and dogwood blossoms, of tall blue skies and gentle zephyrs from the east. It is the season of Easter, and hence, the season of ducks." He indicates that no one could impart precisely what ducks had to do with spring, not even the proprietor of Hastings seed store, the resident duck expert in the community, indicating that all he knew was that they sold a lot of them at the current time of year, probably a couple of hundred during the current week, with around 400 the following week in advance of Easter. He had told of an average father coming into the store seeking to purchase a little duck for his children, and they would sell them at 50 cents apiece or three for $1.30. Then, after Easter, the mother would come into town, tired of the mess around the house, and have the children place the duck in the lake at Freedom Park, resulting in hundreds of ducks being placed in the lake every year following Easter, with about 90 percent of them coming from the Hastings seed store. Then fall would come and the ducks would grow up and there was not enough food around the park for all of them to eat, and so the City would have to buy food for them, which was purchased at the seed store. The store sold about 1,000 week-old ducks every spring, while other seed stores, dime stores and pet stores sold more ducks. Hardly anybody raised ducks to eat, according to the proprietor of the seed store, even though they made "pretty good eating" when they reached between 10 and 12 pounds. But most people took them to the lake before they got that big. He said that they got their ducks by parcel post from a duck hatchery in Ohio, that they were hatched on Monday and they received them the following day. He recounted of a man who came to buy seed from them every now and then, who had a duck waddling behind him through the middle of town, not on a leash, only a red ribbon tied around its neck. Mr. Kuralt regards that duck as illustrating the point regarding care and feeding of Easter ducks, that they should be treated right, in which case they would treat the owner right, that chicken mash would suffice for food, but would have to be accompanied by a pan of water as ducks could not wash their food down, that little ducks were cuddly and invited hugging and squeezing, but that they should not be, that little ducks had fuzz instead of feathers and should not be allowed to catch cold, and finally that the Freedom Park lake was getting crowded, entreating people to find some other lake in which to place them.

In London, Ky., it was reported that a coal miner and part-time preacher faced a three-year prison term because of a scheme to collect thousands of dollars by posing as Adolf Hitler. The man admitted having written hundreds of letters saying that Hitler was alive and would set up a "new kingdom" in the U.S. He was convicted in Federal District Court the previous day on three counts of using the mails to defraud. He had called himself "Furrier NO. I" in his letters. He was sentenced to three years each on the three counts, to be served concurrently. The judge indicated that the man had claimed that he was "a good American" actually seeking to collect evidence against "other persons" whom he claimed were involved, but Government witnesses said that the man had received as much as $11,000 from his victims, including several thousand dollars from a former U.S. Army sergeant of German descent, from Bristol, Va. When the latter had died the previous year, relatives had discovered postal money order receipts made out to the defendant and more than 100 letters from him, promising positions of power to contributors.

No, his name was not Trump, but the appeal sounds basically the same, even if Trump does not, himself, purport to be the reincarnation of Hitler, though his rhetoric certainly leads one to suppose that he is framing himself in the image of the Reich "Furrier" while promising his followers the same sort of pie-in-the-sky on which Hitler built his Third Reich satrapy by satrapy, in each state and each nation as the head Furrier purports to control how Israel and Russia, not to forget Mexico, Central and South America, would function under his worldwide dictatorial direction. We do not jest. This guy is crazy and anyone who votes for him is likewise crazy, or just a plain hypocrite, seeking political power in a supposed new term, making those who have called him what he is after having served under him for awhile in the first four years that much more courageous and responsible to the American people. The worst type of hypocrites are those who have served under him, decried his methods and his rhetoric, and yet now, after having opposed him for the Republican nomination in 2024, exhibit spineless genuflection in bowing to him and indicating their intention to vote for him. It is, however, not so surprising, as most of those people have shown themselves through their political careers to be spineless hypocrites, despite their bold contentions to the contrary, always placing party and political expediency ahead of country, while professing to be the "true Americans" as all of those horrible Democrats are "traitors" to the cause—of true fascism. If a person considers reflectively, objectively and honestly how things were in his four previous years in the White House, all four years, not just three of them, no one but an irresposible, suicidal lunatic or someone who cannot remember past yesterday would wish to relive that horrible time in American history, which, for his lack of policy indications other than promises of vindictive vindication for all of the supposed "weaponized" justice brought to bear on him and the rounding up of millions of people for mass deportation, will be far worse the second time around.

If you think things are really so bad economically and in terms of inflation, stop seeing the economy through the myopic lenses of your Americocentric glasses and instead look at the global picture for a comparative view in light of events affecting world economy, especially the war by Russia against Ukraine and the post-pandemic adjustment. Read about England and its post-pandemic struggles amid high unemployment, when the U.S. is at historic 60-year lows in unemployment under President Biden, and inflation, which is far higher than in the U.S., under Conservative leadership, now likely to end in July after 14 consecutive years of it, in favor of the Labour Party. Do you recall when Trump was echoing the call to support Brexit? See how that turned out, another one of his brilliant policy ukases, to name but one of dozens.

On the editorial page, "Minimum Wage: A Tar Heel Necessity" finds that any old argument which lobbyists opposed to a state minimum wage could put forth to the State Senate Manufacturing, Labor and Commerce Committee appeared to suffice.