The Charlotte News
Saturday, June 27, 1959
ONE EDITORIAL
Site Ed. Note: The front page
reports from Covington, La., that Governor Earl Long had deserted the
sanctuary of a motel south of the town this date and headed for his
beloved farm near Winnfield in northern Louisiana. Before leaving,
he had indicated that he would return to Covington on Sunday night.
Doctors had ordered him to take a complete rest, but he had made no
bones about wanting to visit his farm. The Governor had gone on a
shopping spree the previous night and bought a pitchfork, two horse
collars, a post-hole digger, a hoe and other farm implements. He
loaded the equipment into the trunk of his limousine which left the
motel shortly before he had driven away. The pitchfork did not fit in
the car's trunk and so the Governor put it on the back seat. The
limousine left the motel earlier, taking the Governor's sister and a
niece to an unknown destination. It returned about an hour later and
waited as the Governor directed parking operations. He waved to
reporters as he had driven away and photographers lined the opposite
side of the road. After his release from the mental hospital, the
Governor remained firm in his intention to run again for Governor,
but said that he would follow doctors' instructions for rest. He had
been staying at a small country motel in Covington. His words on
Friday indicated, however, that he did not intend such a rest,
talking of renewing his campaign for re-election, saying, "I
thought I would have to make 300 speeches next fall to win, but now I
think I can do it with 100 speeches." A photograph accompanies
the report, showing former News reporter Charles Kuralt, now
with CBS, seeking to elicit a statement from Governor Long, the caption pointing
out that Mr. Kuralt had later been slugged by a sheriff's deputy when
the Governor had left in a mob scene, though he had not been hurt
badly. Mr. Kuralt was perhaps beat
In New York, it was reported that the Steelworkers Union had agreed this date to resume contract negotiations with the industry's regular bargaining team. Union president David McDonald said, however, "I'm not going to get in another filibuster session," and would walk out again if the industry continued to refuse to grant worker contract gains. The previous day, Mr. McDonald had declined further sessions with the industry representatives, saying that they had been fruitless. He called instead for direct talks with steel company top executives, but that effort had been flatly rejected. Mr. McDonald announced during the morning, following a meeting with the union's 33-man executive board, that he would return to the session with the regular industry team, headed by U.S. Steel Corp. vice-president R. Conrad Cooper. He said he would not sit in on the talks, however, as he was not interested in their case histories.
In Milan, Italy, it was reported that an armored car regiment and hundreds of police this date had sealed off a three-mile zone of scattered wreckage which might hold the secret behind the crash of a U.S. airliner during a harsh summer thunderstorm killing all 68 persons aboard. Witnesses had said that they saw lightning strike the four-engine Constellation the previous day, but aviation experts said that it was more likely that the Chicago-bound TWA plane had been shaken to pieces by the violence of the storm. Some people on the ground said that they had heard the plane explode in the air. There had also been the possibility of mechanical failure as the cause of Italy's worst air disaster ever. Italian and American experts had begun their inquiry this date, with investigators coming from the U.S. and Italian Government air safety agencies and TWA also participating. An Italian district attorney also had been sent by the Government. Until the investigation was complete, not even the relatives of the victims would be allowed near the wreckage. The plane had taken off from Milan just 17 minutes before the crash and had flown north toward the Swiss Alps and into the storm, headed for Paris and then a nonstop flight to Chicago's O'Hare Airport. At least 28 passengers and six crew members had been Americans. Bodies, so badly mangled that identification was not immediately possible, had been collected in an improvised shelter in the woods. Bits of the plane had been scattered across a three-mile area along the ground among the crowded villages north of Milan. All ground observers who saw the lightning bolt strike reported that the plane had then turned into a fireball.
In San Antonio, Tex., it was reported that at least four men had died and two jet planes had crashed on opposite sides of the city within 40 minutes the previous night and there was no word whether anyone had survived. Firemen, able to reach the flaming wreckage only on foot, had sent back word that three had perished in a reconnaissance bomber which had hit on top of a steep, rocky hill about 20 miles northwest of the city. A fourth man had died in a T-33 trainer from Luke Air Force Base in Arizona, which had also burned after crashing a mile north of Lavernia, 26 miles southeast of San Antonio. That plane had been bound for Randolph Air Force Base in San Antonio. An official spokesman at Homestead Air Force Base near Miami, Fla., had identified the T-33 pilot, whom he said was returning the trainer to Homestead from Oakland, Calif., when the crash occurred. The two crashes had occurred about 22 minutes apart, with the T-33 having crashed first.
In St. Louis, it was reported that
the nude body of a red-haired stripteaser had been found the previous
night in an apartment occupied by a pharmacist previously convicted
of illegally selling narcotics. The coroner said that the woman was
three months pregnant and that an autopsy would be performed this
date to determine cause of death. The pharmacist had been jailed on a
charge of suspicion of homicide. He had been free on bond pending
appeal of an eight-year Federal prison sentence on the narcotics
conviction and was working as a taxi cab driver. Police said that a
charge plate among the dead woman's effects showed two different
names, albeit with the same surname, giving one address in New
Orleans. They said that she had been performing for about five days
at the Chik Inn
In Mecklenburg County, it was reported that a 34-year old man from Stanley was injured in a spectacular wreck on Highway 16 W. shortly after midnight and had died during the morning at a Charlotte hospital. Police said that he had been the driver of a 1957 Ford which had gone out of control on the highway about 8 miles west of Charlotte, had traveled 300 feet on the shoulder, had run into a ditch and gone 225 feet, clipped off a telephone pole, nosed into the dirt and traveled 44 feet farther before coming to rest in a field. A passenger in the car, a 36-year old woman of Charlotte, had suffered three broken ribs according to officers. She was identified as the owner of the car. County police said that the man, suffering from head and chest injuries, had been taken by ambulance to a Charlotte hospital where he had died in the wee hours of the morning. The woman told the officers that she was sleeping at the time of the wreck and did not know what had happened. The officers said that they had been unable to talk to the deceased before his death.
Ann Sawyer of The News, in the sixth in a series of reports on prospective school consolidation, indicates that the City and County School Systems stood on the threshold of consolidation, with individuals looking for differences in the systems, having no trouble in finding them. She indicates that the area of greatest difference was in special services, those beyond the state prescribed and financed program, where the school tax supplement made the difference. City residents paid 50 cents per $100 of valuation of property to hire extra teachers and increase teacher pay, producing the previous year $2,193,600. County residents who owned property paid 40 cents per $100 of valuation, amounting the previous year to $905,891, used to increase teacher pay and hire additional teachers. With a higher supplement, which had been higher for several years, the City had been able to do more things. The County had gone from 20 cents to 40 cents only two years earlier. School officials working together had estimated that it would take 61.5 cents countywide to bring the County services up to those offered by the City. Estimating special services alone, they said that it would take $678,300 to do the job, including in that amount $234,500 to put County teachers on the same pay scale as City teachers. With a 54-cent countywide school supplement, the County schools would see their special services expanded but could not have them brought up to the level of the City. If consolidation occurred, the County schools would get two teachers in special education, three in physical education, six in art, six librarians and two or three counselors. The committee estimated that it would take $48,000 to equalize the physical education programs, but felt that it was necessary to reduce the supplement and so had cut the physical education budget to $12,000. They thought that $40,000 more would be needed for the County's art program, but it had to be cut to $24,000. To bring the library program up to that of the City, $88,000 was needed, and it was cut to $24,000. The cost for counselors had been cut from $20,000 to $10,000. Some of those areas involved a difference in philosophy. It was believed in the City School System that "exceptional" children, the mentally retarded, the gifted, and the physically handicapped, ought attend separate classes. For a decade, the City had operated a special education program, believing that all children, those left in the regular classrooms, as well as those segregated, were benefited by that type of program. County schoolchildren also had been admitted to those classes, as the County Schools had no special education program. In the elementary grades, all of the children were kept together, regardless of ability, but were permitted to work at their individual levels. Both systems, the City to a larger extent, grouped students according to basic regular and advanced courses. In elementary grades, there was a great difference in the instructional program. Whereas the City believed in grouping within a grade according to ability, the County did not. County schools followed what was known as the Robinson research program, named after the elementary supervisor, Ms. Ruth Robinson. Parents and teachers in both systems had been concerned about the difference in the two instructional systems, but there was no answer as to which would be adopted for the consolidated system. School Board members said that both systems would be studied and that the best would be taken from each. The library systems were quite different, with the City for years having aimed toward more librarians while the County had stuck to few librarians, with the classroom teachers doing most of the library work. The City System had over 40 librarians and the County System had five.
Bob Slough of The News reports that acting City Manager George Livingston during the morning had briefed the new City Manager, William Veeder, on the 1959-60 Charlotte budget. While Mr. Veeder and Mr. Livingston had been discussing monetary affairs of the city, Mr. Veeder's wife was hunting for a house. They had arrived in Charlotte the previous night from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., where Mr. Veeder was the City Manager, and they would move to Charlotte sometime the following month when Mr. Veeder would assume his new duties.
The "inside story" of the 1959 General Assembly would begin on the editorial page on Monday, with Representative Watts Hill, Jr., of Durham, the session's brightest young star, giving a candid, straight-from-the-shoulder analysis of the Legislature's record in a three-part series written exclusively for the newspaper. He would seek to explain why court reform had failed, how the buck had been passed on education, the peril of "provincialism", how big cities could deal with rural control of the Legislature, and the "tragedy" of the failure of state constitutional revision. Mr. Hill was a member of a distinguished North Carolina family, was serving his second term as a member of the State House and was chairman of the Committee on Higher Education.
Max Muhleman, sportswriter for The News, reports on the sports page from ringside in Yankee Stadium in New York on the defeat of reigning heavyweight boxing champion Floyd Patterson by Ingemar Johansson of Sweden the previous night, by a technical knockout in the third round.
We suppose those who enjoy analogies between boxing and politics might make the leap that the subject of the editorial book review this date, which follows, also would eventually suffer a TKO in his third round of presidential politics when, he, too, suffered a hard punch, albeit a left to his starboard and not a right to his port, after leaving himself momentarily unguarded—but, as with most sports analogies, we would find such a supposed comparison to be knocked out by the devil
On the editorial page, "Dick Nixon: The Man and the Myth", an editorial book review of Richard Nixon: A Political and Personal Portrait, by Earl Mazo, indicates that an acquaintance, a knowledgeable conservative of considerable political sophistication, had been discussing Mr. Nixon with the writer recently after the Vice-President had just made a speech in New York saying some things with which the writer's friend had heartily agreed. He had confided, however, that he "just can't stand that man", when asked why, responding, "That's the whole trouble. I don't know why—and it bothers me."
It finds it a strange admission and wholly unlike the friend and yet was a familiar reaction to the most inscrutably complex and perhaps the most misunderstood man on the American political scene.
Mr. Mazo, a former South Carolina newspaperman who had been national political correspondent for the New York Herald Tribune since 1955, had probed deeper into the riddle of Mr. Nixon than any other journalist, having examined his career with infinite care, sifting fact from fiction, pumping the Vice-President's friends and enemies alike, exploring every imaginable cranny of his personal life and turning up wheelbarrow-loads of new and fascinating information. It finds that a recognizable and wholly believable portrait had emerged, clearer and fairer than any the nation had ever had of Mr. Nixon, but yet, amazingly, some of the enigma remained, and it was bothered by it.
As the author had pointed out, complexity of character was not unusual among important public men, but Mr. Nixon was singularly complex, Mr. Mazo finding him "a paradoxical combination of qualities that bring to mind Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Harry Truman and Joe McCarthy." It was that combination which was both his strength and his weakness, giving him flexibility of mind and spirit to alternate easily between high statesmanship and bare-knuckle political brawling. But the conflicting images of the "two Nixons" had both confused and disturbed many Americans who might be called upon to determine his political future in 1960.
The task of discovering the whole man behind the headlines was all the more difficult because both Mr. Nixon and his career had been subjected to exaggerations. Many of his enemies wanted to dismiss him, as Adlai Stevenson once had done, as "McCarthyism in a white collar". But any real resemblance between Mr. Nixon and the "bumbling hatchet man from Wisconsin" was too slight to contemplate seriously. At the same time, many of his right-wing friends liked to think of him as an arch-conservative. It finds that he was a conservative, but one with a practical yardstick and with remarkably unconservative approaches to such questions as international relations, civil rights and certain areas of social and economic concern, with his innate tendencies probably less conservative than those of President Eisenhower.
At the end of the book, the author had given his readers a rare and candid view of the current political philosophy of the Vice-President, prepared during the course of two dozen interviews between November, 1957 and January, 1959, presented in the first person without interpretive comment. That section alone was worth the price of the book because, in simple, conversational style, it presented the frankest expressions ever recorded of Mr. Nixon's ideas on a number of lively topics.
But to most readers, the meat of the book would be the absorbing accounts of the many political crises in the life of "this strange and wholly unique public figure."
The author had retold the story of the young Californian's buzz-saw tactics against Representative Jerry Voorhis in 1946 in his first run for Congress, including his controversial observations about "lip-service Americans" and public officials "who front for un-American elements." There was a somewhat sketchy but painstakingly fair account of the Alger Hiss case which had catapulted Mr. Nixon to national fame in 1948.
The vigorous Senatorial campaign between Mr. Nixon and Congresswoman Helen Gahagan Douglas in 1950 was documented in more detail. As the author noted, nothing in the litany of reprehensible conduct charged against Mr. Nixon as a campaigner had been cited more than the tactics by which he had defeated Mrs. Douglas for the Senate. Mr. Mazo's account was important because it placed the episode in an impartial perspective, something which it had lost during the years since. For one thing, the Democrats themselves had worked Mrs. Douglas over with the issues of Communism and subversion in the party primary before the Republicans had taken her on. For another, both the campaigns of Mr. Nixon and Mrs. Douglas had been guilty of atrocious tactics. According to the author, "the most notable difference was in the adroitness and calmness with which Nixon and his people executed their hyperbole and innuendo… For whatever reasons—perhaps because Mrs. Douglas and her friends were less blasé and more conscience-stricken by improprieties—when compared with the surgeons of the Nixon camp, Mrs. Douglas' operators performed like apprentice butchers."
It finds that the book achieved a peak of excitement in the two chapters dealing with the "Nixon Fund" during the latter stages of the 1952 presidential campaign, the "Checkers" affair. The author captured all of the drama and emotion of that story, taking readers backstage to view the anguished actors in the strange and remarkable political melodrama, a remarkable job of reconstruction which it finds to have been political reporting at its best. The episode had culminated in the television speech, "an incredibly schmaltzy appeal to sentimentality that nevertheless saved Mr. Nixon's career at a crucial moment", in September, 1952.
The author wrote that, "In retrospect, the affair was bad for Nixon. The people who remember it most vividly thought it was horrible. The Democrats and Nixon's Republican enemies have kept the embers aglow. Much of the 'I don't like Nixon, but don't know why' talk stems from the incident. But if it weren't for the immediate impact of that speech Nixon probably would have been done for and Eisenhower might have lost."
Mr. Mazo had handled the somewhat paler events in Mr. Nixon's career, the attempted coddling of Senator McCarthy, the broken resolution to retire from politics in 1956, Harold Stassen's "Dump Nixon" movement at the convention of that year, the crises over the President's health, the ill-fated South American "good will" tour, with equal skill. It finds that there had also been excellent discussions of the vital role of the Vice-President in the Administration and his growing stature and influence in the nation and the world. The author had also attempted to predict what kind of president Mr. Nixon would make, concluding that he would be a "strong president" in the tradition of the two Roosevelts, hard-driving, imaginative, forthright, and of course, controversial.
The piece concludes that it was a fascinating and eminently fair study of a complex and controversial figure and that if it failed to make an entirely understandable human being out of the Vice-President, it was at least a noble and extremely valuable effort.
Tom Turner, writing in "The American Seen … By Others", in a piece titled "Monkey See, Monkey Do", indicates that Jean-Rene Huguenin, in the French review "Arts", had become indignant over America's mass culture, saying, "The Americans are past masters of the art of popularizations, or rather, the art of rendering vulgar." He had cited condensations of War and Peace and of L'Education Sentimentale as horrible examples. He had said: "We've reached the point where we no longer protest against American inventions. We're hardened to them. We tolerate the Reader's Digest and even are able to laugh at its silly candor."
M. Huguenin had indicated that what was really shocking was to see Europe, with all of its traditions, trying to imitate the U.S., "like those comfortably rich young boys who play Al Capone in the chic bars of the Champs-Elysees."
Drew Pearson indicates that no matter what would happen to the harassed and beleaguered Governor Earl Long of Louisiana and his mental problems, he faced almost certain income tax prosecution. Worry over tax problems was believed to have contributed materially to his mental disturbance. For well over a year, about 12 IRS agents had been scrutinizing the financial activities of the Governor, especially the new home he had built in Baton Rouge and various deposits in the City National Bank of Baton Rouge. The account contained an amount reported to be in excess of $100,000, which the IRS had described as bribes and gifts, but which the Governor had described as "campaign contributions". Part of the money was reported to have come from the Teamsters at the time when Governor Long had removed the right-to-work bill from the Louisiana statutes on July 21, 1956, shortly after he had taken office for his second term. The law had been passed on July 21, 1954, when he was out of office. Also involved was a payment to the Governor at the time he had vetoed the Mississippi Bar Pilots bill.
When Mr. Pearson had asked Louis Rousell, a New Orleans oilman, what he knew about that payment, he had been frank in saying that Earl Bennings had brought $5,000 to him to deliver to the Governor, which he had done. Mr. Bennings, he explained, represented a group of steamship companies which did not want the Mississippi Bar Pilots bill to become law. Mr. Rousell told Mr. Pearson that the Governor had vetoed the bill and that he had delivered the money to the Governor just before the veto. He said that he had not told the Governor that it was a campaign contribution, that he had just been a messenger boy and did not tell him anything. When Mr. Pearson said that the Governor had claimed that the payments were campaign funds for his re-election, Mr. Rousell said that it sounded like what they said in Baton Rouge, "when you pay $10,000 to a state legislator. If he's a lawyer, it's a legal fee. If he isn't, it's a bribe." Mr. Rousell said that he had not made any affidavits about the payment, that he had been subpoenaed to testify in front of the intelligence unit of the IRS and that he had told them what had happened, as he had told Mr. Pearson. He said that Mr. Bennings had made an affidavit.
Mr. Pearson indicates that in the state which took its politics raw and its bourbon early in the morning, Governor Long had been a better than average Governor. His troubles had resulted from those rewards, a recent diet of dexedrine to pep him up, with sleeping pills to put him to sleep, plus plentiful doses of bourbon and vodka in between, and finally, the estrangement of his wife. Significantly, he comments, Mrs. Long had left Baton Rouge two days earlier, just before the Governor's latest sanity hearing.
Walter Lippmann indicates that the previous week the Democratic Advisory Council had issued a long pamphlet dealing with national defense, the worst thing about it having been that it was sponsored by a faction of a political party and thus was to be heavily discounted, a pity, for disregarding a few unnecessary and extraneous partisan phrases, the pamphlet deserved careful reading. There was a large body of literature already extant which was critical of the nation's defense policy and having read a good deal of it, Mr. Lippmann indicates that the pamphlet in question was the best in its field, evidently expertly informed, reasonable, civilian in temper and lucidly written.
The argument it made had the support of large numbers of Republicans, especially those who had paid close attention to the problem of defense, and of many military men who by common consent were leaders in military thought. Moreover, the pamphlet was not a Democratic Party document as there was no reason to believe that the current Democratic leadership in Congress agreed with it.
There were two primary points of the pamphlet, the first having dealt with the "missile gap" which, on the admission of Secretary of Defense Neil McElroy, was likely, in the ensuing three years, to provide the Soviet Union an ICBM supremacy of 3 to 1, possibly indicating that during those years, the Russians could theoretically knock out the bulk of the U.S. Strategic Air Force. The pamphlet did not say that the Russians were likely to do so, but it was correct in saying that the political relations between the West and the Communist powers would be altered by it. The other point was that U.S. defense could not be allowed to depend solely on nuclear weapons, the big ones which were suicidal or the small ones which would be devastating to the nation's allies and to the uncommitted countries.
The pamphlet contained a carefully reasoned and persuasive argument as to why expenditures ought be increased to close the missile gap and to increase conventional forces.
Mr. Lippmann indicates that what had interested him most, given that it had been written under the auspices of Dean Acheson, former Secretary of State under President Truman, had been the illuminating candor with which it explained how things had changed since the Truman Administration. The critical change was that the original strategy in NATO had been based on the U.S. possession at the time of a monopoly of nuclear weapons, under which conditions a small ground force backed by the irresistible power of the Strategic Air Force was quite sufficient to hold in check the superior masses of the Red Army.
That monopoly had been broken by the Soviets in 1949, bringing with it, as the Soviets developed their bombs and missiles, a radical change in the balance of power. The U.S. was far from being defenseless against the new might of the Soviet Union, but there was no doubt that the nation's allies in Western Europe and its client states in Asia were far more vulnerable than they had been ten years earlier. That could have serious political consequences if the "missile gap" were allowed to become so wide that the U.S., the ultimate protector of the non-Communist world, were to become itself highly vulnerable. No matter what it would cost, that could not be allowed to happen.
He indicates that it would be useful if the Administration issued a thoroughgoing, fully considered reply to the pamphlet, not easy to do because within the Pentagon and within the Administration itself, there were many who agreed with the pamphlet. But it would be a true public service if the President, who did not agree, would see to it that there was a reply.
Doris Fleeson indicates that the intensity of present debate about Democratic presidential politics was matched only by the dearth of solid evidence to back up the opinions so freely expressed. Two meetings were in prospect, however, which ought shed light on the situation, one being the Governors Conference in Puerto Rico between August 2 and 5, wherein the 35 Democrats commanding statehouses from Maine to California would be given every opportunity to state their views. If an important majority remained uncommitted and clung to a favorite-son strategy, it would afford practically unlimited scope to the Hot Stove League in the winter months, for such tactics would virtually assure a wide-open convention.
Between September 15 and 19, there would be the national committee and state chairmen meeting in Washington, wherein those party leaders would take their time about the candidates, lest they find themselves hitched to bandwagons which would not start rolling. They had important decisions to make which would show where the convention power would rest. The committees to be named at that time and the party's strategy decisions reached would point to the places where the decisions would be made. Each such place would be a point of danger to every presidential aspirant.
The convention arrangements committee was one such spot. The contest there would be between the state power and the Congressional caucus. The principal personalities would be House Speaker Sam Rayburn and House Majority Leader John McCormick. The Speaker had been permanent chairman of the previous three conventions and thus knew the job and was personally revered. But the following year, he had a presidential favorite, his fellow Texan, Senator Lyndon Johnson. A growing number of party figures thus wanted to place in other and more safely nonpartisan hands the gavel and the right to recognize one voice amid the clamor of voices from the convention floor. It had been suggested that the Speaker might be made chairman emeritus.
Representative McCormick had been handling the platform and in the Congressional tradition, it had been a matter of conciliations and compromises. State politicians were saying that was not how they had been achieving their grassroots resurgence. A challenge loomed at the national meetings to the five Southern states which had freed their presidential electors from obligation to stand by the party nominees. Some Western committeemen believed that it constituted a violation of the loyalty pledges previously made to the party and they wanted to see the matter investigated at present rather than becoming an issue at the convention.
A demand for a report on the legal aspects of the problem would be made. In each state, those differed and it would not be easy for the national party to exercise effective control even though the Southern delegations would participate in the selection of a nominee.
It had been nearly 3 decades since such preliminary skirmishes were of any real moment to the Democrats, but it was possible that those who now saw clearly all that was involved would end up with the "Sunday diamonds".
A letter writer wants to know why homeowners needed to increase the school tax to 54 cents per hundred dollars of valuation to pay more money to janitors, to hire extra teachers and pay teachers more who were already receiving a large supplement in addition to their regular salaries, why they should vote 8 million dollars more in school bonds, half of which, he had heard, would go to the City and the same amount to the County. He wonders why, if the City was losing students to the County and especially to the perimeter area, the City needed 4 million dollars in new bonds. He had heard that perhaps three County schools might be required in the ensuing several years in subdivisions which were not yet developed, costing about $250,000 each, and if that were so and they needed $750,000 for the three schools, why they would need four million in bond money for the present. He finds that the bonds, with high interest charges, were not needed at the present time and so he urges a no vote on the consolidation scheme on June 30.
A letter writer from Rock Hill, S.C., indicates that she had seen where Senator Lyndon Johnson had predicted "harmony" among Democrats for the remainder of the current session of Congress. She finds that the Democrats had been striking the same discords for so long that they were beginning to think it was a melody.
A letter writer from High Point indicates that the U.S. Supreme Court had just handed down a decision which tended to kill the small businessman's incentive to stay in business because the ruling had given the states power to levy taxes on all businesses operating within those states, with 39 states presently having that power, finding that it was inevitable that the remaining 10 states would soon join that legal procedure to confiscate more funds. He says that some companies sent business to 18 states during a year, meaning that those businesses had to file 18 income tax forms even though the amount was small. Penalties and interest from failure to file would be determined by each state. Many companies would be ruined during the very first year. He finds that it would affect the average workingman's wages because the executive manpower had to be increased, making it impossible to take care of the average worker's salary. Manufacturing concerns would be sent packing if the document was allowed to go on uninterrogated by the opinion of the American public.
A letter writer from Salisbury indicates that work was the most important item in the life of any individual, that without work, there could be no real happiness, that people were not satisfied in their souls unless they worked and did a good job at the task they chose. He finds that people piling up grief for themselves and those dependent on them were those who through some ruse or other were able to avoid real work. "Real labor brings one closer to God than prayer ever can. Work puts muscles and our minds to work and somehow satisfies the spiritual within us at the same time." He thus recommends trying to establish the correct attitude toward work and in that event, one would have gone a long way toward solving one's problems.
Framed Edition
Links-Date — Links-Subj.