teered to cut beef and mutton shipments to the United States slightly this year and to increase shipments by 3.7 percent in each of the next 2 years.

Last year, about 1.9 billion pounds of beef and veal were imported into the United States. This equaled 11 percent of U.S. production. Seven years earlier imports equaled only 1.6 percent of domestic production.

Australia, with 517 million pounds sent to America, was the biggest foreign supplier of beef to U.S. markets.

The United States provided a market for Australian and New Zealand cattlemen when they needed it most. Britain, the traditional market for "down under" beef, recently boosted its barriers to imported meat.

Perhaps, strictly speaking, the Australians and New Zealanders shouldn't be blamed or credited-with sending beef to the United States.

A former overseas employee of an American packing company estimated that 80 percent of the beef coming to the United States from Australia is owned by American firms before it ever leaves Australian ranches.

And Nebraska Governor Frank Morrison suggested that an investigation be made into the "amount of American capital going into Australia and New Zealand to produce meat for the American market."

Wherever in the production cycle they acquire the foreign beef, American firms make no bones about the fact that they're using it. At Armour & Co.'s annual meeting in February, Board Chairman William Woods Prince was queried about Armour beef imports. An Iowa cattle raiser who owns Armour stock put the question to Prince.

Prince, who said most of Armour imports are manufacturing beef, went on to say, "Armour's duty is to make money for you stockholders. Therefore, Armour has to participate in meat imports if it will make money."

Some 20 to 25 percent of beef consumed in the United States is in processed products. Manufacturing beef, too tough by itself for American tastes, is the principal ingredient in these products.

An Australian government agency has reported that 60 percent of the boneless beef sent to the United States goes straight to American retailers for grinding, with rough

cuts and fat trims from domestic carcasses, into hamburger; 5 percent goes to restaurants for stews and similar dishes; and 35 percent goes to packers for frankfurters and other processed meats.

Foreign beef has a fringe appeal for use in hamburger. Generally, it's redder than domestic beef. Because American house

wives mistakenly judge hamburger chiefly by its redness, they prefer hamburger with gen

erous amounts of foreign beef.

Herrell DeGraff, president of the American Meat Institute, explained last month in an Omaha, Nebr., speech that domestic production of manufacturing beef has fallen off at the very time demand for it has risen to an

alltime high.

He blames the increased demand on the increased number of American youngsters and their hearty appetites for hamburgers and frankfurters.

While the population explosion was building a demand for processed products, it was also building demand for quality beef. There was more profit in quality beef.

Taking advantage of that profitable trend, cattlemen quit culling herds as assiduously as they had in less profitable days. Old cows and bulls that might have been hamburger years earlier were kept to produce calves for that attractive market. Old cows and bulls are the principal source of domestic manufacturing beef. In the 6 years up to 1963, said DeGraff, domestic manufacturing beef production dropped 40 percent in the United States.

Don't put more than minor blame for low cattle prices on imports, said DeGraff. He

recalled that in May, 1963, he warned in another Omaha speech that the "cattle business is heading for trouble."

He based his warning on the fact that in 6 years cow numbers had risen by a third. Not only were herds bigger, there were new herds. The prospering beef industry attracted many a new operator, including some strange to the cattle business. Barron's, the financial journal, has pointed out that newcomers included such diverse interests as comedian Jack Benney, the Hunt Oil Co. and the Mormon Church.

In his 1963 speech, DeGraff warned that bunched marketings would break the market. Before the year was out, the warning came true.

Even in the face of 1963's beef market break, the national cattle inventory has continued to rise. In 1963, there were 104 million beef cattle in U.S. herds; there are an estimated 107 million this year.

DeGraff had some unsettling observations to make about what the increase in the number of giant feed lots has done to the cattle industry. With their big investments, big lot owners must run cattle through their expensive facilities, DeGraff pointed out. Smaller operators can adjust to oversupply by shifting to other operations for a couple of years and riding out bad prices.

The big lots make the industry less flexible, DeGraff observed.

"I have a disturbing feeling that the beef business under this influence is getting to be like the chicken business-pressuring always for volume even though prices take a beating."

DeGraff agrees generally with Department of Agriculture estimates that for every $3.70 per hundredweight decline in cattle prices, 20 cents can be blamed on increased poultry and pork supplies, 50 cents on imports, and $3 on domestic oversupply.

Meat Institute President DeGraff, USDA, and various college economists nowithstanding, cattlemen seem more exercised about beef imports than about the domestic over

supply.

A couple of Ohio Cattle Feeders Association officials have estimated that:

It would have taken 3.2 million domestic animals to produce the beef and veal imported last year.

It would have taken a 4-million-head herd to produce replacements for the cattle slaughtered.

And it would have taken 1.4 million animals to breed replacements for the production herd.

That adds up to 8.6 million cattle. How

much of the beef turned out by that hypoing beef or willingly sold for manufacturing beef prices wasn't reported by the herd's

thetical herd would have been manufactur

creators.

Besides fretting about imports' effects, cattlemen have held meetings to protest them. One such meeting was held March 2

in Shenandoah, Iowa.

Cattlemen, bankers, a couple of Governors, and an Assistant Secretary of Agriculture addressed the meeting. The recently negotiated import agreements came in for attack.

The assistant secretary, George Mehrens, explained that the Department of Agriculture has no authority to raise tariffs or re

strict imports. It can only negotiate voluntary restrictions-as it did.

Under the new agreements, Australian and New Zealand beef imports will be held this year to 6 percent below last year's imports. It has been estimated that they would have been 11 to 12 percent above last year's without the agreements.

Mehrens said the agreements "bought time" for the United States, apparently until tariff negotiations scheduled for May in Geneva. He implied that the administration intends to press at Geneva for freer

world trade for both industrial and agricultural products.

"We don't intend to remain the world's only open market for beef," Mehrens said.

Last year, more than half of the beef in world trade was imported by the United States, which has only a longstanding 3-centper-pound tariff on meat.

Increasing the tariff drastically or establishing severe new import restrictions virtually on the eve of the Geneva negotiations would hamper the U.S. bargaining positions, and cause cynical amusement around a world still echoing with American squawks about trade barriers to our poultry products.

Mehrens said that only Congress has authority to change tariffs or restrict imports. Despite Mehrens' warning about what tariff increases or import restrictions would do to the Geneva Conference, cattlemen closed the Shenandoah meeting by passing a resolution asking "Congress to limit by legislative action imports of beef and veal, fresh, frozen, cooked, and/or canned or cured, to the level in pounds approximately equal in volume to the level of 1960, approximately 775 million pounds or 4.9 percent of domestic production of that year."

Two bills have been introduced in Congress to do just about what the Shenandoah resolution asked. One was narrowly defeated. The other, still in the Senate Finance Committee, has strong bipartisan support.

On the very day of the Shenandoah meeting, the good ship Sonoma arrived on America's west coast. The Mariposa was already there, sliding between U.S. ports. And less than a week later the Nottingham put in at a Florida port before heading up the coast toward the great metropolitan centers.

The refrigerated holds of the three Australian vessels were packed with 71⁄2 million pounds of beef and mutton.

The First Lady Views Space Achievements Firsthand

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

ОР

HON. OLIN E. TEAGUE

OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, March 12, 1964

Mr. TEAGUE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, March 24, Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson viewed firsthand our accomplishments to date in the space field When she visited the NASA's installation at Huntsville, Ala.

The static firing of a Saturn I engine was witnessed by the First Lady from a blockhouse, and her comments at that time to the effect that if man's mind can do such things with machines, it can do the same thing in human relations, is in my opinion, indicative of the great and sincere interest the First Lady manifests in the welfare of our Nation and the possible peaceful uses of our space program.

The Washington Post for March 25 carried a complete report on Mrs. Johnson's visit and under leave to extend my remarks in the RECORD, the article follows:

WANTS ACHIEVEMENT MATCHED IN HUMAN RELATIONS-MRS. L.B.J. IS AWED BY SPACE FEAT

(By Marie Smith) HUNTSVILLE, ALA., March 24.-Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson wore a white plastic helmet and held her fingers over her ears here this afternoon as she witnessed a dramatic static test

firing of an eight-engine cluster of the first stage of the Saturn I followed 7 minutes later by a static firing of the F-1 engine which in a cluster of five will be used later this decade to send an Apollo spacecraft to the moon.

There was an almost deafening roar as the eight-cluster engine with a total thrust of 1.5 million pounds belched forth flames like a giant firecracker, and Mrs. Johnson watched from an opening in a bunker 1,400 feet away.

With her were some 60 "kissing cousins" who came to this 17,000-acre Space Flight Center in northern Alabama for a luncheon reunion with the First Lady who spent her childhood summers in Alabama, where her parents were born.

"It was fantastic," she declared after the firing was over and she removed her white plastic helmet labeled in gold letters "Mrs. L.B.J." "It gives you a clear picture of why you need all the heat insulation. I didn't dream it would be that terrific amount of firepower."

She was still talking about the dramatic display when the second test firing went off, a single engine with a 1.5 million pounds of thrust that burned for 60 seconds, filling the landscape in the distance with smoke and flame.

"The awe of what the mind of man can accomplish grows apace when you witness something like this. I've never seen anything comparable," the President's wife said.

The wood and concrete bunker from which

Mrs. Johnson watched the test firings cost $200,000. (The test firings had been scheduled as another step in the Apollo program and were not held especially for her.) The bunker was behind bales of hay to reduce the vibration, but still the wood framing of the bunker quivered as the flames erupted.

Mrs. Johnson said watching this impressive accomplishment "gave me hope if the mind of man can do such things with machines, it can do the same in human relations."

The eight-engine cluster of Saturn I, which burns 600 gallons of kerosene a second for 137 seconds, will be used to send an unmanned Apollo spacecraft into earth orbit, and one is presently on the pad at Cape Kennedy for launching later this spring.

With her to explain the firings and the importance of the harnessed reservoir of power were James Webb, Administrator of the National Space and Aeronautics Administration, and Wernher von Braun, Director of the Marshall Space Flight Center.

The entire day was an education in the Nation's space program for the First Lady who has long been interested in it because her husband was author of this Nation's first major space legislation when he was a Member of the Senate.

She stressed the peaceful uses these achievements may mean to he world. She said when she saw the large engine section of the Saturn V, she was reminded that the Roman numeral V-vee-was a symbol of victory during World War II "When in the near future the Saturn V, carries three men to the moon, that will be another V-day, but with an important distinction.

"For the antagonist over whom we will have won a victory will not be a human enemy or hostile ideology. Rather, it is a vast unknown; and our mission is not conquest, but understanding. Our weapons are not arms, but ideas. Our strategy and tactics are intellectual and scientific ingenuity. Our goal: Peaceful cooperation," she said.

She spoke briefly at an assembly of employees in the Center's administration headquarters at which she presented awards to nine employees for outstanding achievement, performance, and inventions. At the ceremony Director von Braun presented to her a model of the Saturn V, which he jokingly

said will be known in the future as the Saturn Vee instead of the Saturn Five.

At another ceremony earlier in the day Von Braun had presented to her the white plastic "hard hat" of the type worn by construction workers. He, himself, was wearing a Texas hat which had been presented to him by President Johnson last December when he and Mrs. von Braun were guests of the Johnsons at the L.B.J. Ranch.

He said the President gave him the hat with instructions to put it on the moon by 1970, "I keep it wrapped in cellophane except on ceremonial occasions," he said.

increased, racial strife, causing the leadership on both sides to pass from the hands of responsible and reasonable men to purveyors of hate and violence, endangering domestic tranquility, retarding our Nation's economic and social progress, and weakening the respect with which the rest of the world regards us."

There should be no partisan politics here; Congress must enact legislation to lay the guidelines for solutions to the various phases of this problem. Failure to do so will weaken the fabric of this Nation at a time when it needs its full strength.

Legislative relief is needed in the areas of voting, education, employment, and public accommodations. It has been in these

All Our Citizens

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. JAMES C. HEALEY

OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 26, 1964

Mr. HEALEY. Mr. Speaker, I regret that the U.S. Senate continues to delay action on the civil rights bill after all these weeks. We passed this important legislation in the House on February 10. I continue to receive a large volume of mail from my constituents thanking me for my vote for the bill and my sponsorship of it, and asking that my efforts continúe for final passage. Because of such great interest expressed by residents of my district, I insert in the RECORD at this time my testimony on the civil rights bill on July 17, 1963, and my remarks on the House floor on February 5, 1964:

TESTIMONY OF CONGRESSMAN JAMES C. HEALEY, OF NEW YORK, BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON JULY 17, 1963

Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for this opportunity to present to you and members of your distinguished committee my views on H.R. 7152, your omnibus civil rights bill and my own bill, H.R. 7224, containing the President's civil rights proposals. As you

know, my bill, H.R. 7224, is identical to your bill, Mr. Chairman. I am here to testify in favor of these proposals and to urge approval by your committee.

You will recall that I was one of the sponsors of legislation to eliminate the poll tax, which passed in the 87th Congress.

You also have before your committee my bill, H.R. 2095, to eliminate unreasonable literacy requirements for voting; and my bill, H.R. 6639, to extend the Civil Rights Commission and to broaden the scope of its duties. These proposals are both incorporated in our omnibus civil rights bill.

Mr. Chairman, 100 years ago Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation assuring freedom and equality to all Americans. One hundred years later, some of our people are still deprived of these rights. Across our Nation we are seeing evidence of impatience of some of our American citizens who are victims of discrimination. And the rest of the world watches while we preach to them about freedom.

The erupting civil rights crisis has injected a sense of urgency into this session of Congress and our adjournment date should not be set until action is taken on this problem. Congressional inertia in this area of our national life would be tragic. As our President has put it so adroitly:

** the result of continued Federal legislative inaction will be continued, if not

Negro's struggle for full equality has been a frustrating one.

The struggle is not that of the Negro alone. No American should be denied his basic rights to work, eat, vote, to learn, and to live where he chooses.

Effective action must be taken by Congress to assure justice and equality for all of our citizens.

Legislation cannot change a person's prejudices. If color discrimination were to disappear overnight, the Negro's low economic status would still handicap him. But legislation can work to eliminate conditions that handicap the Negro. And this is where we have a responsibility in the U.S. Congress.

The proposals in our bill, Mr. Chairman, attempt to remove the barriers which some of our citizens have faced the past 100 yearsbarriers which will stand in the way of enjoyment of full citizenship, to which every American is entitled, and which is guaranteed in his birthright.

There are those who regard the President's proposals as too much, too soon, as too ambitious an undertaking, especially in terms of success. I think not. They offer the Congress a set of solutions that should be acceptable to all men and women of good will. They are not designed because of mere economic, social, or diplomatic considerations. They were designed out of the knowledge that to insure the blessings of liberty to all is the primary prerequisite in a democracy, in a government, of and by, and for the people.

Our basic commitments as a nation and a people, our conscience, our sense of decency and human dignity, demand that we try to eliminate discrimination due to race, color, religion. To eliminate it is (1) not to practice it, and (2) not to tolerate it on the part of others. If we are successful in eliminating discrimination in our great country, other countries will look to us for having given substance to the dream of freedom and equality. If we do not, then we have lost our dignity and leadership both at home and abroad.

Limitation of the exercise of that right to vote according to race serves no other purpose than to put into doubt the rendition of justice to the Negro citizen and the protection of his rights. A government not electorally responsible to one segment of our national citizenry, seriously jeopardizes the very essence of our representative democracy and the political life of the Nation as a whole.

Under the provision of our civil rights bill, Mr. Chariman, voting protection in Federal elections would be strengthened by providing for the apportionment of temporary voting referees, and by speeding up voting suits. For States having the literacy test, a presumption of qualification to vote would be created by "the completion of the sixth grade by any applicant." The constitutionality of such a provision is beyond reproach; Congress has within its purview of constitutional powers the power to regulate the manner of holding Federal elections.

the

Mr. Chairman, with regard to the elimination of unreasonable literacy requirements for voting, I would like to quote from my testimony before your committee in the 87th Congress: "It is a known fact that unreasonable literacy tests have been used unjustly to deny the right to vote. Education is a reliable gage of literacy, but how much education? At what point should standard be set? My bill establishes the minimum line at the completion of the sixth grade in schools *** this a reasonable demarcation point, and I believe the most effective device is the one in my bill. consists of establishing an objective standard by which an individual's literacy may be judged. This eliminates the intrusions of bias or prejudice it requires the de

It

gional, State, and local biracial committees to alleviate racial tension. The value of such a service cannot be emphasized enough. Lacking the power of subpena, it would advise and assist local officials in improving the communication and cooperation between the races. By so doing, the Service would go a long way in helping to preclude recur

rencies of racial crises.

I have already mentioned the Civil Rights Commission; title V will extend and broaden its powers. With regard to title VI, our Federal Government provides financial assistance or backing for many programs and activities administered by local and State governments, and by private enterprises. As a Member of the U.S. Congress, it is my privilege and responsibility to vote on these pro

or an interpretation."

Title I under our omnibus civil rights proposal would further require that if a literacy test is used as a qualification for voting in Federal elections, it shall be written and the applicant shall be furnished, upon request, with a certified copy of the test and the answers he has given.

Title II of our bill proscribes discrimination in public establishments such as hotels and motels engaged in furnishing lodging for guests traveling interstate; movie theaters and other public places of entertainment which present forms of amusement which move in interstate commerce traffic; and restaurants and stores that extend food services, facilities, and the like, the substantial portion of which has moved in inter

state commerce, for sale or hire to a substantial degree to interstate travelers. Arbitrary practices guided by racist considerations in this area create nothing but unjust hardships and inconveniences for the Negro citizen. He is forced to stay at hotels of inferior quality, and travel great distances to obtain any kind of satisfactory accommodations or food service.

Discrimination in the field of public accommodations should find no quarter of sympathy or tolerance in our National Legislature. As it contributes to an artificial restriction of interstate commerce, it can best be removed by congressional action invoked under the commerce clause. In addition, legislative action can be justified by the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment: as these particular vehicles of private enterprise are licensed by the appropriate State authorities to engage in their particular activity, discriminatory practices found therein take on the character of State action and therefore fall within the limits of the 14th amendment.

Critics of the public accommodations section level the charge that legislation of this kind would amount to an unconstitutional hindrance to property rights. The soundness of this argument is tenuous to say the least, for when was the right to property considered to be absolute? President Kennedy answered his critics by saying that: "The argument that such measures constitute an unconstitutional interference with property rights has consistently been rejected by the courts in upholding laws on zoning, collective bargaining, minimum wages, smoke control, and countless other measures designed to make certain that the use of private property is consistent with the public interest indeed, there is an age-old saying that 'property has its duties as well as its rights'; no property owner who holds those premises for the purpose of serving at a profit the American public at large, can claim any inherent right to exclude a part of that public on grounds of race or color."

Mr. Chairman, a further provision of the bill-title IV-provides for the establishment of a Community Relations Service, the duties of which would be to work with re

of such programs should be available to eligible recipients without regard to race or color. This should also apply to the employment practices of the organizations involved, public or private.

Title VII authorizes the President to establish a Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, to prevent discrimination against employees or applicants for employment because of race, color, or religion, or national origin, by Government contractors and subcontractors, and by contractors and subcontractors participating in programs or activities in which direct or indirect financial assistant is provided by the Federal Gov

ernment.

Unemployment falls with special cruelty on minority groups, and creates an atmosphere of resentment and unrest; the results are delinquency, vandalism, disease, slums, and the high cost of providing public welfare and of combating crime. I support the President's requests for more vocational education and training for our illiterate and unskilled. It is programs such as the manpower development and training program which assist in reducing unemployment.

Racial prejudice and discrimination are fundamentally wrong. Our Judeo-Christian heritage our sense of how man should treat his brother-our basic commitments as a nation and a people, should make us want to eliminate a practice not compatible with the great ideals to which our democratic society

is dedicated.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for letting me appear

before your committee. I urge prompt and favorable action by the Judiciary Committee, and pledge my support when the civil rights bill comes to the floor of the House of Representatives.

CIVIL RIGHTS SPEECH OF CONGRESSMAN JAMES
C. HEALEY, FEBRUARY 5, 1964
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.

I need not discuss in detail the nine substantive sections which will help assure to all our citizens the equal enjoyment of their rights under the Constitution of the United States. These rights include the right to vote, to hold a job, to have equal access to places of public accommodation, public schools, and other governmental facilities. Surely, no one can begrudge such rights to his fellow citizens on account of their color of skin or religious persuasion. Indeed, the protections the bill affords are so necessary and so reasonable that opponents are having a difficult time attacking the bill on its merits. Instead, they have leveled false and extravagant charges against it, and they give a distorted picture of what the bill actually does. This, of course, is done to arouse such prejudice against it that others may be blinded to its true meaning.

Opponents of the bill say that it sets up racial quotas for job or school atendance. The bill does not do that. It simply requires that children be admitted to public schools without discrimination because of race, and that industries involved in interstate com

merce not deny a qualified person the right to work because of his race or religion. And not even all industries are covered-initially only those with 100 or more employees, eventually those with 25 or more.

Under its power to regulate commerce Congress has the authority-and, I submit, the duty to enact such legislation. The same constitutional basis underlies our right to require nondiscrimination in certain business establishments which are connected with interstate commerce and which hold themselves open to the public at large. Most such places are already under some type of Federal regulation-the Pure Food and Drug Act, for example, the minimum wage law, antitrust laws. The bill has no effect on a private homeowner who wants to rent a room to a "paying guest." In fact, it does not apply

to owner-occupied establishments which offer five units or fewer for rent. The bill does not circumscribe private social contacts in any way.

It is clear that State-supported segregation is unconstitutional. This is the mandate of

the school segregation cases and the numerous cases involving parks and other governmental facilities. It is high time, therefore. to enable our Negro citizens to enjoy the rights to desegregated educational and recreational facilities without further delay. For that reason titles III and IV authorize the Attorney General to sue for desegregation of these facilities, under certain specific conditions. It is no novelty to allow the Attorney General discretion as to the bringing of an action. The Attorney General has the same authority in antitrust cases and criminal cases, to name but two examples. This is not "unbridled Federal control," as critics are quick to assert.

Nor is it "unbridled Federal control" to require that public funds from the Federal Treasury-funds contributed by all our citizens-be used for the advantage of both races without favoritism.

Mr. Chairman, in sum, the provisions of H.R. 7152 are firmly grounded in the Constitution of the United States. They provide for fair and equitable procedures in the courts and before administrative boards. They do not usurp or diminish the rights and duties of State and local governments or of private individuals. They would simply assure that all citizens will have the full enjoyment of the rights now unfortunately denied to many on account of race, color, religion, or national origin.

Dallas Honors Publisher Carl Estes of Longview

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. LINDLEY BECKWORTH

OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 26, 1964

Mr. BECKWORTH. Mr. Speaker, one of the most outstanding publishers in the Southwest is Publisher Carl Estes.

I attended SMU in Dallas and think highly of that fine city. I was born in Kaufman County not far from Dallas. The people of Dallas sincerely appreciate the interest of Publisher Estes in their fine city as do many other fine citizens. Their appreciation has been and is being expressed by many letters which have been sent to Publisher Estes.

I include some enclosures at this point in the RECORD, one entitled "Dallas Honors Publisher, City," appeared in the Longview Daily News March 4, 1964. The other appeared in the Longview Daily News Tuesday, November 26, 1963: [From The Longview (Tex.) Daily, Mar. 4, 1964]

DALLAS HONORS PUBLISHER, CITY
(By Staff Writer)

Dallas expressed its appreciation to Publisher Carl Estes and the people of Longview for their support in a time of crisis through a special personal representative at the chamber of commerce banquet here Tuesday night. This was the highlight of the meeting.

Ed Reynolds, chairman of the board and president of Reynolds-Penland and immediate past president of the retail merchants division of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce, came here at the request of Bob Cullum, president, to bespeak the thanks of the chamber and the citizenship for Publisher Estes' editorial, "The Image of Dallas," which appeared in the Longview newspapers several days after the assassination of President Kennedy and was subsequently published in The Dallas Times Herald, and for the support of the people of Longview.

Reynolds, who was described by Cullum as "a wheelhorse in all efforts to build our community and State," read the following message from Cullum:

"You Longview folks are wonderful friends and neighbors.

"Dallas has always known that, and has treasured your friendship through the years. We haven't made a point of telling you how much we value your friendship, because most of us are reluctant about just walking over to our neighbor and telling him, face to face, that we are glad he is what he is. But Dallas has felt that way about Longview for generations-we are glad that you are what you are, and that you are our friends and neighbors.

"The situation is different, however, when your neighbor-through no fault of his own-has a great tragedy occur in his home. That is the time when the heart overcomes reticence.

"That is what happened in the dark hours of last November. A transient fanatic killed the President during his visit to Dallas. It was a terrible thing to have happen anywhere. It was heartbreaking to Dallas that it should have occurred in our own city. It was in those first agonizing hours that Longview spoke out. Carl Estes-with great understanding and conviction-wrote his beautiful editorial in the Longview Daily News. The people of Dallas heard the voices of friends and neighbors--and found strength and reason-and comfort-in them.

"It is a privilege to be with you tonight as a representative of Dallas. It is a privilege to tell you face to face that we think you Longview folks are wonderful friends and neighbors. And it is an understatement to say that Dallas is eternally grateful for the arm you put around our shoulders last November when Mr. Estes spoke out in his editorial.

"Thank you."

Walter Koch, executive vice president and general manager of the Longview chamber, presented Reynolds a scrapbook containing the editorial "and a sampling of the hundreds of letters and telegrams which poured into Longview from all sections of the Nation in recognition of this masterful editorial."

Koch told the huge crowd that "I have been asked to introduce a special event on our program. The tragic events of November 22, 1963, which could have happened anywhere, but did take place in our neighboring city of Dallas, remain in our thoughts.

"The historic events of that date were followed by a period of concentrated attacks upon Dallas by misguided persons and by some who attempted to project a discolored and false image in an effort to destroy the good name of one of the most progressive

cities of this Nation.

"Dallas was momentarily stunned by these vicious attacks and did not speak out in its own behalf, but it was not without a champion. Quick to spring to the defense of Dallas, at a time when it was in sore need of friends, was our eminent publisher, Carl Estes. On November 26, a truly inspiring and stirring editorial entitled, "The Image of Dallas," appeared in the Longview Daily News. The masterful words of this editorial gave comfort to those whose hearts were heavy and quickly spread throughout the Nation.

"Which brings us to the purpose of this special event. On the evening of December 3 Mrs. Koch and I were privileged to attend the annual meeting of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce. The long-planned program for the meeting was abandoned at the last moment. In its place three prominent citizens spoke on the responsibilities of Dallas citizenship.

"One of the highlights of the evening was a glowing tribute by Bob Cullum, president of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce, expressing the sincere gratitude of Dallas to Publisher Carl Estes and the people of Longview for their support in a time of crisis.

"Bob Cullum, president of the Dallas Chamber of Commerce, was scheduled to be with us tonight, but had to cancel out at the last moment due to an important business engagement. We have just received this telegram from Mr. Cullum:

"I had looked forward to being with you personally tonight to tip my hat to one of the truly great forward-looking communities of our State. When an unavoidable conflict developed and I had to cancel my plans, I drafted one of Dallas' fine younger business leaders. Ed Reynolds will represent the Dallas Chamber of Commerce most appropriately. He is immediate past president of our retail merchants division and a wheelhorse in all efforts to build our community and State. He is also part of your own business community. My very best wishes for a great meeting tonight and my personal appreciation to the people of Longview for their friendship and goodwill which mean so much to Dallas.'"

THE IMAGE OF Dallas

While the spirit of Dallas is bowed in the sackcloth of deep grief over the irresponsible acts of two wild-eyed fanatics, we are witnessing the sorry and un-American spectacle of a widespread campaign of slander and vilification designed to discredit and destroy her recognized influence and strength as a center of faith and patriotism, culture and progress.

Two gunslingers on a shooting spree do not represent nor reflect the true spirit and life of Dallas. Dallas leaders and citizenship alike have firmly condemned the violence. But while the great heart of Dallas has been too deeply moved to speak adequately in its own right, we hear the airwaves literally sizzling and see the pages of the ultraliberal press spread with the outcries of a howling horde of leftwingers, proMarxists, Communist admirers, opportunistic political aspirants, unhappy social climbers, sensationalist TV announcers, and not a few highly placed officials who are doing their ugly best to project a horribly discolored and false image of Dallas.

East Texans, and especially we here in Longview, will not sit idle and mum while the red paint bucket brigade puts the big smear on our metropolitan neighbor. When outsiders jump on Dallas and seek to condemn her before the Nation and the world

as a sinkhole of crime and outlawry, we east Texans can and do proudly declare: It isn't so.

Because two zealots of questionable background have wantonly spattered blood on the proud image of Dallas, is it fair or reasonable that uninformed outsiders should join their dastardly cause and make the smear national and international in scope? This is justice gone beserk.

Who are these self-righteous and howling critics who would drown Dallas in the blood spilled by two fanatical acts of violence? They appear to be led by Communist Russia with the "me-too" approval of Cuban dictator Castro, and apparently are joined by leftwingers, social climbers, and the misinformed who so easily are deceived. What blind fools some mortals be.

We east Texans flatly refuse to keep quiet and see Dallas crucified by an unholy aggregation of character assassins, disgruntled misfits and social malcontents who display the strong suspicion if not the self-professed admiration of godless foreignisms of questionable color and name,

What has happened in Dallas could have happened almost anywhere. Is a great city to be judged by the action of a mail-order foreign-made rifle said to have been fired by a self-confessed Marxist and admirer of communism? Can decent-minded people fairly judge a city by the blast of a pawnshop type revolver stealthily wielded by a Chicago-born night club and dance hall operator with a strange penchant for dating strip-teasers and a passion for social climbing? God forbid.

East Texas people know the heart and spirit of Dallas. We want to tell the Nation festly unfair and cruelly vindictive for perand the world that we regard it as manisons standing on the idiotic fringe to try to recast the image of Dallas in a mold of common outlawry because of the foul deeds of two discontended misfits who set themselves as prosecutor, jury, judge and executioner of their fellowman.

Dallas is a great city. Dallas is big, dynamic, forceful, cosmopolitan. Dallas also is civic-minded, cultural, patriotic, religious, Dallas has the marks of character and courage, enterprise and leadership, achievement and stability, vision and a steadfast dedication to high purpose.

The great traditions of the free pressestablished by the Late G. B. Dealey of the Dallas Morning News and the late Edwin Keist and Tom Gooch of the Dallas Times Herald, and so ably and commendably perpetuated today by Ted Dealey and Joe Dealey of the News and by John W. Runyon and James F. Chambers of the Times Heraldprovide a rich heritage which both Dallas and east Texas admire and cherish.

Dallas is a major stronghold of private enterprise in Texas and the Southwestthe cherished free system which from the earliest days of the Republic has underwritten and continues to sustain the material strength of our Nation. This system of free enterprise and individual opportunity, so faithfully nurtured and vigorously promoted by Dallas, not only affords the people the highest standard of living the world has ever known but has given multiplied billions of dollars worth of aid and succor to downtrodden peoples and weaker nations the world around.

In a measure almost beyond description, Dallas has contributed to the progress and strengthened the image of Texas as a leader among the States of the Union. The State fair of Texas, although not exclusively a Dallas institution, has been developed and operated by Dallas for Texas as a whole. It has become the greatest exposition of its kind in the Nation. The Cotton Bowl, built and largely financed by Dallas, is nationally recognized as a symbol of Texas and its lead

ership in outdoor sports and entertainment spectacles.

East Texas, indeed all Texas and her neighboring States, as well, looks to Dallas as the financial center of the Southwest. The enterprising leadership and progressive standards of banking set by such giants as the late Fred Florence and by Nathan Adams, R. L. Thornton, Sr., and others, and so admirably and effectively maintained and extended today by James W. Aston, Robert H. Stewart III, and Ben H. Wooten, R. L. Thornton, Jr., and others, have given Dallas a preeminence that challenges and inspires others all across Texas and the Southwest.

Dallas paces Texas and the great central Southwest region in the field of insurance, with such stalwarts as Dan Williams and Ben Carpenter among many others symbolizing the leadership which has built a large number of strong companies which now make Dallas a major headquarters of this important institutional service.

Symbolizing the pioneering role of industrial development of Dallas and much of Texas was the leadership of the late John W. Carpenter, and the present day leadership of young Ben Carpenter and associates in the ambitious dream and worthwhile canalization of the Trinity River and development of its tremendous potential.

All of us here in East Texas are keenly aware of and impressed by the magnificent role in industrial progress which W. W. Lynch continutes to play in Dallas and throughout Central Texas. The eyes of Texas have long been on the valuable leadership of E. B. Germany, chairman of the Texas Industrial Commission. The hopes and confidence of East Texas and a great section of the Southwest ride with the current leadership of George A. Wilson and associates such as L. D. Webster and others of Dallas-based Lone Star Steel Co.

East Texas looks to Dallas for its religious, educational and cultural inspiration and leadership. For three generations and more, we have often attended and regularly followed the leadership of its fine churches and religious institutions, its colleges and universities, its art centers and libraries, its theaters and symphonies, operas and concerts.

Exemplary courts and honorable and hardworking judges are the hallmark of Dallas, Dallas has an able, dedicated, and widely recognized mayor in Earle Cabell-a man whom east Texas has long admired and loved. Dallas is noted for its energetic and responsible city government.

A major medical center has been in development in Dallas over the years. Today its many modern hospitals, study and research centers, excellent doctors and trained technical staffs have national and world recognition.

Dallas leadership is a major asset to Texas and the Nation. It is characterized by ability, courage, energy, friendliness, and understanding. We have named only a few but Dallas has thousands of big men who have served with devotion and faithfulness over the years-including such indefatigable workers as B. Hick Majors, Bob Cullum, Earle Wyatt, Julius Schepps, Henry English, Rae Skillern, Erik Jonsson, Stanley Marcus, Willis Tate, and many others.

We here in east Texas are homefolk with the people of Dallas. We have much in common. Call the roll of Dallas leaders and we find prominent among them many who came from our sand hills and piney

woods.

Here in Longview especially do we recognize Dallas as our friend and neighbor. We can never forget that it has been Dallas to which we have turned when we needed help, financial and otherwise, in our pursuit of new industrial payrolls to bolster the economy of east Texas. Across the years in the cotton era, later in the oil era, and in the latter years of our spreading

development as an inland industrial center-we have had the assurance that Dallas was at our side.

Dallas has been the friend of east Texas

across the years. Our material, cultural, and religious interests are rooted in Dallas. As for many of us east Texans, our friends and kinfolk are there, and some are buried there. Our hearts are there.

In this hour of crisis and distress when the bright image of Dallas is under outside fire, we in east Texas will not turn our

backs and run. In the face of a rising

chorus of leftwing attacks and condemnation, we will not sit cowed in silence. While some may run for cover before the onslaught of the red smear brigade, we will stand up with Dallas and be counted at her side.

For, you see, we know the great heart and the true spirit of Dallas and have the firm imprint of her proud portrait in our hearts. Whoever would wantonly distort and smear her fair image must learn that when outsiders jump on Dallas they also jump on Texas.

Fair warning is enough. While all honorable Texans condemn and decry deliberate

acts of violence, we here and now serve public notice to character assassins of whatever ilk and color that the outraged spirit and righteous indignation of a united Texas must be reckoned with, both now and hereafter.

CARL L. ESTES.

The 175th Anniversary Dinner of the U.S. Customs Service, February 22, 1964

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. HAROLD D. DONOHUE

OF MASSACHUSETTS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 26, 1964 Mr. DONOHUE. Mr. Speaker, one of the Federal agencies of which we can all be proud is the U.S. Customs Service which is celebrating its 175th anniversary this year. The Congress called upon the American people to mark this anniversary with appropriate ceremonies and activities and President Lyndon B. Johnson issued a proclamation designating 1964 as "U.S. Customs Year."

In keeping with this legislation, the Bureau of Customs held an anniversary dinner-dance on Saturday, February 22, 1964, at a Washington hotel where close to 1,000 people assembled to launch the anniversary program for this year. Among those in attendance were a number of distinguished citizens, Members of Congress, jurists, organizations such as the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America, Inc., the Air Transport Association of America, the National Customs Service Association, and many others.

It should be noted that the entire cost of this affair was paid for from the proceeds of the sale of tickets to customs employees in Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York, Detroit, and other cities; and to custom brokers and attorneys from out of town. Customs personel from out of town paid their own way and hotel expenses so that this entire affair was conducted at no expense to Government.

Indeed, the U.S. Treasury has benefited from the customs anniversary.

On the initiative of the Bureau of Customs, the Post Office Department has issued a commemorative postal card with a U.S. customs design for the 4-cent stamp. Assistant Postmaster General Ralph W. Nicholson stated at the banquet that 40 million of these have been printed and have been placed on sale at post offices throughout the country. The demand on the part of the collectors for first-day covers is so brisk that Mr. Nicholson indicated that the print order was increased before the stamp was placed on sale. It is anticipated that the Post Office will realize $1,400,000less expenses-from the sale of the customs commemorative postal card.

This is typical of our customs service. They always do things with an eye to how the United States can benefit. Secretary of the Treasury Douglas Dillon, who delivered the principal address at the anniversary banquet, summed up the feelings of most of us when he said:

Your determination to continue seeking ways to improve your service to the traveling public, and to the international business community, is to be commended. After 175 years, you're not resting on your oars. Your efforts have been instrumental in furthering the administration's policy of encouraging foreign travel to the United States by speeding up customs procedures, by encouraging facelifting of our various ports and, above all, by greeting visitors to our

shores with courteous, efficient personnelour dockside dispensers of good will.

It is a source of real satisfaction to those of us in the Treasury Department to salute Customs employees on their 175th birthday. To Assistant Secretary Reed, to Commissioner Nichols, and to all of you, I say for all of us in the Department-congratulations on a job well done.

One of the keynote speakers at the anniversary banquet was Walter J. Mercer, president of the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America, Inc., a man who is widely respected in the trade in which he has been a leading figure for more than 40 years. Mr. Mercer took as his theme the fact that the customs service has fewer personnel today than it had in the time of Calvin Coolidge, despite the fact that there has been a fourfold increase in the volume of customs work performed by the Bureau. Mr. Mercer stated that in his opinion the U.S. customs service, needed strengthening in order to improve our safeguards against narcotic smuggling along our borders and in our Great Lakes ports along the St. Lawrence Seaway. On behalf of the association he represents, Mr. Mercer urged that there be a general increase in customs personnel to expedite the greatly increased volume of international trade between the United States and the rest of the world, all of which comes within the purview of customs.

I think that the American people owe a debt of gratitude to the U.S. customs service and especially to U.S. Commissioner of Customs Philip Nichols, Jr., who has taken the leadership in streamlining and simplifying the customs service since his appointment to this post in 1961. They are doing a yeoman job and everyone of us is better off as a result of this job. However, they must be given the tools if they are to do their jobs with the efficiency, skill, and devotion which