THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska „ _
Telephone: Main 125 **• ®°x
$1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAR
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editors
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffice at
Nome, Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879^_
Wednesday, October 24, 1945_
THE ATOM SCIENTISTS WORRY, TOO
By JACK STINNETT—(AP) Feature Writer
WASHINGTON—In discussions of the world control
of atomic bombs, it is surprising that the opinions of
the scientists who still are working on the bombs are
being given so little attention.
Rep. Walter H. Judd, Republican of Minnesota, has
laid one report from a group of these scientists before
his colleagues, but few so far have incorporated any of
the conclusions of the laboratory men into their public
arguments.
Except for occasional outbursts by some Congress
men and other public officials who declare we should
or should not keep the bomb a U. S.-British secret, Con
gress seems willing to wait until the President lavs the
problem squarely before it.
Even then, there probably will be some buck-passing
between the legislative and executive branches. ^
“The scientists who created the atomic bomb,” says
Rep. Judd, “have spent sleepless nights on the question
of what to do with their brain child.
And the scientists themselves reiterate this, pointing
out that because of the secrecy surrounding its devel
opment they have been spending sleepless nights a good
deal longer than those who only learned of its horrible
force when the first bomb was dropped over Hiroshima*.
The scientists (who have elected to remain anony
mous in making their report) set forth their conclu
sions with direct laboratory logic. They state simply
.that the United States has four alternatives in control
of the atomic bomb and then proceed to show what is
wrong with each one.
(1) Disregard the atomic bomb altogether in our
formation of foreign policy.
Arguments for this are simply that the atomic bombs
will not in the long run change the basic nature of war
or conquest and that eventually science will develop an
adequate defense against them.
To this latter, the scientists say unequivocally they
can “offer no hope of a specific defense against the
atomic bomb.” They point out also that neither moral
sanctions nor fear of retaliation has ever kept a power
from using any weapon on its march of conquest. (The
latter did prevent use of gas in the late war, but for
reasons that wouldn’t apply to the atomic bomb.)
(2) Keep our secret; control raw materials and build
bigger and better bombs.
To this, the scientists say simply that any nation can
find the secret for itself in two to five years; that the
raw materials (especially uranium) are scattered all
over the world; and that after a minimum number of
bombs are constructed, bigger and better one are just
so much useless surplus.
(3) Conquer the world before anybody else can de
velop the bombs. This is against everything that the
United States has fought and bled for and may be dis
missed as unthinkable.
(4) Turn atomic power over to international control.
The scientists recognize the difficulties ahead in this
policy, especially that in so doing the United States will
have to sacrifice some of its national sovereignty. But
those are the possibilities in a nutshell. Take your pick,
the scientists say.
Worrying about how much work you have ahead of
you gets very little behind you.
Ambition is the “No Parking” sign that keeps us
moving.
WHY HANDICAP U. S. MINES
A penny-wise and pound-foolish financial policy on
the part of the government toward the metal, mining in
dustry of the west will continue the stagnation in hun
dreds of minirfg districts that has resulted with state
and federal government interference with mine financ
ing. Halfway policies have been inaugurated by the
SEC to start new financing of mining development but
the duplication of federal and state laws are hurdles
that few companies care to negotiate.
Now there seems to be a definite policy on the part
of the government to keep mining wages at wartime
levels and also a desire to encourage foreign “good
neighbors” to ship their cheaply mined ores into the
United States to compete with high-cost ore of the west.
Such a policy, if carried out, would close hundreds of
metal mines in our western districts.
Thousands of returning war veterans are looking for
ward to the western metal mines as a source of em
ployment. Millions of dollars of idle money in the banks
or going into the horse race racket, should go into legit
imate development of western metal and oil resources.
Congress should make a survey and note the stagnation
caused by its action in allowing one of its bureaus to
stop mine financing. It would seem to be the patriotic
duty of our legislators to be loyal to home workers as
against those of foreign lands.
If gold mines are to pay the high scale of wages that
have resulted from a shortage of labor and high war
production, Congress should allow an open market that
would allow the producer to make a profit. The sold
mines should have an additional $10 an ounce for their
production to make gold production an economic busi
ness under the present high wage scale of the metal
miners.—Denver Mining Record.
JUST mom THE OPgg
p'j* ■ . «w»
<< *:iV -y
JSjj
I*
1
(PETUffN
OF NYLONS
In the forefront of The Salva
tion Army’s services for the
Armed Forces were those given
by its 3,000 Red Shield Clubs, of
ten improvised huts set up on
beachheads, in jungles and in des
ert outposts; and those given by
1,000 Salvation Army mobile can
teens which, from the time of
Pearl Harbor until May of this
year, accompanied the Armed
Forces on hazardous fighting
fronts.
One outstanding war service by
The Salvation Army was given by
its Red Shield huts, or canteens.
During six years, 3,000 of these
operated from a variety of loca
tions, ranging from snow-covered
mountains in Syria, to caves in
Sicily and tents in Iraq.
By GEORGE SBENSOK
President of Hording College
Searcy. Arkansas
OIL AND MOLD
Apostles of government owner
ship of business agree sometimes
that private management can do
better with little things. When it
comes to filling prescriptions,
mending shoes or making clothes
pins, they admit, private operators
may be more efficient. Not so with
the big stuff, they argue; coal,
iron, oil and railroads are differ
ent. These just beg for bureau
cratic bossing.
Of course big industries are
more interesting to politicians be
cause they employ large numbers
of people and affect the daily
lives of millions more. The fact
remains however, that govern
ment can and does make mistakes
in the operation of big industries.
Moreover, appropriate encourage
ment from government in rela
tively small enterprises has been
known to result in much good.
Significant Decisions
Since government enterprises
tend ultimately to become mono
polistic, mistakes in them can be
far more fateful than private
blunders. Our government made
two important decisions in 1942,
which illustrate the case perfectly.
One, to take a speculative flyer in
Arctic oil, has cost American tax
payers 300 million “goodbye”
dollars already. The other decision
had to do with penicillin.
Penicillin is a drug, mold ex
tract that most people know less
about than they do about gaso
line. Some perfectly astounding
cures are being worked with it,
including cure of meningitis. It
was discovered by an English
scientist, Sir Alexander Fleming,
in 1929 but production was tedi
ous, slow and costly and conse
quently few sufferers were helped
by it for 13 years.
In Mass Production
By 1942, our first war year,
some American capitalists had
taken a hand with marked suc
cess. The product was costing $20
a bottle then, and the average pa
tient required three bottles. Gov
ernment authorities realized that
war would create a need for it so
they guaranteed a large market
and provided capital for mass pro
duction. History will record the
splendid results.
With the government’s big pur
chase of this successful time, vol
ume production started. Now
there are 20 factories. The largest
cost more than three and a half
million dollars, but penicillin is
costing less than $1 a botlte, $3
per treatment. Many lives have
been saved and more will be.
Mankind will be healthier and
happier. Government encourage
ment of this business proved wise
and benfeicial.
Smell of the Yukon
How different was the Canol oil
venture. The Army drilled wells
on the Mackenzie river, built a
27-million dollar refinery at White
Horse and tied into Fairbanks,
Alaska, with 1,000 miles of pipe
line. Nothing was gained. Gaso
line from the white elephant plant
at White Horse costs 26c a gallon.
Oil companies can ship a better
product there from the states for
18c. The venture has been aban
doned.
The Canol experiment failed,
Very apparent obstacles made the
operation too costly. Known
sources of supply are better and
300 million dollars of taxpayers'
money is gone. Government’s sup
port of one beneficial drug can’t
justify its management of big
business. What official, spending
public money, is cautious and
thorough like a private investor
with his own money? Never has
government management achieved
the efficiency of American pri
vate management.