THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome. Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box «ih
$1.50 PER MONTH $16.00 A YEAH
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editor*
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoftif'*
at Nome. Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Wednesday, March 19, 1947
Pinning Germany
(By Barnet Nover)
THE FIFTY-YEAR TREATY of alliance which Great
Britain and France signed at Dunkirk has more of a
symbolic significance at this time. Its potential im
portance is not on that account to be discounted, how
ever. In signing the pact, neither Great Britain nor
France assumed any new obligations. The heart of the
treaty is the clause formally pledging the two nations to
act together to insure that Germany will be disarmed
and demilitarized and, generally, that she will “not
again become a menace to peace.”
Yet Great Britain and France were already separately
pledged to just such a course by their respective alli
ances with Soviet Russia and by their membership in
the United Nations.
From this point of view the pact of Dunkirk is a for
mal manifestation of the diplomatic axiom that two na
tions that are individually allied to a third are, in effect,'
allied to each other.
Soon Belgium proposes to conclude treaties with
France, the Netherlands, Great Britain and Russia,
whose purpose will be in line with the purposes of the
Russian-French, Anglo-Russian and Anglo-French al
liances. Together with the Russian-Czechoslovak and
Russian-Polish alliances there interlocking pacts will
bind all of Germany’s neighbors, with the sole, but prob
ably temporary, exception of Denmark, to act as one
should the former reich show signs of again going on the
warpath.
The pact of Dunkirk also expresses the hope that all
four of the powers at present occupying Germany will
sign a long-term pact to keep Germany from breaking
out. Such a pact was proposed by former Secretary
Byrnes last year and that American offer, no doubt, will
be renewed at the Moscow meeting of the Big Four for
eign ministers by Secretary Marshall.
If Germany is actually kept disarmed, demilitarized,
and peaceful during the next twenty or thirty or fifty
years it will be only incidentally and indirectly because
of the solemn pledges which Germany’s neighbors have
made to do just that.
lne determining tactor will be whether or not the na
tions that were allied against Hitler’s reich consider it
to their respective interests to keep Germany disarmed,
demilitarized and peaceful. That, in turn, will depend on
their relations with one another.
Those relations today, particularly the relations be
tween Russia and the western powers, are anything but
good. There is hardly a policy which the United States
or Great Britain is pursuing anywhere in the world
which the Kremlin does not view with suspicious eyes.
Great Britain and the United States are equally suspi-J
cious of the aims, ambitions and policies of the Soviet
Union.
At Moscow the four major powers will be dealing
with the central of all questions concerning them, name
ly, the organization of power in central Europe.
If they succeed in achieving a proper balance in their
respective interests, if they manage to reconcile their!
conflicting points of view regarding the political organ
ization and the economic future of Germany, there will
be peace in Europe. If they fail, the split between Rus
sia and the western powers will unquestionably widen.1
It is because of this possibility that the Russians have
viewed the negotiations between Great Britain and
France for the alliance that has just been consummated'
with a notable lack of enthusiasm.
nn# ohiert to it since. on the surface, it
merely completes that Moscow-Paris-London triangle
which, for all intents and purposes, came into being af
ter Russia made her alliance with Great Britain and
France. But it is questionable whether Ernest Bevin’s
statement at Dunkirk that the two countries are not
trying to form a bloc against the Soviet Union will he
enough to reassure the men in the Kremlin.
The fact cannot be ignored that, whatever its stated
purposes, the pact of Dunkirk does mean a drawing
together of Great Britain and France. Because it means
that it may lead to closer economic and political ties be
tween them. Those are made all the more necessary by
the palpable weakness of both countries, their need of
each other. And given their geographic position, they
can, if the European and world situation deteriorates to
the point where such a combination becomes necessary,
become the nucleus of that western bloc whose very
name makes the Soviet leaders see red.
Inviting The Meat-Ax
(Rocky Mountain News)
A PLAIN-SPOKEN STATEMENT on government
economy comes from the large and long-established Na
tional Federation of Federal Employees.
Administrators of government agencies who refuse to
face “the stark realities of the situation,” it warns, are
“simply inviting meat-ax curtailment at the hands of
Congress.”
Rank-and-file federal job holders, such as the NFFE
represents, “would be the sufferers” from that sort of
slashing.
Many high officials in the government’s executive
branch, the statement points out, believe that big spend
ing and deficit financing are essential for national pros
perity. World War II “multiplied the civilian payroll
tremendously” and “further tended to obscure the idea
of economical use of federal funds.” And Congress for
years was “very liberal with appropriations, many of
which were not earmarked and therefore often were
available for purposes which Congress never intended.”
But last November’s elections, which turned control of
Congress over to a party pledged to drastic cuts in
spending, should have made it apparent to all heads of
executive agencies that they would have to co-operate,
the NFFE asserts. For this accurate and honest apprais
al, we think, the NFFE and its officials—President
Luther Steward and Secretary Gertrude McNally—de
serve a public vote of thanks.
By GEORGE S BENSON
President of Harding Colic 30
Searcy. Arkansas
<
ON BEING VIGILANT
That the price we pay for lib
erty is eternal vigilance may seem
like old stuff to some of us. We
are prone to relax after being vig
ilant for five years during a hard
war. Like the next man, we pay
more attention, to signs of opti
mism than to those danger signals
that are likely to call us to vig
ilance.
As modern-day Americans, we
indicate by our actions and our in
terests that we are concerned
about a lot of things—but perhaps
least concerned about playing Paul
Revere roles. Let Samuel Adams
and John Hancock and Thomas
Jefferson and Patrick Henry and
A. Lincoln and all the others stay
in their history IBooks. We won our
our freedom in 1776, and we’ve
kept it since. So why take the
trouble to worry about being vig
ilant in 1947?
Take The Trouble
During the war we were told
what to be vigilant against, and
much of what we were fighting
for. Even particular freedoms were
enumerated. We knew too which
particular dictators were giving us
trouble. But today Hitler is gone.
Mussolini’s ambitions are dust. It
was a lot of trouble, but we paused
to finish the job. We were strong
I enough to do it, and we are still (
i strong.
*
It is always a lot of trouble to
i have a mind toward our freedoms.
With three-fourths of the world
embracing doctrines which oppose
our cherished freedoms, and with
many of the nations of the world
j scorning our kind of Republic, we
shall have to keep on taking trou
ble to defend our way of life. This
is true, even when we know that I
our Republic is the best and most
prosperous anywhere in the history
of civilization.
Defense of ihe Mind
We have called America the
melting pot, the place where the
| cradle of liberty was first rocked,
the refuge of all the persecuted of
| hundreds of brands of minorities, i
We have been a thrifty people, an
active people, a people building a
continent all the while warding
' off tyrants from abroad and hav
ing a care at home for your free
doms and mine.
How is it, then, that we have
.been caught napping? Have we,
I not, in times of confusion at home
and trouble abroad, allowed doc- \
‘r’nes to creep in which would
chain our minds and shackle our
bodies as well? Distorting, mis- '
leading, boring from within, state
socialism at home and abroad pre
sents to us the kind of curse that
tyranny has always been to free
man. Inroads have been made on
1 some sectors of the American
mind.
Constructive Program
Did you know that polls have
shown that 51 per cent of our peo
ple do not know what a balanced
budget is. That virtually a third
have no conception of the meaning
>f “free enterprise?” That many of -j
us think it alright to owe a huge
national debt to ourselves? That
.security is something Congress can
hand out? That inflation is accept
able because it creates wealth?
That there are ways to earn more
by doing less?
All these things are fallacies.
With other fallacies they will en
slave, just as surely as any tyrant.
We must make our platform free
dom. Can there be a more con- a
structive program than that of free
men? Free men will have a dy-.
nam e, not a static philosophy.
! Such philosophy can never permit
i economic tyranny, either of labor
| or capital, any more than it could
permit a political tyranny. Ameri
! cans everywhere must prepare the
defense of their own minds against
the inroads of enslaving ideas.
—
U. N. Battles With
Atomic Control
(By Francis W. Carpenter)
LAKE SUCCESS, N. Y. (/P)—
Delegates to the United Nations
atomic energy commission turned
once more today to the difficult
assignment of controlling the atom
for peaceful purposes.
They gathered at U. N. head
quarters for their first meeting this
year with the realization that their
problem was more complicated
than ever because of the strong
differences between Russia and
the United States on atomic con
trols.
The United States, still standing
by its guns wants an internation
al development authority with full
powers over all phases of atomic
energy and with no veto anywhere
on punishments of atomic crimin
als.
Soviet Russia, which had little
•o say in the commission meetings
late last year and which rejected
the United States plan in a sting
ing attack on the U. N. security
council, wants a cenvention now
to ban atomic weapons and an
other convention to set up control
organs. Russia also has insisted on
retaining the veto right in the se
curity council.
The consensus of the delegates
was that the atomic probelm
would be turned over to the com
mission’s working commi 11 e e ,
which is in effect the whole com
mission sitting as a committee,
and that attempts to reconcile the
Russian-U. S. differences would
begin in closed sessions.
EVERETT, (/P)—Howard Cann,
27-year-old Snohomish county au
ditor’s office employee was being
sought today on a warrant charg
ing him with graad larceny. Em
ployed by the country about 10
months, Cann failed to appear for
work last Friday and was reported
to have taken a bus to Seattle. Pre
liminary investigation was dis
closed by prosecutor Phil Sheridan
to have developed shortages of
about $5,000 in Cann’s department.
Cann was in charge of the collec
tion of excise taxes, handling li
cense payments on automobiles,
trucks and trailers.