THE NOME NUGGET
Published Monday, Wednesday and Friday by The
NOME PUBLISHING CO.
Nome, Alaska
Telephone: Main 125 P. O. Box 618
*1.50 PER MONTH *16.00 A YEAR
W. A. and EMILY BOUCHER.Editors
Entered as second class matter October 14, 1943, at the postoffic*
at Nome. Alaska, under the Act of March 3, 1879.
Friday, January 3, 1947
Decline Of A Committee
(Rocky Mountain News)
WHILE THE WAR was on, the Senate Investigation
Committee, under the chairmanship of Mr. Truman,
performed fine public service.
It adhered strictly to three sound policies.
One was to give credence only to facts that could be
proved. Gossip, hearsay testimony and the general
smear technique were rejected.
A second was directed toward getting results rather
than headlines. Wherever inefficiency, waste or mis
management could be proved, it was Chairman Tru
man’s practice first to lay the evidence before army,
navy or other responsible government agency and de
mand corrective action. If the action was prompt and
effective, the committee was satisfied and went on to
something else. Its object was to help win the war.
A third policy—invoked when it became necessary to
“blow the lid off,” which was frequently—was to pre
pare a strongly-worded report, so well-documented and
conclusive that all members of the committee. Demo
crats and Republicans, willingly signed it.
There never was a minority report from the Truman
Committee. And when one of its unanimous reports was j
published, the fur really flew—so great was the prestige
the committee had gained through its painstaking pro
cedures.
Mr. Truman became vice president, then President.,
Chairmanship of the committee was passed along to
Senator Mead, and, when he resigned to run for gover- j
nor or New York, to Senator Kilgore of West Virginia.
Investigators less responsible than those who had help
ed Mr. Truman were hired.
The committee went the way of so many congression- j
al committees in the past, with hearsay testimony, the
smear and headline hunting. Political partisanship!
reached the point where, on the last vote taken, the six
Democrats lined up against the four Republicans on the !
question of whether to investigate the American mili
tary government in Germany.
Then the four Republicans, ignoring the will of the
Democratic majority, made public a ‘secret” report of
a committee investigator, a report that contained sensa
tional charges but was not well-documented.
If the old Truman committee is to serve any further
useful purpose, it will have to be reorganized and purg
ed of politics.
Six-Month Training
(Washington Post)
IT IS A PITY that the War Department has been
forced to modify its proposal for one year’s military
training for every American youth and limit it to six
months. Apparently opposition in and out of Congress
has led the War Department to devise this compromise.
Secretary of War Patterson says he will offer the new
program when Congress reconvenes in January. As an
offsetting factor added emphasis will be put upon re
cruitment for the National Guard and encouragement of
men who have completed their compulsory training to
remain active in this present-day version of the militia.
The plan should be less unpalatable than the parent
plan to the educators and others who—unwisely, in our
opinion—have been complaining about the interruption
of education that would be caused by military training.
Maybe they might now be placated.
Six months, of course, is not adequate time to train a
soldier. But it is enough time to instill the basic rudi
NEVER AGAIN! WELL, HARDLY EVER
merits of soldiering so that the trainees would not be
wholly green in a national emergency. It is a long
enough period for military authorities to weed out some
of the misfits. Such training is not conscription. It is
rather designed, as Generals Marshall and Eisenhower
both have emphasized, to justify a relatively small,
highly professional Army which will remain the nucleus
of our defense. In the I6ng run military training gets
back to the principle that every individual owes a peri
od of service to the Nation. This is a principle which
Americans—whose talk is often long on rights and
privileges and short on responsibility — cannot forget
without disastrous consequences. In today’s world mili
tary weakness is an invitation to war. Prompt enactment
of a national military training law would be concrete
evidence that Congress has the courage of our victory.
Nothing in the Patterson program is inconsistent with
a revision of our strategical concepts In this atomic age,
or with our support of general disarmament. Indeed,
national training would be a demonstration that we in
tend to live up to our police responsibilities under the
United Nations, and a warning to would-be aggressors.
One Man’s Opinion By Walter kiernan
Winter arrived on Dec. 22 and Republican hopefuls
are beginning to stir. . . . Harold Stassen is the first
Barkis—He’s not only willin’ he’s anxious. . . . Demo
crats are getting powerful bashful. Chicago’s Mayor
Ed Kelly won’t even say he’ll run for mayor again for
fear he might be mistaken for ’48 material. . . . Kelly
says: “I have never been a candidate but I don’t say I
won’t be a candidate and I am not trying to be coy.” I’d
like to see him when he is trying to be coy. . . . Both
parties are eyeing General Eisenhower but Ike got a
piece of advice at the recent Circus Saints and Sinners
luncheon. ... A character impersonating General Grant
walked up to Ike and said “Take my advice—don’t!”
THAT’S THAT By BRUCE GUSTIN
*
Originally, the federal bill of
rights only restricted the federal
government. But through ratifica
tion of the fourtheenth amendment
many years later, its prohibitions
were extended to cover the states.
This amendment provides that “no
state shall make or enforce any
law which shall abridge the priv
ileges or immunities of citizens of
the United States; nor shall any
state deprive any person of life,
liberty or property without due
process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the
equal protection of the laws.”
Today the American people
need another bill of rights. That is
a bill of rights to protect the gen
eral public against the excesses of
organized groups. Irresponsible,
power-crazed, dictatorial labor
leaders must be restrained as
greedy industrial barons and busi
ness monopolies have been curbed.
That is the most important job
confronting the next Congress.
The statement by Presiden*
Murray of the CIO, warning Con
gress that labor disputes cannot
be solved by ‘crippling anti-labor
legislation” indicates plainly that
he regards and attempt to restrain
the excesses of labor unions as
‘‘anti-labor.” That is a blunder
many so-called labor leaders are
prone to make. They are unwilling
to submit to any curbs. As a mat
ter of fact, fair and reasonable
regulation of unions to make them
behave and respect public rights
will be "pro-labor.” The most dan
gerous enemies of organized labor
are its own leaders who denounce^
every suggestion that big labor be
regulated as business has been
regulated.
American Communists have a
tough time following the Russian
party line. When John L. Lewis
called a nationwide coal strike.
Communists in this country rallied
to h:s support. They figured in
dustrial paralysis of the United
States fits right in with plans of
Russian Communists for world
revolution. But now the Soviet
trade paper Trud has denounced
Lewis as a "reactionary.” What*
Russian Communists are sore
about is his action in calling off
I the strike.
| President Jackson of the U. S.
; Chamber of Commerce unerring
ly pointed out the fallacy in CIO
; claims that wages can be increased
: without increasing prices. “If all
profits were held by an omnibus
corporation” he said, “it might be
possible for labor leaders to di^
into the pail and take a piece. Buf
, profits are always unequally dis
1 tributed. A monopolistic wage de
mand by a national union will in
evitably raise prices to the con
sumer by a closely corresponding
amount unless a rise in productiv
ity makes such a wage rise possi
ble.” The truth of that was dem
i onstrated by this country’s expe
rience with the wage increases
made early this year. The CIO ar
gument was the same then as now.
An investigation of the sugar
! situation, as proposed by Republi
| can congressmen, certainly is de
! sirable. The American people
: should know all the reason why
! sugar still is rationed. What the
investigation will disclose is fore
cast by the statement of Senator
elect Dworshak (Rep.) of IdabA
that ‘Attempts to plan our econ
omy have never worked out and
this attempt to deal with the sugar
effort is little better than any other
attempt at government planning
in the field of production.” The
brutal fact is that the sugar short
age, at least in part, ‘is a result of
new deal plans to kill off the
American beet sugar industry.
Why should Colorado’s sugar
beet goal for the next year be set
at 200,000 acres? It is admitted
that the sugar shortage will con
tinue through 1947. This country*
next year should produce all the
sugar it possibly can. With the
sugar beet price fixed for beets in
1947 the highest in history, there
isn’t any reason why Colorado
farmers shouldn’t plant more than
200,000 acres of beets. As State
Director Harmon of the product
tion and marketing administration
points out “in the early 1930’s
when beets were dirt cheap and
. we had no (sugar* rationing our
plantings in Colorado were run
ning well over the 225,000-acre
mark.”
I The beet sugar industry is
! unique in a way. The sugar beet
is a vegetable. But its principal
product—sugar—contains no veg
etable matter. Sugar is a chemical *
combination of carbon, hydrogen
and oxygen. It has been described
as “crystallized water and sun
shine.” Air and water are the raw
materials used and sunshine pow
ers the manufacturing process in
the beet.
TOO MANY BICYCLES
Germany had more bicycles
than any other country, according
to registration figures for 1943 '
published in the Encyclopaedia
Britannica. Statistics showed 1^[
million bicycles in Germany, 12
million in the United States and
ten million in the British Isles.