"The FDIC is probably the best reason for people's confidence in our banking system and the safety of their money. When people have confidence in banks there is little danger of panic"-(L.A.C. in the Long Beach, Calif., Independent).

"Before FDIC, depositors usually lost money if a bank failed. Uneasy depositors could cause a run on strength of a rumor. However, the FDIC has changed all that"— (Champaign, Ill., Courier).

The public, speaking through its newspaper and magazine editors, obviously is satisfied with the manner in which the FDIC operates to protect depositors' interests.

A step in the direction of educating the public with regard to this agency's efficient function should be taken by banks through utilizing these laudatory comments and expressions of confidence in their promotional efforts.

CONFLICT DEEPENS IN UNITED STATES (By Edgar Ansel Mowrer) Evidence of a deep and basic division in the American people is mounting. Recently in discussing the John Birch Society, I observed that unfortunate as it was for members of this society to disqualify themselves as fighters against communism by their at-tacks on democracy, desegregation, and the civil rights that are the basis of American civilization, their presence showed the deep and abiding anxiety of increasing numbers

of Americans at successive administrations'

unwillingness to refuse further concessings to Moscow and Peiping.

At the base of this division lies a simple choice: either you understand that the United States is in a war (cold but genuine) which requires victory, or you don't.

If you admit the existence of war you start playing to win, not just bumping back Communist advances. If you don't know we are at war you try to capitalize on the Americans' desire for peace to scare them into successive surrenders by threats of atomic destruction.

You argue that Cuba and Guinea are not really Communist. You insist that the Russians have just as much right to have a missile base in Cuba as we have to have bases in Italy or Turkey or wherever. This is the same as saying in 1944 that the Nazis had as much right to land on Cape Cod as we had to invade Normandy.

In other words, you try to ignore the existence of the key fact of existence todayCommunist aggression.

Such talk is not merely found in the mouths of pro-Russians like Linus Pauling and Cyrus Eaton (to mention only a pair of prize exhibits). No, it exists in attenuated form even around the White House.

Adlai Stevenson is quoted in the Boston Herald (May 1, 1961) as having said that we "cannot save some countries from going Communist" (Why not?) and "ought not be too upset when one of them vanishes behind the Iron Curtain." He also argued,

according to Holmes Alexander, who wrote the story that "we ought to stop overstressing the Communist conspiracy." (I hope this story is inaccurate.)

Stevenson is also believed to have been the chief influence that caused President Kennedy in advance of the Cuban invasion, to make the public declaration of no American support, which broke the back of the antiCastro Cubans' morale.

In fact, certain highly placed advisers came to Washington with three assumptions-all of them mistaken. One was that quiet diplomacy and greater civility would be reciprocated by the Communists. A second was that there existed large areas of potential agreement with the Russians. A third was that the neutrality of certain newly independent nations would strengthen the free world. (Nonalinement of areas and peoples once under anti-Communist control is exactly what Khrushchev and Mao want, too.)

As a result, the foreign policy of the new administration has been fainthearted from the beginning.

President Kennedy made the finest, most stirring declarations heard in many a day . Many of us were thrilled and eager to support him in what looked like a call to win the cold war. But he has retreated in Cuba and Laos.

Secretary of State Rusk has talked big at Oslo, reiterating our resolution to defend our rights in Berlin at any cost. Who believes him? Let Khrushchev offer a new summit to discuss Berlin, and who believes Mr. Kennedy will not come running?

Faintheartedness in the White House has

encouraged a whole host of defeatists to emerge who have been lying low since the unhappy McCarthy days. One such is a certain Taylor Adams of New York City, a defender of Castro's Cuba, who concludes an attack on me with the question: "Why are you people always obsessed with this 'free world and freemen' stuff?" Why, indeed?

In any case, the dispute over how to deal with communism-defeat it or try to mollify

it with sweet words and continual concessions-is not going to stop. For the proponents of conciliation turn the situation exactly upside down: far from preserving us from a nuclear catastrophe, faintheartedness

and retreat are making world war III ever more certain. At some point, after the loss of 2 or 10 more Allies to neutralism or

communism the American people are going to brush aside the fainthearts and pro-Communists at home and decide to defend their heritage of freedom.

Los Angeles Board of Supervisors State Need of Parking Space for Federal Buildings in Los Angeles

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. CLYDE DOYLE

OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, May 2, 1961

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, by reason of unanimous consent heretofore granted me so to do, I call to your attention, and the attention of my other distinguished colleagues, a letter I have received from the clerk of the board, Board of Supervisors for Los Angeles County, concerning the great need for parking areas adjacent to Federal buildings.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, Los Angeles, Calif., May 12, 1961. Members of the Los Angeles County Delegation to Congress.

GENTLEMEN: At the meeting of the board of supervisors held May 9, 1961, on motion of Supervisor Kenneth Hahn, an order was adopted respectfully requesting President John F. Kennedy, Senator THOMAS H. KUCHEL, Senator CLAIR ENGLE and the U.S. Congress to take corrective action regarding parking requirements in metropolitan

areas.

It was brought to the board's attention that it is generally the practice of the Federal Government not to provide parking when new Federal buildings are constructed It is requested by the board of supervisors that the Federal Government institute a policy of complying with requirements of local governments in metropolitan areas, in practice as well as in spirit, in providing adequate parking facilities not only for citizens and taxpayers who must travel to conduct business in Federal buildings, but also for employees working in these buildings. Respectfully yours, GORDON T. NESVIG, Clerk of the Board.

Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy Pays Tribute to Poland's Constitution

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. THOMAS J. O'BRIEN

OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, May 15, 1961

Mr.

Mr. O'BRIEN of Illinois. Speaker, Sunday, May 7, by proclamation of Mayor Richard J. Daley, Chicago officially observed the 170th aniversary of Poland's inspiring constitution.

More than 150,000 Chicagoans participated in a colorful parade and a program in Humboldt Park in tribute to this magnificent Polish document, which in 1791 brought to the people of Poland and to the European Continent for the first time the principles of dignity and self-rule, which only 2 years earlier had been incorporated into the Constitution of the United States.

I am sure I speak for all of those who participated in Sunday's inspiring program that we were indeed proud to welcome as the main speaker for this event in Chicago the Honorable Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States.

I should like to call to the attention of my colleagues the inspiring remarks delivered by the Attorney General in tribute to Poland's Constitution of 1791. His remarks reflect to a great extent the sentiments expressed here in Congress by more than 100 of our colleagues last week, when on May 3 we honored the Polish Constitution here in the House of Representatives. I am sure it is a source of great pride to all Americans of Polish descent that the Attorney General of the United States would join in this tribute.

Mr. Speaker, Attorney General Kennedy's remarks, delivered in Chicago on Sunday, follow:

ADDRESS BY THE HONORABLE ROBERT F. KENNEDY, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES AT THE POLISH CONSTITUTION Day OBSERVANCE, CHICAGO, ILL., MAY 7, 1961

I want to express my deep appreciation and gratitude to all of you for inviting me here today because I know I am among people who are dedicated forever to love of country and liberty. It is a great honor to join with you in celebrating the 170th anniversary of Poland's adoption of a constitution which gave meaning and noble expression to liberty and the fundamental rights of man.

The history of Poland goes back many years-many more than that of the United States, but almost since the day the Declaration of Independence was drafted in Philadelphia, the history of Poland and the United States have been entwined. These close ties have existed between the Poles and the Americans because of mutual respect for each other.

Casimir Pulaski was 29 years old when he came to America as a volunteer to serve in the Continental Army. He participated with distinction in the Battle of Brandywine and formed his own cavalry unit which was known as Pulaski's Legion. Pulaski was with the ragged American Army during the cruel winter at Valley Forge and lost his life leading an attack against the British defenses at Savannah, Ga. Though he died fighting for America's freedom, I cannot help but believe that he also was fighting for Poland's freedom.

Thaddeus Kosciusko, another Polish volunteer, was one of the most popular officers in the Continental Army-by all accounts. He was Washington's adjutant, built the fortifications at West Point and later served as a strategist and fighting officer in the recapture of Charleston, S.C.

After the United States had won its independence, Congress awarded him American citizenship, the rank of brigadier general and a large land grant. But Kosciusko returned to Poland and a few years later fought to defend the constitution which we honor to day . In 1794, when Polish patriots again sought to win their freedom by fighting. Kosciusko returned from exile to lead themand again distinguished himself-only to be overwhelmed by vastly superior forces.

Kosciusko still was pleading the cause of Polish independence in 1814 at the Congress of Vienna. He was then 68 years old, but the same democratic spirit which

burned brightly in Jefferson and Lafayette

also was unquenchable in him.

And down through the years to the Second World War-Poles and Americans have stood steadfast for the cause of liberty. The Poles, under Lt. Gen. Wladyslaw Anders, had the distinction of capturing Cassino and its historic abby which blocked the Allied advance in Italy for so many months.

I visited Monte Cassino several years ago and climbed up the steep, rocky hillside where the Polish soldiers fought their way forward. I will never forget the inscription on the memorial to the Polish soldiers who are buried there:

"We Polish soldiers, for our freedom and yours, have given ourselves to God, our bodies to the soil of Italy and our hearts to Poland."

These very same principles of freedom for which these gallant Polish soldiers died at Cassino, should be an inspiration to free people everywhere in the world today.

I might add that on this same trip in 1955. I visited Poland, too, and after traveling through the Soviet Union, it was inspiring to see that the people of Poland still stand and yearn for the principles of freedom and meaningful democracy.

So, the ties between our countries, beginning with Pulaski and Kosciusko, go to the present time and it just wasn't a coincidence that the President, in his state

of the Union message, mentioned one country-Poland-because he has the same admiration and affection for the Poles than I do.

We continue to be interested in and have concern for the welfare of the Polish people and we have attempted to maintain our close ties with them. In doing this, we have developed cultural relations and exchanges. We have developed economic programs which are of assistance to the Polish people.

What we need are:

1. More flexibility in giving assistance to Poland and other countries behind the Iron Curtain.

2. Strengthen the economic and cultural ties between Poland and the United States. 3. Increase the exchange of students, teachers, and technicians.

4. Explore with the Polish Government the possibility of using our frozen Polish funds on projects of peace that will demonstrate our abiding friendship for and interest in the people of Poland.

Recently, we have been disturbed by a number of hostile statements made by Polish leaders. However, we believe that the Poles favor, as we do, the continuing development of constructive relations between the two countries and we hope that they will avoid words and actions which would impede such development.

The Polish people will know that the American people and the American Government will continue to seek friendly relations. They also will know that we will work unceasingly to defend freedom and individual rights as heirs of a noble heritagein the spirit of 1791 as well as in the spirit of 1776.

Senior Citizens' Month

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. VICTOR L. ANFUSO

OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1961

Mr. ANFUSO. Mr. Speaker. recent developments in the city of New York hold out the promise for greater understanding and better treatment for its senior citizens. On May 3, 1961. New York City began a month-long program of activities in connection with Senior Citizens' Month.

The

Under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to insert into the RECORD the text of a radio address over station WNYC opening Senior Citizens' Month. address was delivered by Mr. Theodore Charnas, chairman of the citizens committee on aging of the Community Council of Greater New York, and also coordinator of a self-regulating program of proprietary nursing homes. Mr. Charnas reports on important developments that have taken place in New York City to help the city's older citizens. These developments may well serve as an example to other communities throughout the United States. I commend his address to all my colleagues, and especially to all those interested in the problems of the aged:

TALK GIVEN BY THEODORE CHARNAS IN CONNECTION WITH SENIOR CITIZEN'S MONTH OVER WNYC, MAY 3. 1961

Respect for age is fundamental in our tradition. All of us know the fifth commandment-honor thy father and thy moth

er. We all understand that this means an obligation not only to our own parentsbut to all parents-to all older people. We all know that the Declaration of Independence says that all men are endowed with inalienable rights-and that these are rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and we understand too that this means that all men-the old as well as the young-the sick as well as the sound-are entitled to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

I think we would all agree that the greatest asset of any society-especially in a democracy is its citizens, its people, all its people. A community must realize a fair return from all its people. If it doesn't the community is not receiving a fair share on its investment. On the other hand, a community must make its maximum contribution to all its citizens. If it doesn't, some are being cheated.

At the beginning of of Senior Citizens' Month, it is appropriate that we should pause and ask why are we so concerned with the problems of our older citizens?

More than 2,00 years ago during the Golden Age of Greece, the life expectancy of the average Greek was 25 years.

In 1900 in our country, the average life expectancy was 47 years. Only one person in 25 could expect to reach 65 years of age. Then a wonderful thing happened. People began to live longer. By 1940 the average life expectancy was 63 and one man in 14 could expect to reach 65. By 1955 the average life expectancy for men reached 68 and for women 72. One out of every 12 men could expect to reach 65 and 1 out of every 8 women could expect to reach 65 years of age. Today that life expectancy is even greater.

In 1900, 96,000 reisdents of our cityabout 3 percent of the population, were 65 or older. Today, more than 750,000—almost 10 percent of the population are in this group. There are almost 112 million over 60 years of age who live in New York City.

Now what kind of life is our society offering our older citizens? What are people doing with the additional years with which we have been endowed? As our population increases and life is prolonged, we have more and more aged, more and more chronically ill. more and more older people who need help to make their lives more complete and more meaningful.

How does a great community like ours in New York City plan for its older citizens? Who does the planning? How is planning structured in a community with about 1,200 health and welfare agencies of which more than 200 serve the aged?

Thirty-five years ago New York City had an alms house and a haphazard system of private homes for the aged. There was no public old-age assistance. There was little thinking in terms of recreation, employment, housing, geriatric medicine. The New York Association for Improving the Condition of the Poor, the Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of New York and of the Diocese of Brooklyn, and the Jewish Social Service Association were each developing a point of view in making provision for the needs of older people. And as the thinking of these agencies developed and crystallized. they came to realize that a community-wide framework must be established to deal with the many problems of the older person.

In 1925 the Welfare Council of New York City, now known as the Community Council of Greater New York, was established. Until then our services for the aging could best be described in terms of Mark Twain's definition of the dictionary-interesting but terribly disconnected.

The council played an active part in the promotion of the old-age pension of 1930. It issued the first statement on acceptable minimum standards on homes for the

aged some 20 years ago. It played an important role in public housing, which led to the construction of the first 50 apartments for older people in the Fort Greene housing project. It made intensive new studies on the multiple problems affecting older people. It took an active part in stimulating the growth of such facilities as the Goldwater Memorial Hospital. It played a vital part in the enactment of the nursing home legislation and only very recently, in December of 1959, it conducted a regional conference preliminary to the White House Conference on Aging, which was magnificent in terms of representation and good, sound, solid thinking.

At the same time the great Catholic. Protestant, and Jewish sectarian agencies were improving and extending their facilities and services for older people.

Then in 1949, a mayor's advisory committee for the aged was organized and charged with the duty of improving conditions affecting older people in New York City. It made a monumental study of living arrangements for older people in a public housing project-the Vladeck study. It was a vehicle for the exchange of information between voluntary groups and city agencies. It published many valuable papers. It inaugurated and assumed responsibility for Senior Citizens' Month in New York City.

But it is especially in the last 12 months that we have achieved extraordinary advances in planning for older people of New York City.

During these past 12 months, many fine voluntary homes for the aged and the chronically ill have developed plans for enlarging and improving their facilities. They are planning to bring within the scope of their services more and more older men and women who will continue to reside in their own homes but have the opportunity to make use of the facilities of these institutions. They have begun to study and make provision for the senile and they are employing newer and better techniques in the care which they provide.

The

During the past few months responsible private nursing homes have accepted a recommendation of the city administrator and they have voluntarily adopted a program of self-regulation. The homes which subscribe to this program are elevating their standards and improving their services. planning includes new central services which will be furnished to member homes, the availability of expert guidance in several areas of service, special courses for administrators, and the adoption of a code which must surely result in better care for residents of the nursing homes which subscribe to the program. This voluntary effort should be applauded by the community and it will undoubtedly be encouraged by the city administration which suggested this constructive program.

During the past 8 months we have seen the creation of the first citywide planning agency for our older people.

In October of 1960 the mayor's advisory committee on the aged and the committee on welfare of the aged of the community council merged into a Citizens Committee on Aging for the City of New York under the auspices of the Community Council of Greater New York. Thus, for the first time. we have responsible community planning on a citywide basis.

The objectives of the committee are to promote community education on the needs of the aged and on the concepts of aging; to develop a master plan for programs and services to the aging; to foster the development of recommended programs and services; to sponsor new legislation and review proposed legislation; and to coordinate community activities on proposed legislation which concerns older people.

The committee consists of 105 members who are leaders in the community, of these 60 are lay people. It numbers among its members a representative of the mayor and of each major city department concerned with old people. In addition to 30 experts serving on the committee, the subcommittees have involved 50 additional experts in the various fields in which these subcommittees are involved. The membership includes representatives of health and welfare agencies, clergy, members of the city council and the State legislature and the judiciary. the junior league, board of trade, commerce and industry, labor, fraternal organizations, and each of the great sectarian agencies.

The citizens' committee is independent, notable for its membership. ably staffed and completely flexible and with a program of the broadest possible scope. It holds tremendous promise for the future.

Since its beginning last October, the citizens' committee has functioned with remarkable efficiency. A number of committees have been hard at work isolating problems and evolving programs to meet the demonstrated needs. The committee on legislation has analyzed and made itself heard on proposed bills. The committee on retirement planning is working out a program to stimulate employer interest in preretirement programs. The committee on health is especially concerned with facilities and services for the senile and for the mentally ill. The income maintenance committee is analyzing the public assistance program. The housing committee is preparing a brochure outlining funds available from Federal, State, and city agencies for private builders and organizations undertaking to house old people. The committee on services is preparing a recommendation for the mayor at his request, on information and referral services.

And finally Mayor Wagner has announced a program of action for the aged which describes steps to be taken by the city government to provide a network of services for the aged. He has called for the assumption of greater responsibilities by the community and has asked the citizens' committee to cooperate with city government. The mayor made this announcement at the first meeting of the citizens' committee on aging last October. The mayor will address the next meeting of the committee on May 9 at city hall and he will then make a further statement about his action program. This meeting will be the occasion for the formal opening of Senior Citizens' Month and the presentation of a scroll to Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt. What are we really trying to achieve?

We want the older person to have pleasant and agreeable shelter. We want him to have economic security. We want to make provision for his physical and mental health. We want him to have recreational activities which will deter the degenerative effects of old age. We want him to have a meaningful old age with dignity and self-respect. And isn't this really what we want for ourselves?

What can we ask of the community?

I believe that the older person has a right to the sympathetic understanding of the entire community-not only during Senior Citizens' Month but all the year round.

I believe that the planning and the programing can flourish only if we have a climate which is hospitable to this planning and programing. We must all understand that everyone of us is involved in the process of growing older. And we must teach our children and younger people to respect the experience and the contributions of our elders. We must make it possible for our older people to find dignity and self-respect and the awareness of being needed. Only when we have learned to honor our fathers

and mothers and to respect all fathers and mothers can our programs come to fruition. And only when we conscientiously strive to give older people their rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness will we be able to say that we have planned well.

We all have a stake in this business of getting older. Let us try to make life more complete for our older men and women and for ourselves as we grow in years so that we can say with the poet:

"Age is opportunity no less than

Youth itself, tho' in another dress.
And as the evening twilight fades away,
The sky is filled with stars visible by day ."

We Must Stop This Slide

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. CLYDE DOYLE

OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, May 2, 1961

Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, by reason of unanimous consent heretofore granted me so to do, I call to your attention, and the attention of my other distinguished colleagues, a timely and pertinent editorial appearing in the Huntington Park, Calif., Daily Signal newspaper, for Tuesday, May 9, 1961:

WE MUST STOP THIS SLIDE Never in peacetime has American power suffered such damage as by the Cuban invasion fiasco coupled with the all but completed loss of Laos to the Communists.

Since we back the invasion that failed communism is more firmly entrenched to fester in Cuba and its potency to filter into other lands in our hemisphere has been increased.

In Laos, which we talked loudly of holding, a new strategic gateway is rapidly falling open to the Communists. But far more important that the geographic conquest is the psychological effect so easy a victory must have upon Khrushchev. We must surely expect him to strike now for a more valuable stake and the chances are good American troops will be needed to stop him. An appraisal of our failures is essential if we are going to prevent the slide of many more nations into the Soviet orbit.

NEEDED: A REAWAKENED SENATE Corrective action should be taken on four fronts. Presumably study of the CIA and Joint Chiefs of Staff responsibility in the Cuban debacle is already underway. Of more long-range value can be a closed-door, nonpartisan Senate investigation of the reasons why the administration made the decisions it did on Cuba and why it chose a course to drift on Laos.

Such an investigation is fundamental if the Senate is to return to its constitutional responsibility to watchdog the Chief Executive in his foreign actions. Certainly events of the last 2 weeks show that we have need of the Senate to act again in this role and to its full capacity.

Finally, it is probably a safe presumption methods he personally chose to reach his that President Kennedy has realized that the

decisions were at fault. New types of judgments and new wisdom in his decision making are needed.

FORCE AND ONLY FORCE

Of all the guidelines which can be laid down from our present setbacks the most fundamentally useful was pointed out by Stewart Alsop in his column in this news

paper yesterday. As Alsop wrote. Khrushchev really means it when he says, as he did a year ago, that "the world balance of power has now turned sharply in favor of the Socialist countries."

If President Kennedy becomes fully aware that Khrushchev means and believes this he will sweep from his administration all who counsel that a deal be made with the Soviets either to "settle" the cold war or to negotiate a disarmanent pact. As long as the Russians think they are winning only force or the determination to use force can halt them.

Wiretapping and the Rights of the Individual

EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF

HON. ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER

exclusively to keep all strangers out. The householder may shut his door against the world. That is one of the proudest rights of an American—a right enjoyed by the householders of few other countries in the world today. It applies with equal force whether the intruder is a private trespasser or a Government agent.

This right of a citizen to shut the door against anyone, even the king himself, is part of our ancient heritage of freedom from England. One of the great ends for which men entered into society was to secure their property. By the common law every invasion of private property, no matter how minute, was a trespass, even if no damage was done. And the king's man, entering without sanction of law, was as much a trespasser as an ordinary man.

Eavesdropping and wiretapping are trespasses against the home. Let there be no question about that. They are much more serious trespasses than an unlawful search

have worked. We should not anticipate failure until we have made a genuine effort to succeed.

In the second place, is there any reason to believe that by permitting some wiretapping under regulation other types of wiretapping would be eliminated? If wiretapping goes on outside the law now, legalizing some types would hardly be calculated to change the situation. Instead, it would amount to a congressional declaration that wiretapping is not always bad. I recognize that it is proposed to enact new penalties against unauthorized wiretapping. But we have no assurance that these penalties would be enforced or are enforcible. If they are, this argues strongly that all wiretapping could be banned, and that there is no need to give even partial legislative section to lawlessness that now exists.

OF WISCONSIN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 15, 1961

Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker, recently the Assistant Attorney General, Herbert J. Miller, Jr., argued that the Justice Department should have added legislative authority to permit wiretapping. Perhaps one of the arguments Mr. Miller used in urging this new authority indicates the depth to which our conception of the rights of the individual have sunk. The Assistant Attorney General argued that "law enforcement officials should be as free as criminals use modern scientific methods."

I know that my colleagues agree that the powers of the State must be constrained lest they infringe upon the rights and privileges of the individual. Were we ever to allow the State the freedom of criminal methods, we would have lost the very meaning of the free society we so hopefully proclaim to the world and in which we have trusted throughout American history.

While I must personally register my strong objection to the demand for greater wiretapping authority, I think that other members may find the views

of Prof. Charles A. Reich a sound and careful analysis of the problem. I would submit these excerpts from much longer testimony which was given on May 9, 1961; before a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, to the consideration of the House:

STATEMENT BY CHARLES A. REICII BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE My opinions about eavesdropping and wiretapping reflect a long time interest in the fields of constitutional law and property, the principal subjects that I now teach. They are views which many of my students tell me are old-fashioned, but that you will have to judge for yourselves.

Private property is to me one of the most basic institutions of a demorcratic country like ours. Without it individualism and freedom inevitably wither and die, no matter how democratic a government purports to be. One of the major purposes of our Constitution and Bill of Rights was to safeguard private property, and it should not be forgotten that the framers were mostly men of substantial property.

Among the most important attributes of private property is the right to possess it

long periods of time and are usually unknown to the householder even after they occur. The householder never even gets a chance to fight for his privacy. Eavesdropping has always been regarded as despicable by those who believe in the privacy of private property, and wiretapping, while of more recent origin, is in no way different.

When eavesdropping and wiretapping are carried on by government against its people we have a condition that reminds me of what George Orwell foresaw for 1984, when Big Brother will be able to watch what each of us is doing at home. Spying by government against its citizens is odious to a free people, and I think the framers of our Constitution forbade it once and for all when they provided that the right of the people to be secure in their homes against unreasonable searches "shall not be violated."

As I understand it, there are two principal arguments in favor of legislation which would permit some eavesdropping or wiretapping. First, there is the testimony of many law enforcement officials that such methods are needed in order to track down organized crime. Second, there is the view that since wiretapping now goes on in defiance of the law, it is wiser to attempt to regulate it than to continue a largely ineffectual band. I do not think either argument justifies the legalizing of eavesdropping or wiretapping.

On the first point, my position, very simply, is that fundamental rights the rights that make this country what it is-must not be abandoned no matter how strong the claims of law enforcement. Each of our fun

damental rights-trial by jury, necessity of indictment by grand jury, the prohibition against coerced confessions. the right to bail. freedom of speech and press, may well make law enforcement less efficient. Necessity could be advanced as justification for giving them all up. But without these rights what would these enforcement officials be protecting? We would be a totalitarian country. I myself would rather have law enforcement less efficient than to move in the direction of abandoning our freedoms. At least law enforcement must stop short of destroying the very rights it is supposed to protect.

On the second point-existing wiretapping in defiance of law-I have two comments. First, have we ever tried really enforcing a ban against wiretapping? Have we ever made it a felony in explicit terms and set about jailing those who violate the law? It can be and is argued that present laws do not actually ban the interception of telephone messages. A law that clearly did so might be tried. Or, if prosecution of law enforcement officials is unrealistic and undesirable, have we tried banning the shipment of wiretapping equipment in interstate commerce-a prohibition that might reach the evil at its source. Similar bans

Mother's Day Service, Combined Church Schools, First Lutheran Church of Altoona, Sunday, May 14, 1961

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT

OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, May 4, 1961

Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, on Sunday, May 14, 1961, it was my privilege to deliver the following Mother's Day address to the combined Sunday Schools of the First Lutheran Church of Altoona, Pa., as part of their annual Mother's Day service:

MOTHER'S DAY ADDRESS BY REPRESENTATIVE JAMES E. VAN ZANDT, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, 20TH DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, AT MOTHER'S DAY SERVICE, FIRST LUTHERAN CHURCH, ALTOONA, PA., MAY 14, 1961 Holy Scripture reminds us that "he that honoreth his mother is as one that layeth up treasure."

The converse of this text for my Mother's Day message is to be found in Proverbs , chapter 14, 14, verse 20: "A foolish man despiseth his mother."

The scriptural lesson here taught agrees with common experience and general opinion.

A man's value can generally be pretty well determined by his relations with his mother-by the way he looks at her-speaks to her-speaks about her.

The attitude of an honorable and manly man toward his mother is an attitude of love and respect.

An affectionate regard for the wishes of his mother does no harm to a man's dignity and independence, and a protective chivalry helps a man to develop a firm courage.

Mother's Day is an excellent institution if we take it as an occasion to emphasize an attitude that reveals our conduct and speech the year round.

Thus we can observe Mothers' Day in an appropriate manner by giving some extra remembrance to one we never forget, and by displaying on Mothers' Day before the world a feeling that we show to our mothers and experience in ourselves, every day of the year.

Mothers' Day can be worthwhile, too, if it marks a turning point in our relations with our mothers, by providing a time of good resolutions which are adhered to in a conscientious manner.

It can be worthwhile if we write a letter and continue the correspondence, if we give needed help, resume close association,

apologize for past neglect and, above all, resolve to do better in the future.

On the other hand, Mothers' Day is a mockery if it is only an occasion of momentary attention after 12 long months of utter disregard for our obligation of love and respect.

Wear a carnation if you wish, but unless it represents an emotional tie, a relationship of affection and honor between you and your mother, it might just as well be a lowly cabbage.

The beauty of the carnation must represent the beauty of the relationship it is intended to symbolize.

To wear it honestly as the token of Mothers' Day you must mourn your mother if she is dead, or rejoice in her if she is living. Living or dead, she should be the object of your unfailing love and deepest respect.

Every mother has borne pain and undergone danger for her child. Mothers down through the ages have given years of effort to the physical care and sustenance, the intellectual development, and the moral training of their children. This display of deep maternal love is a free gift, expecting no sort of return or reward.

But though our mothers have freely given, with no thought of recompense, the gift itself demands at least the just recognition of gratitude and of whatever form of expressing that gratitude deemed appropriate to present circumstances.

For those who are grown up and have established their own families and independent way of life there is no one prescribed and proper form of relationship with their mothers.

In some families it has been found an ideal arrangement to have the mother live with them, helping with the household duties, thus being spared the expense of a separate establishment and benefiting by the consciousness of being needed.

In other families, where circumstances or personalities may differ, such an arrangement might be disastrous to family relationships. In such cases harmony and happiness might be best served by the mother's keeping a separate and independent living place, to whose upkeep her children might contribute if necessary. Some find the best answer in a flexible system of traveling and exchanging visits.

The basic necessity is affection at the core of the relationship, with the physical details to be adjusted by mutual agreement, and with regard to financial and other circumstances.

What is essential is the attitude of mutual respect and love that leads to cordial agreement and generous cooperation in establishing harmonious conditions of living.

This attitude is represented neither by the slogan, "Mother knows best," nor by the masterful declaration, "Now, mother, we know what is best for you, and you needn't trouble yourself-we'll arrange it all."

Respect should not be exaggerated into abject submission nor care and solicitude degraded into tyranny.

A mother is, first of all, a person entitled to recognition as an equal and independent personality, with her own opinions and preferences.

Her opinion on your affairs is to be sought with respect, listened to with courtesy and attention, and given its due weight in the formation of your decisions. Her opinion on her own affairs is paramount and decisive, except insofar as she may choose to defer to your opinion or preference.

Courtesy is the outward expression of the warmth of affection that must permeate family relationships. But courtesy does more than express that warmth of affection-it preserves and stimulates it. Mothers' Day affords the opportunity for an expression of formal courtesy from all of us toward our mothers.

The writing of letters, the wearing and giving of flowers, the special celebrations of the day such as dinners, parties, entertainments, all these are of value as acts of courtesy, as tangible, audible, visible assurances to our mothers of the warmth of our feelings for them.

This virtue of courtesy has been fittingly celebrated by the English Catholic poet, Belloc, in terms that associate it vividly both with religion and with motherhood: "Of courtesy, it is much less

Than courage of heart or holiness,
Yet in my walks it seems to me
That the grace of God is in courtesy.
"On monks I did in Storrington fall,
They took me straight into their hall;
I saw three pictures on a wall,
And courtesy was in them all.
"The first the annunciation;
The second the visitation;
The third the consolation
Of God that was our Lady's Son.
"The first was of St. Gabriel;

On wings a-flame from Heaven he fell;
And as he went upon one knee
He shown with heavenly courtesy.
"Our Lady out of Nazareth rode-
It was her month of heavy load;
Yet was her face both great and kind,
For courtesy was in her mind.
"The third it was our little Lord,
Whom all the kings in arms adored;
He was so small you could not see
His large intent of courtesy.
"Our Lord, that was our Lady's Son,
Go bless you, people, one by one;
My rhyme is written, my work is done."

Courtesy is a form of politeness, but it is a stronger word than politeness, carrying with it the implication of real feeling, of gentleness and courage and kindness.

Courtesy goes with the "something more" of politeness, with the dramatic demonstration of affectionate respect.

Politeness, therefore, is suitable to our everyday relations with our mothers and courtesy is suitable to this special day .

Not a nod of greeting but a low bow, not a hasty kiss but a hearty embrace, not a

friendly word but a gift, a flower, a speech

of tribute.

This is a day for the plentiful and courteous bestowal of gifts and praises-upon our mothers. Let us be grateful and gracious in our observance of the occasion.

We ourselves know, and we can be assured our mothers know, how we feel about them. If our feelings are not such as are appropriate to the day let us labor to amend them.

If our feelings are, however, in tune with the spirit of the day , let us not shrink from giving full and enthusiastic expression to them in the confidence that a bold expression of devotion to the ideal of motherhood, and to one particular mother, will be beneficial not only to our personal relationships but to the community in general, and particularly to our young people.

Standing in this holy place, I am made tion of this occasion-the spiritual. The best strongly aware of the most fitting celebraand greatest gift we can give to our mothers is to pray, sincerely and fervently, both for

their welfare and for our own fulfillment of their hopes for us.

Nearest to the heart of any mother is the hope that her son or her daughter will be a good man or woman. An endeavor to fulfill this hope in the development of our own characters should, therefore, be our resolve on this day for the coming year.

May God guide our consciences in the formation of this resolution and strengthen our wills in its performance.

The value of this day , in strengthening and renewing our relationship with our mothers, is great and lasting. From the natural human virtue of love between mother and child we rise easily and naturally to the love of God.

The value of such natural human emotions and virtues is eloquently celebrated in a familiar poem by Father Abram J. Ryan, which might well be taken as the keynote of our Mothers' Day observance: "Better than grandeur, better than gold, Than rank and titles a thousandfold, Is a healthy body and a mind at ease, And simple pleasures that always please. "A heart than can feel for another's woe, And share his joys with a genial glow; With sympathies large enough to enfold All men as brothers, is better than gold. "Better than gold is a conscience clear, Though toiling for bread in an humble sphere.

Doubly blessed with content and health, Untried by the lusts and cares of wealth, Lowly living and lofty thought

Adorn and ennoble a poor man's cot; For mind and morals in nature's plan Are the genuine tests of an earnest man. "Better than gold is a peaceful home Where all the fireside characters come, The shrine of love, the heaven of life, Hallowed by mother, or sister, or wife. However humble the home may be, Or tried with sorrow by Heaven's decree, The blessings that never were bought or sold,

And center there, are better than gold."

Our Religious Heritage

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

OF

HON. WALTER H. JUDD

OF MINNESOTA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Monday, May 15, 1961

Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave

to extend my remarks in the RECORD, I include the following address given at the annual meeting of the Religious Heritage of America, Inc., during the annual Washington pilgrimage which it sponsors:

OUR RELIGIOUS HERITAGE AND THE BLESSINGS
OF LIBERTY
(Keynote address by the Honorable WALTER
H. JUDD, of Minnesota)

Mr. Chairman, it is a great privilege to participate in the conferring of the Religious Heritage Awards to these distinguished men and women whose service to God and man has been so outstanding as to merit this recognition and tribute.

Your Washington pilgrimage comes this year at a time characterized by perhaps as great a confusion of emotions as at any period in American history. On one hand there is profound gratitude for the goodness of life that is possible for us in this land. On the other hand there is great uneasiness, uncertainty, perplexity, even anxiety and despair. Less than 15 years after winning a war with total, unconditional surrender of all our enemies, we are soberly asking, What can we do to survive?

We are profoundly grateful that no such thing has happened here as we saw happening in Hungary 3 years ago, in Tibet last year, and in Japan this week. But we are dismayed that such things can be happening to anybody anywhere on this globe in the