Hide Article Text (OCR)
Appreciating the potency of a strong Rome-Berlin axis, Great Brit ain and France have long sought to keep Germany and Taly divided. Now this eee trick of diplomacy has boomeranged. With Hitler and Mussolini on top of the heap since Munich's peace treaty, the Rome- Berlin axis in very successfully building a barrier between London and Paris. Until a few weeks ago Great Brit ain and Germany were compara tively close friends, while Italy bus ied herself hurling insults in the meral direction of London. Now this is changed; the Anglo-Italian “Friendship treaty has been in voked and Prime Minister Cham berlain is willing to grant belliger ent rights to Fascist Spain. During this display of affection, shrewd Adolf Hitler has found it convenient to abandon his British friends and turn to France. Thus it was not entirely unexpected when France announced conclusion of a pact with Germany to outlaw war between the two nations and recognize the per manent integrity of present Franco- German boundary lines. On the surface this appears to complement the Anglo-German no war” treaty signed secretly by Hit ler and Chamberlain at Munich. A more likely result is that it will cause bickering between France and Britain; by making peace with Berlin, Paris has figuratively aban doned the protectorship of British aristocrats and financiers. At the same time, Britain's new peace with Mussolini arouses the indignation of Fascist-hating Frenchmen, who are now being vilified by the Roman press. I Ein the road abusion wecit re sentment against the current Ger man Jewish persecution. Still to Come are French overtures for Ital ian friendship, probably to be paid for by the grant of new African colonies to Mussolini. Though both England and France deny it, ob servers are quite certain both will return war-mandated colonies to Germany. The only new development which does not fit into this appeasement program is the Anglo-French deci sion to pool all forces and construct a fleet of 10,000 fighting planes by 1940. This contradictory move only emphasizes how he faith any mod ern European nation places in the sanctity of treaties, since the only reason for a ‘super’ air feet would be to combat the combined threat of anytalo-German feet Defense Though much talk has been heard of a multi-billion defense program in which the U. S. would place a steel ring around the entire Western hemisphere, President Roosevelt's armament requests are not expect ed to be that big. Closest essi mates now available call for a $1,400,000,000 defense budget for the fiscal year starting next July 1. This would be $350,000,000 more than the current armament appropriation, most of the boost to be spent for army increases. Not only does the war depart ment want to lay plans for mobiliz ing an army of 1,200,000 men within a few weeks, but it also wants to start storing away equipment for this army. Other plans call for in dustrial mobilization education in factories which would be converted to processing of war materials. Still a third phase of preparedness calls for increasing our aviation force to §,000 planes. Peace organizations are expected to rally against increased arm aments within the next few weeks, arguing that great defense precau tions might lead to offense. There fore the President will probably start publicizing the purpose of his remilitarization program imme diately. Much more pertinent to the aver age U. S. citizen is the problem of paying for increased armaments. Though Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau admits that new tax proposals are being held up pending completion of defense plans, all is expected the total budget, submitted to congress next Jani ery will run over $4,000,000,000. On this basis, and with anticipated rev enues approximating those of the fiscal year ending last June, a defi cit of about $1,000,000,000 may be expected during the government year starting next July. Armament’s share of the new budget must be paid with new taxes, and many congressmen advocate a two-year emergency income tax. This would pile a 10 per cent levy on top of the present income tax and provide $260,000,000 a year. Al ready trying to spike such plans, Utah's Sen. William H. King pro poses to substitute “war taxes in the form of a “nuisance levy on luxury and semi-luxury goods. Throughout the U. S. are about 2,500 manufacturing firms who share profits or managerial respon sibility with employees, Proctor Gamble workers contribute 5 per cent of their wages against a 5 to 15 per cent contribution by the man agement (based on seniority) and from this fund employees buy stock. McCormick Co., Baltimore im porters, not only share profits but organize workers to help run the business under a ‘multiple manage ment” plan. Such firms, whose number is in creasing yearly, generally have lit tle labor trouble. Example: the American Rolling Mill company of Middletown, Ohio, has never experi enced a labor disagreement in its 88 years of operation. Even C. L O., which organized the bulk of steel plants, was defeated 1,200 to 400 in one American Rolling Mill labor election. If profit-sharing could be extend ed, most U.S. industrialists believe employees would be better satis fied, employment would become less fluctuant, and our national fnancial picture would be improved. In Waanington, a senate finance sub committee investigating the plan was recently told it would be “an unbeatable defense of the capital istic system. Members of this committee are Michigan's Sen. Arthur Vandenberg and Iowa’s Sen. Clyde Herring. Their purpose is to unearth facts about profit-sharing merits and find methods of expanding it. The long range ambition is to make the work ing man more prosperous and more able to bear a share of the U.S. tax load. ‘Thus, by splitting its profits, industry would help itself by win ning a more equitable division of tax burden. But an expansion of profit-sharing must come either voluntarily or through government insistence, and voluntary adoption of the plan by industry would be a long discour sion. Though no member yet advocates it, both Sen ators Vandenberg and Herring have been feeling out sentiment on an “incentive taxation” plan. Under it the government would give tax cred its to profit-sharing concerns, mean while penalizing non-conforming firms. ‘Tax credits might be given on employers’ social security pay ments, though the mere mention of such tampering with social security has already aroused protest. Most of the committee's wit nesses have gone on record oppos ing the incentive tex because it would impose either reward or pen alty for an employer's decision on a matter which should be entirely voluntary. Loudest supporter has been Walter D. Fuller, president of the Curtis Publishing company, who wants a more liberal tax treatment to stimulate re-employment. He also thinks industrial plant expan sion, will follow if employers are al lowed to charge off more on depre ciation than at present. Labor's opinion has been ex pressed by William Green, presi dent of the American Federation of Labor, who naturally favors profit sharing provided It does not tend to replace collective bargaining. This issue may be the battleground on which profit-sharing plans rise or fall, since collective bargaining is based on compulsion rather than co-operation. Before adopting the profit-sharing principle, many indus trialists would demand that the threatening club of organized labor be removed, Civil Liberties Union. She said that Roger Baldwin, head of the group, once told another congressional committee that the organization up held the rights of aliens to advo cate murder, assassination and the overthrow of the government by force and violence. This charge started the ball roll ing. Admitting membership in the union, Mr. Ickes called Mr. Dies “the outstanding zany in our politi cal history. Answered Mr. Dies: “The secretary's most recent or of uncontrollable rage only emphasizes his unfitness for the high position he holds. The secretary literally reeks with the venom of hatred. It flows from him as naturally and free ly as water from a spring.” As Mr. Dies prepared to release his selection for the ‘1938 all un American team, ' the average U. S. citizen was beginning to wonder if the committee's real purpose, to un cover evidence of subversive activ ties, was not being overlooked. @. Potential 1940 presidential nomi nees will be well mulled over before the nominating conventions roll around, but a few straws are al ready in the wind. First, Missouri's new Sen. Bennett Champ Clark, a “middle - of - the - road Democrat whom many of his partisans would like to see nominated for 1940, has inferred that his ambitions reach no higher than the senate, and that he will not run for the presidency. Sec ond, Republican Alf M. Landon, de feated in 19368, made the following comment at a New York luncheon: “The woods are full of Republicans, but I think there is one outstanding Democrat—and that is the man just elected for the fourth time as gov ernor of New York.” But few poli ticians consider Gov. Herbert E. Lehman a serious possibility. Aviation Because a major U. S. airline has allegedly refused to accept delivery on a new type 33-seat plane, avia tion experts believe the advent of substratosphere commercial aiir craft will be delayed several years. This happens despite the demon strated practicablity of larger ships. It results almost entirely from the public's slowness to accept air travel. Whereas substratosphere ships have four motors and carry 42,000 pounds at a cruising speed of 250 miles an hour, the present 21-passenger ships have but two mo tors and accommodate a considera ry smaller meenee. Yet , steiae Foreign The resignation of Premier Bela Tmredi's Hungarian cabinet is a di rect result of his failure to obtain the entire eastern half of Czecho slovakia, an arm which was opposed first by Germany, and now by Italy as well. Since Adolf Hitler has de livered 1st representations or as any Hungarian ambitions in the varian or Carpatho-Ukraine (in thenia) districts, the new cabinet is expected to be more closely allied to the German viewpoint. Hitler naturally does not want Hungary to annex Czech territory which would give her a common border with Po land, since that might block Ger many's long-plannned “drive to the southeast through Czechoslovakia. Miss Leslie Lee Jom student, spent Thain her parents and d guest her roommate, Silve . Mrs. Cecil Downn Shelah, were Sunday art guests of Mr. William Hart's ta lk. Quite a crowd from Thursday in Oldham ing. Mr. and Mrs. H. M. family, of Minnie Arnold, of Mr. Willard Lilly and Camp Taylor, were ©. Lilly. Mr. Parcell spent the week-end with his mother. —_ Master George K In spent from Wednesday day with his aunts in Ni enjoyed every minute of it, urday night Mr. Andrew very kindly took him to se anders Lingtime Band, Mrs. R. J. Cook was got Mrs. L. P. Jones and Mra, Hart Monday afternoon, Mra, Edward Hindle and BE. B. Martin were lots of Shivelys and kunA day. Also Mr. and Mrs. Suther land and Mins Farnham shopped for a brief call on their way from the florists. Mr. R. J. Gook called at the home of Rev. Leo Hall and family Tuesday night, NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN France no longer needed him, WALTER D. FULLER For depreciation, profit-sharing.
Newspaper Details
Jeffersontown Jeffersonian
Jeffersontown, Kentucky, US
Thu, Dec 01, 1938
Page 8
Full Page
Clipped by
Grant E.
USA 05 Jun 2026
Other Publications Near Jeffersontown, Kentucky
Jeffersontown Jeffersonian
