Ferguson: Christmas books
By Mrs. Walter Ferguson
With the world as it is, a good book will make the best Christmas present this year, since it can be both a source of information and a means of escape. At the request of several readers, here is a list of the latest ones coming to my desk:
“Covering the Mexican Front” by Betty Kirk – a vivid recital of political happenings in Mexico from 1936 until now; powerful, penetrating and readable analysis of our next door neighbors.
“Young Man of the World” by T. R. Ybarra – gay, racy account of an international gadabout.
“Democratic Ideals and Reality” – Halford J. Mackinder’s republished geopolitical masterpiece.
“The Invasion of the German Mind” by Dorothy Thompson at her best.
“Call Her Rosie” by Eva Bruce – a heartwarming tale of another cockeyed family.
“Horseless Buggy” by Katrine MacGlashan – a few hours of good entertainment about people who lived before Mr. Ford performed his wonders.
“Frontier Passage” by Ann Bridge – adventure, love and excellent writing, with setting on Spanish frontier.
“Uncle William” – another of those mouthwatering books by Della Lutes, who always makes readers homesick for the good old days, when people were ignorant of vitamins but wise about cooking.
“See Here, Private Hargrove” by Marion Hargrove – a close-up, humorous account of training camp life.
“The Army Life” by Pvt. E. J. Kahn Jr. – ditto.
“Signed With Their Honor” by James Aldridge – a tale of Flying Patrol in Greece, done in Hemingway style.
“Mr. W. and I” – a delightful record of a genteel journey kept by Daniel Webster’s wife on a trip to England in 1839.
“Yankee Fighter” by Lt. John F. Hasey – a story of an American fighter in Free France.
Background of news –
Foretaste of 1943?
By Editorial Research Reports
Some indication of what the administration faces in the new Congress came in the House on December 8. By unanimous vote that body sent to the Senate a bill to require that farm labor costs be included in the parity price formula for farm products. Last September the administration with the greatest difficulty staved off a similar move in Congress. The administration leaders in the Senate may manage to shelve the new House bill for the remainder of this Congress, but what happens in the new Congress probably will be something else again.
Slightly more than one-half of the House seats gained by the GOP in the November elections were in the Middle West. This is the section supposed to be particularly outraged by the President’s partially successful fight in September to keep farm labor costs out of the farm parity price formula. The history of that fight indicates that if the issue arises in the next Congress, the outcome may be different, even in case of a veto.
The Price Control Act of January 30, 1942, was adopted six months after the President had asked for such legislation. The act contained a provision forbidding ceilings on farm prices below 110 percent of the parity price (or higher under certain circumstances). In approving the act the President questioned the wisdom of certain provisions; his anti-inflation message of April 27 called, among other things, for lowering farm price ceilings to 100 percent of parity.

When Congress took no action, the President, on September 7, sent in his ultimatum to pass a bill by October 1; else he would act on his own initiative, presumably as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy. Unfortunately for the administration’s side, the message contained this statement: “Calculations of parity must include all costs of production, including the cost of labor.”
The anti-inflation bill laid before the House Banking Committee by Chairman Steagall called for a new farm price parity formula to include costs of farm labor, including family labor. When the President objected, this provision was stricken from the bill by the committee, but it was restored by the full House by vote of 205-172. Estimates were that the new formula would make existing farm price ceilings 112 percent of the old. Of the members voting, 65 percent of the Republicans and 47 percent of the Democrats lined up for the new formula.

In the Senate, the new formula was approved by vote of 48-43, but with an understanding that later a compromise would be worked out acceptable to the administration. The compromise which remained in the bill as enacted into law sanctioned farm price ceilings at 100 percent of parity or the highest price from January 1 to September 15, 1942, whichever was higher. However, changes in price ceilings were to be made whenever necessary to reflect increased labor and other farm costs, or to stimulate production. Also, in fixing ceilings on products manufactured wholly or in large part from farm products, “adequate weighting” was to be given farm labor costs.