America at war! (1941–) – Part 4

3458

americavotes1944

Philadelphia key in Roosevelt bid

Big majority needed to carry state
By Kermit McFarland, Pittsburgh Press staff writer

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania – (Oct. 28)
President Roosevelt’s arduous campaign here yesterday was based on the general beef among both active political leaders and local political writers that he will need an imposing majority in this city if he is to carry Pennsylvania again.

His personal appearance here, featured by a four-hour, 45-mile tour in an open car despite bitterly cold and wet weather, was designed to stir up the vote the Democrats believe is pro-Roosevelt.

The tour took the President through districts of the city which have generally backed him in previous elections. This strategy was in line with the now prevailing belief that to defeat Governor Thomas E. Dewey in Pennsylvania, every potential Roosevelt vote must be turned out to the polls.

Estimates on majority vary

Estimates on what will happen in Philadelphia, which four years ago gave Mr. Roosevelt a majority of 177,000, vary all the way from some wild-eyed Republican guesses of 30.000 for the President to some similarly extreme Democratic guesses of a 200,000 majority for him.

Democratic money is being bet on a Roosevelt majority of 135,000 and some conservative Democratic leaders are forecasting as much as 150,000. The real Republican figure, from the less rambunctious viewers of the situation, is a 75,000 Roosevelt majority.

The Philadelphia Bulletin, a conservative newspaper supporting Mr. Dewey editorially, published a poll, completed 10 days before Mr. Roosevelt’s visit, which shows 59 percent of the vote for the President and 39 percent for Mr. Dewey.

The Bulletin said one percent of those interviewed declined to say how they will vote and another one percent indicated preferences for minor party candidates.

All registered voters

The polltakers said they limited their results to persons who said they are registered and intend to vote. The survey was done with secret ballots.

This poll would indicate a Roosevelt majority of about 175,000, assuming that the total voter turnout equals that of four years ago. The poll did not take into account the vote of men and women in the armed forces, who have been sent 123,000 military ballots.

The President carried Pennsylvania four years ago by 281,000, which was almost precisely the sum of his majorities in Philadelphia and Allegheny counties, the total vote in the other 65 counties of the state being a virtual deadlock.

City’s vote important

In the face of evidence that the 1940 Roosevelt majorities elsewhere in the state are being pared down this year, the Philadelphia result becomes of major importance in the President’s bid for another term.

Estimates of the crowd which lined the streets to get a glimpse of the President as his motorcade toured the city ran all the way from 600,000 to two million. But no accurate guess was possible because the crowds were stretched out over 45 miles of streets.

In some sections, they were sparse, in others the congestion nearly blocked the progress of the President’s car.

Crowds friendly, smiling

There was nothing like the President’s visit in 1936, the last time he made a campaign here “in the usual sense,” when it took nearly two hours to go five miles along Market Street and into Camden.

The crowds yesterday were friendly, smiling and for the most part in a gay mood, despite the drenching thousands of them endured. But they did not show the hysteria which characterized the demonstration in 1936.

In some sections, there was little more than applause and smiles, with a few shouts of encouragement mixed in. But at the Navy Yard, where 30,000 civilians are employed, at Cramp’s Shipyards where there are 14,000 employees, and in Camden, New Jersey, where Mr. Roosevelt spoke briefly, the crowds were hilarious.

In Camden they had stayed in the rain upwards of an hour awaiting the President’s arrival. His short talk there was unscheduled. The cold rain was at its worst during the Camden visit.

Democratic leaders were well pleased with the crowds which appeared to greet the President. They said they believed the turnout particularly impressing in view of the weather, the fact that Mr. Roosevelt, before he finished the tour, was running almost an hour late and that thousands who are engaged in war work were unable to leave their plants.

Didn’t expect converts

They did not expect the President’s visit to convert many Dewey voters, but they did lay great stress on the value of the trip in stirring up enthusiasm among potential Roosevelt voters.

They are in the position of trying to show high confidence over the outcome of the election and at the game time impressing on the pro-Roosevelt voters the extreme necessity of going to the polls Nov. 7 if the President is to win.

In other words, while saying they are confident of a big Roosevelt majority here, they are endeavoring to break down any idea that it is a “sure thing.”

3459

americavotes1944

Campaign expenses thus far –
GOP has spent $1,688,368; Democrats pay $1,052,589

Group and individual contributions to both parties listed by clerk of House

Washington (UP) – (Oct. 28)
The Republican National Committee has spent $635,779.57 more thus far in the presidential campaign than the Democratic National Committee and has received $1,335,143.50 more in contributions, reports filed with the clerk of the House of Representatives disclosed today.

The Republican Committee spent $1,688,368.79 from Jan. 1 through Oct. 23 as compared with $1,052,589.22 spent by the Democratic Committee through Oct. 24.

The Republicans listed contributions of $2,428,321.52 and the Democrats $1,093,178.02.

The CIO Political Action Committee spent $378,730.90 from Jan. 1 through Oct. 25 and listed contributions through Sept. 10 at $101,606 05.

The National Citizens PAC said it had spent $165,018 and received $271,531 through Ort. 22.

Contributors to the NCPAC included Singer Frank Sinatra, $5,000, and Mrs. Marshall Field, wife of the publisher of the newspapers, PM and the Chicago Sun, $2,500.

The Pennsylvania State Republican Finance Committee reported expenditures of $609,477.17 from Jan. 1 through Oct. 25 and receipts of $912,713.18 for the same period.

Contributors to the Pennsylvania group included Mr. and Mrs. J. Howard Pew of Ardmore, Mrs. Margaret R. Grundy of Bristol, Eugene C. Grace of Bethlehem and Howard S. Vanderbilt of New York, with $3,000 each.

The International Ladies Garment Workers Union campaign committee for Roosevelt and Truman spent $68,165.24 and received $85,237.05 through Oct. 23. The largest contribution was $27,500, from the New York Joint Board of Coat Makers Union Campaign Committee.

The Democratic National Committee, listed President Roosevelt as contributing $1,000, and Mrs. Roosevelt, $100. Other Democratic contributors included:

Movie magnates Albert Warner, Jack Warner and Harry M. Warner, $5,000 each; Floyd B. Odlum, financier, $5,000; William L. Clayton, surplus property administrator, and Mrs. Clayton, $5,000 each: Mr. and Mrs. Samuel Goldwyn, $5,000 each; A, J. Drexel Biddle Jr., former Ambassador to Allied governments-in-exile, $2,500; RAdm. Frederick R. Harris, $2,500; Laurence A. Steinhardt. former Ambassador to Turkey, $2,000; Mr. and Mrs. Henry Morgenthau Jr., $2,000; and Mrs. Emma Guffey Miller of Slippery Rock, Pennsylvania, $2,000.

Guffey sisters give $2,000

Daniel J. Tobin, president of the International Teamsters Union (AFL), $1,000; songwriter Irving Berlin, $1,000; Mrs. Herbert H. Lehman, wife of the Director General of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, $1,000; Senator Theodore F. Green (D-RI), $1,000.

Ida V. Guffey and Pauletta Guffey of Washington, DC, $1,000 each; Breckinridge Long, Assistant Secretary of State, $1,000; Homer Cummings, former Attorney General, $1,000; Mrs. Nellie Tayloe Ross, director of the mint, $500; Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins, $300: Attorney General Francis E. Biddle and Mrs. Biddle, $250 each; Secretary of State Cordell Hull, $250; Leon Henderson, former Price Administrator, $200; and Mr. and Mrs. Harry L. Hopkins, $100.

Mellons give GOP $5,000

The contribution list of the Republican National Committee during the period in question showed two $50.000 donations and one for $40,000 by the United Republican Finance Committee for Metropolitan New York.

Other large donations were $50,000 and $25,000 by the Republican Finance Committee of Pennsylvania.

Other gifts to the GOP National Committee follow:

Max C. Fleischmann of Santa Barbara, California, $5,000; M. T. Grant of Madison, Connecticut, $4,000; J. Howard Pew, J. N. Pew Jr., Miss Mary Ethel Pew and Mrs. Mabel Pew Myrin of Philadelphia, $3,000 each; Mrs. Sarah Mellon Scaife, and W. L. Mellon, both $3,000, and aul Mellon, $2,000.

Other GOP contributors:

Page F. Stranahan, Marie C. Stranahan and R. A. Stranahan, all of Perrysburg, Ohio, $3,000 each; Mrs. Oliver G. Jennings and L. K. Jennings of New York, $3,000 each; Mrs. Elizabeth B. Blossom of Cleveland, Ohio, $3,000; Russell H. Bennett of Minneapolis, $1,000, and Mrs. Helen H. Bennett, $3,000; Edward S. Hutton of Westbury, New York, $3,000; Sterling Morton of Chicago, $3,000; Ralph M. Shaw of Chicago, $3,000; Charles G. Dawes of Chicago, $2,500; Mr. and Mrs. R. W. Morrison of San Antonio, Texas, $2590 each; Mr. and Mrs. John J. Sheerin of San Antonio, $2,500; also M. E. Coyle of Detroit, $2,500; C. E. Wilson of Detroit. $2,500; Thomas Morrison, Helen B. Morrison of Spring Lake, New Jersey, $2,000 each; Mrs. John D. Rockefeller Jr. of New York, $1,000; Lammont DuPont of Wilmington, Delaware, $2,000.

Senator Davis spends $4,154

Meanwhile, the Secretary of the Senate disclosed that the highest campaign expenditures report filed by a Senate candidate up to tonight was submitted by Richard J. Lyons, Illinois Republican, who is opposing Democratic Senator Scott W. Lucas.

Mr. Lyons said in a preliminary report that he has spent $22,484 and received $10,930 in contributions.

Republican Homer E. Capehart, opposing Democratic Governor Henry Schricker of Indiana for the Senate, reported expenditures of $5,630; Senator Millard E. Tydings (D-MD), $8,321; Senator James J. Davis (R-PA), $4,154. Senator George D. Aiken (R-VT), his Democratic opponent, Harry W. Witters, and Senator Lister Hill (D-AL), all reported no expenditures.

3460

Simms: Protectorate is envisioned for Poland

‘Atlantic Charter’ appears dead
By William Philip Simms, Scripps-Howard foreign editor

…

3461

‘Uncle Joe’ Stilwell believes in direct words and action

General walked out of Burma with his men, returned with them after jungle victories

…

Army engineer takes over in India-Burma theater

Ex-Marshall aide gets China post

…

3462

A 1,000-mile trek –
Chinese fleeing advancing Japs

Miserable refugees take to the road
By Albert Ravenholt, United Press staff writer

…

3463

Factory sales to Alcoa scored

…

3464

americavotes1944

‘Get Willkie’ plan revealed by Mead

Buffalo, New York (UP) – (Oct. 28)
Senator James M. Mead (D-NY) charged tonight that former President Hoover and Governor Thomas E. Dewey initiated an undercover campaign some few months ago to drive the late Wendell Willkie out of the Republican Party.

Senator Mead said here before his departure for New York, where he will make several campaign speeches:

I am in a position to prove that Mr. Hoover, following conferences with Mr. Dewey, advised nationally known Republican leaders that “Tom and I are agreed that the sooner we remove the corn Willkie from the Republican toe, the better it will be for the Republican Party.”

Senator Mead’s statement said:

Mr. Willkie, with his irresistible charm, his wealth of wisdom and the purity of his motives, was well on his way to his second nomination for the Presidency when Hoover and Dewey set out… to stop him and obtain the green light for the New York Governor.

One of the first men to take the cue from Hoover and Dewey was Senator Alexander Wiley of Wisconsin, a pre-war isolationist of the first order and the man who later was to participate with Mr. Dewey and Mr. Hoover in the presidential primary contest of that state, which proved the political death knell of the able and revered Mr. Willkie.

Mr. Dewey and Mr. Hoover did not forget the generous contribution Senator Wiley made to Mr. Willkie’s defeat and his reward came on last Wednesday when Mr. Dewey, en route to Chicago, chose to stop in Wisconsin to give not only his unqualified endorsement to Wisconsin’s leading isolationist, who is seeking a second term, but to make a speech for him.

How Mr. Dewey can tell the people that his party no longer stands for isolation, and go out and embrace and endorse full-fledged isolationists like Mr. Wiley, is one of the mysteries of the Dewey campaign.

3465

americavotes1944

If you have swoons –
Sinatra, speaking for common man, introduces Vice President

Don’t look, Dewey, sings Ethel Merman

If you have swoons, prepare to swoon them now. Frank Sinatra reached the pinnacle of his career last Thursday night when he was chosen to introduce the Vice President, Henry A. Wallace, over a national network.

For the benefit of the Sinatra audience – some of whom may have been put to bed by their parents before the rather late broadcasting hour, and others of whom may have swooned before the climax – we have secured from the Blue Network the text of his oration. It is the story of the “average citizen” and the “little man” – of whom The Voice said he is one.

Sinatra shared the program with Ethel Merman of musical comedy fame (Anything Goes, Du Barry Was a Lady, Something for the Boys, and others). Ethel finished off the program with a campaign song, “Don’t Look, Mr. Dewey, Your Record Is Showing.”

‘Thrilled and excited’

Sinatra didn’t sing – just talked. Mr. Wallace was sandwiched in between Frank’s oration and Ethel’s song. The Ladies Garment Workers Union paid for the broadcast.

Sinatra began:

This is a new experience for me, and I am thrilled and excited and eager about it, because it is the first time in my life that I am going to make a political speech.

I imagine most people associate me with the world of entertainment, but tonight I want to step out of this world for just a few minutes to tell you how I feel about something that is as important to me and my children as it is to you and your children and your loved ones on the far-flung battlefields of the world.

I want to tell you why I am for the reelection of Franklin D. Roosevelt. I am speaking as an average citizen, as a father and an American.

For the younger generation

It seems to me that never in the history of this great nation of ours have you and I and, above all, the younger generation, had so much at stake.

And I believe that the great problems of the post-war world, the military problems at this very moment, can be worked out and will be worked out under the leadership of the man in the White House – our Commander-in-Chief.

I cannot help thinking back for a moment to those apple-selling days when thousands of kids roamed the countryside because there wasn’t enough for them to eat at home – the days of the long lines of men and women seeking jobs that weren’t there. Gone are those days – gone, let us hope, forever – and don’t let us forget it was our great President who worked out with his advisers the program of social security, unemployment insurance, CCC camps for boys, NYA, better housing, all of which made up a pattern for a better life.

Can there be a question in anyone’s mind that Franklin D. Roosevelt is qualified by such experience and background to work with the statesmen of our allies so that our children and our grandchildren, and even we, can live in a world of peace and security?

I have yet to read a single sentence or hear a word spoken that logically denies the achievements of Franklin D. Roosevelt in the past, and his ability and astuteness to cope with the problems of the future.

Those who have spoken against him, it seems to me, have indulged in carping and unfair criticism and have failed to make even a dent in the intellectual armor of the President.

One of the common people

And let me say just one word, or perhaps repeat what I have said once before, and that is – what I like most about the President is, he is pretty fond of the little man. In that respect I guess he is just like Abraham Lincoln, who once said that God liked the common people because he made so many of them. Well, I am one of them – even with all my good fortune. Don’t let the common man down – keep Franklin D. Roosevelt in the White House.

Then came the supreme moment of this spokesman for the common man – his introduction of the Vice President.

He said:

Now it is my privilege, my great honor, to present the symbol of the common man – the symbol of an American to the rest of the world – the Vice President of the United States, Henry A. Wallace.

Mr. Wallace delivered a prediction that Roosevelt would win by over three million votes, and then Sinatra returned to the radio to introduce Ethel Merman’s song.

‘Don’t Look, Dewey’

Sinatra said:

Once to every woman, my wife included, comes that embarrassing moment when a friend whispers kindly, “Don’t look now, but your slip is showing.” “Well, there’s no whispering when this girl’s step up to the microphone to sing… and what she has to sing about can be shouted from the housetops. Ladies and gentlemen, Miss Ethel Merman with E. Y. Harburg’s new song – “Don’t Look Now, Mr. Dewey! (But Your Record Is Showing).”

Because of the newsprint shortage, we can’t risk our paper quota by printing all of Ethel’s song, but here are some high spots that carry the idea of campaigning 1944 style:

…the ship of state, oh the ship of state
Is not the Albany night boat,
And when the people turn out to vote,
Somebody is going to miss that boat.

Chorus—
Don’t look now, Mr. Dewey,
But your record is showing…
Your new-deal trousers are smart, no doubt.
But the old-deal short tails are sticking out.
Don’t look now, Mr. Dewey,
But your record is fooey;
The soldier vote you jumbled,
On Russia you jumbled,
On lend-lease you brumbled,
On world peace you mumbled,
The dumb’lls you’ve assembled
Will be stumble-bumbled–
So, Dewey,
Don’t look now.

3466

americavotes1944

3 Mississippi electors bolt Roosevelt-Truman

Say they’ll vote for Harry Byrd because of convention’s race planks
By James Perry, United Press staff writer

Jackson, Mississippi – (Oct. 28)
Three of Mississippi’s nine Democratic presidential electors announced today that they will not vote for President Franklin D. Roosevelt and vice-presidential candidate Harry S. Truman in the Electoral College.

Frank E. Everett of Indianola, Clarence E. Morgan of Kosciusko, and W. G. McLain of McComb issued a statement here in which they said they would vote for Senator Harry F. Byrd (D-VA) for President.

The statement, addressed to the Democratic voters of Mississippi, said that the Mississippi Democratic Convention in June had freed all electors from the obligation of voting for party nominees if the National Convention failed to restore the two-third rule or if it adopted race platforms obnoxious to the South.

Race planks hit

On the basis of these instructions, the statement said, Mississippi electors have the right to vote for any Democrat holding similar views to those expressed by the state convention.

The statement contended that the National Democratic Convention did pass obnoxious race planks and failed even to consider restoration of the two-thirds rule.

The action of the three electors today was expected to cause a furor in Mississippi political circles as voters must vote for all nine electors or ballots will not be counted. A possibility that a second pro-Roosevelt slate of electors might be placed on the ballot was ruled out because the deadline set for qualification of electors was Sept. 7.

Signed a statement

Soon after the state Democratic convention in June, the Executive Committee in Mississippi had requested that all party electors support Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Truman at that time eight electors signed a statement pledging their support unless something happened to make the election of President Roosevelt inimical to the best interest of the South and Mississippi. The ninth pledged unqualified support.

Later, when Roosevelt backers threatened to put a second slate of electors on the ballot, Governor Thomas L. Bailey issued a statement in which he said he had been assured by all electors that they would support party nominees.

Factors are given

The three electors named the following factors which make it impossible for them to support the Democratic ticket:

  • Appeals by nominees for the Negro vote in the South.

  • Promises to do away with race segregation in the South.

  • Open acceptance of support by candidates of Communists and Sidney Hillman, chairman of the Political Action Committee.

3467

americavotes1944

‘The Voice’ gives $5,000 –
Perkins: Clothing firms backing PAC with cash

All employ members of Hillman’s union
By Fred W. Perkins, Pittsburgh Press staff writer

Washington –
A report on file today with Congress, as required by the Corrupt Practices Act, by the CIO-sponsored National Citizens Political Action Committee (a twin of the other PAC), shows more than a score of clothing manufacturers as contributors of $100 to $500 each to this organization for reelection of President Roosevelt.

These manufacturers are members of the industry in which the dominant union is the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, of which the president is Sidney Hillman, who is also chairman of both Political Action Committees. Some of the concerns listed as contributors were the following, all in New York City: Acme Pants Company, Topp Overcoat Company, W&C Clothing Company, Carlyle Clothes, Winshire Clothes and Dutchess Slacks Companies.

No corporations on list

According to their listing, none of the contributing concerns are corporations. The Corrupt Practices Act makes it an offense for “any corporation whatever” to make a political contribution in connection with a national election, and also forbids any political committee to receive such contributions. The law makes no mention of business concerns not organized as corporations.

Total contributions up to Oct. 23 to the Political Action Committee were given as $271,531, in comparison with the $1,500,000 which Chairman Hillman announced in August might be raised. Of the total contributed, $29,614 represented unlisted gifts of less than $100. Among the largest contributors was Frank Sinatra, “The Voice,” who was down for $5,000.

Union donations curbed

The Corrupt Practices Act, as amended by the War Labor Disputes Act, also makes it a punishable offense for “any labor organization” to contribute in connection with national elections.

Another report just received by Congress shows that the International Ladies Garment Workers Union Campaign Committee for Roosevelt and Truman had collected $85,237 up to Oct. 24, almost entirely from campaign committees of local unions and of joint boards representing various associations of workers in the women’s garment industry. The largest contribution listed was $27,500 from the New York Joint Board Cloak Makers Union Campaign Committee.

The Ladies Garment Workers Campaign Committee listed expenditures up to the date of the report totaling $68.165, including a contribution of $35,000 to the Liberal Party of New York, David Dubinsky is president of the union and is also active in the Liberal Party, which was created after a left-wing group, with the cooperation of Mr. Hillman, took over control of the American Labor Party in New York.

PAC held within law

Mr. Dubinsky and others called this week on President Roosevelt to arrange for a great rally in Madison Square Garden at the close of the campaign.

Arguments are expected in Congressional committees after the campaign on whether any of these activities violate the spirit or the letter of the law.

Attorney General Francis Biddle has ruled repeatedly that activities of the Political Action Committee were within the law.

The reports to Congress also show that Republican fundraisers have not been idle. For instance, the Republican Finance Committee of Pennsylvania reports that on Oct. 25 it had collected $912,713 to add to a balance of $18,274, making a 1944 fund of $930,987. It had spent $609,477. Among the large contributors were members of the Pew and DuPont families, and also former Senator Joseph Grundy.

3468

americavotes1944

Dewey pledges stable prices to farmers

He also promises end of ‘dictation’

Aboard Governor Dewey’s campaign train, Utica, New York (UP) – (Oct. 28)
Voicing his confidence that he will win the presidential election next month, New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey told a crowd of several hundred persons here today that “Your new President will never use his office to separate the country.”

Mr. Dewey added in a brief speech from the rear platform of his campaign train:

Your new President will never use his office to claim personal or political credit for the magnificent achievements of the military leaders and the sacrifices of the American people and their sons.

Several hundred persons, carrying banners which read “We Want Dewey,” “No Fourth Term” and “Win With Dewey,” gathered around the rear platform of the train when it stopped here en route to Albany from Syracuse, where the GOP standard-bearer made a speech attacking the Roosevelt administration’s farm program.

Hits farm program

Mr. Dewey told the crowd that it was just “like old home week” and that he was glad to be “campaigning in my own home state.”

He said:

Change in administration can only mean that we will end the chaos, bungling and confusion in Washington.

When we have a new administration, we can go forward and win the war even quicker.

In his Syracuse speech, Mr. Dewey charged that the administration’s farm program had been “exploited for political profit” and was designed to give the national government “control over the operation of our farms.”

Urges ‘expanding industry’

Bringing his campaign for the White House to usually-Republican Upstate New York, Mr. Dewey told an overflow crowd at Syracuse Central High Schol that it “took a war to get decent farm prices” under President Roosevelt and that farm programs had been set up “as an excuse for regimentation and wasteful bureaucracy.”

The nominee said farm prices are linked with factory employment and that to maintain fair returns for the nation’s farmers the city dweller must be able to find jobs.

He said:

We can have fully employed agriculture with fair prices and a real market if we have three square meals a day for all our people. That can be obtained through a fully employed, expanding industry with real money for real jobs.

The farm and food problems of the United States are inseparable. Neither will be solved until all our people are well fed, and our agriculture is stabilized on a par with industry and labor.

Willkie backer helps

Republican Leader Rolland B. Marvin, ardent supporter of the late Wendell L. Willkie, presided at the rally. Mr. Marvin and Mr. Dewey were reported at odds for some time, but have since closed the breach.

Mr. Marvin said:

I want to say to Governor Dewey today that you don’t have any worry or fear what we’re going to do in this section of the state. We are going out and give Tom Dewey the biggest, majority that any candidate ever received.

Counts on farm vote

Mr. Dewey’s farm speech, which had been postponed a few days ago so the GOP candidate could “reply” to Mr. Roosevelt’s foreign affairs address, opened his drive for support in upstate counties of New York, whose 47 electoral votes are expected to play a major role in the election. GOP leaders are counting on a heavy upstate vote to offset the usually large Democratic margin in New York City.

Iowa Governor B. B. Hickenlooper introduced Mr. Dewey by radio from Burlington, Iowa. He said Mr. Dewey would sponsor a farm program “free from politics.”

Hits price structure

The Roosevelt administration failed to achieve “anything like fair prices” for the farmers despite 12 years in office and that the underlying factor was that there were 10 million unemployed, Mr. Dewey said.

He assailed the administration for assigning two men to one job and cited agencies involved in the sail conservation program. He said the Soil Conservation Service had accomplished good im some parts of the country but added that the program “will fail if it is used as an excuse for regimentation and wasteful bureaucracy.”

3469

americavotes1944

Truman to make 7 speeches here

Main address set at 9:00 p.m. Thursday

Senator Harry S. Truman, Democratic candidate for Vice President, will make seven speeches here Thursday in a 12-hour schedule announced yesterday by the Democratic County Committee.

Mr. Truman will top his tour of the district with a major address in Syria Mosque at 9:00 p.m. ET.

The Republicans will stage a rival rally the same night in North Side Carnegie Hall at which Republican County Chairman James F. Malone, District Attorney Russell H, Adams, and candidates will speak.

Before the evening rally, he will speak in Braddock, East Pittsburgh, Wilmerding, McKeesport and Uniontown and, on his return to Pittsburgh, he will deliver a 15-minute radio talk.

Pinchot on program

On the program with Senator Truman at the Syria Mosque will be Gifford Pinchot (former Governor of Pennsylvania), James L. McDevitt (president of the AFL State Federation of Labor), David J. McDonald (secretary-treasurer of the United Steelworkers) and Orson Welles (movie and radio star).

The rally will start at 8:00 p.m. with County Commissioner John J. Kane presiding.

Senator Truman will arrive here via the Baltimore & Ohio at 8:45 a.m. and will stop at the William Penn Hotel.

Schedule given

He will make a 10-minute speech at 10:45 from his auto at the corner of Eighth Street and Braddock Avenue, Braddock. He will speak at 11:30 at the mill gate of the Westinghouse Electric Company, Cable and Braddock Avenue, East Pittsburgh.

Senator Truman will then go to the Westinghouse Airbrake Company plant in Wilmerding where he will speak at noon. A half hour later, he will attend a luncheon given for him by Mayor Frank Buchanan at the Penn-McKee Hotel, McKeesport.

He will speak at 3:30 from the Courthouse steps in Uniontown.

His radio broadcast is scheduled over KQV at 6:15. This speech will be rebroadcast over WCAE at 11:15 p.m.

3470

Patterson: Nation is 10% short of war requirements

U.S. victories slow up arms production

…

Tax proposal seen spurring plant growth

Foster depreciation of equipment urged
By Roger Budrow, Scripps-Howard staff writer

…

3471

Science aids horror –
Nazi crematorium in Holland burned 13,000 prisoners

Sometimes they were hanged first; Gestapo butchered 600 just before Germans fled
By B. J. McQuaid

…

3472

Jap warships knocked off just like sitting ducks

Enemy fleet wheels directly into line of fire of U.S. battleships, cruisers, destroyers
By Ralph Teatsorth, United Press staff writer

…

Princeton survivors swim four hours before rescue

Yanks in water ringed by bullets to keep off curious sharks after carrier sinking

…

3473

americavotes1944

Poll: New York City shows trend from Roosevelt, but he has big lead

Poll gives Democrats 57% majority in city but vote of only 40% in balance of state
By George Gallup, Director, American Institute of Public Opinion

New York City, which in the last presidential election cast more votes than the combined total of 16 states, shows a trend away from President Roosevelt in the latest balloting conducted by the Institute.

However, the President still leads in the city by a substantial majority of civilian votes.

Balloting was completed shortly before Roosevelt’s visit to New York City Oct. 21, when he spent most of the day touring the city. Consequently, the figures do not indicate the effect of that visit. A new survey will measure any last-minute changes in sentiment.

Up to the time of the President’s visit, the survey found the following situation:

NEW YORK CITY
(Civilians only)
Roosevelt 57%
Dewey 43%

This represents a shift of four percent away from Mr. Roosevelt in the city since the 1940 election, which he received 61 percent.

A survey during registration week in New York City indicates the turnout increase over expectations will not necessarily help the Democrats more than the Republicans. It was found that the new registrants divide about the same as old registrants in their preferences for Governor Dewey or Mr. Roosevelt.

Upstate is GOP

In previous years, the city has cast about half the vote in New York State. This year, the indications point to a somewhat higher ratio for the city as against the rest of the state – a likelihood which will bring cheer to the Democrats.

Upstate New York continue to follow its traditional political pattern, being overwhelmingly Republican. Institute balloting there points to an increase of 2.0 percent in Republican sentiment since 1940.

UPSTATE NEW YORK
(Civilians only)
Dewey 60%
Roosevelt 40%

The 12-year trend in the city and upstate is shown below. The percentages are in terms of the vote for Roosevelt.

NYC Upstate
1932 71% 44%
1936 75% 45%
1940 61% 42%
Today 57% 40%

For the state as a whole, the balloting indicates no change since the recently reported figure of 51 percent for Governor Dewey, 49 percent for Mr. Roosevelt.

New York has been a comparatively close state in quite a few elections. In 1940, President Roosevelt carried it with only 52 percent of the major party popular vote. In the 1870s and 1880s, in three presidential elections in a row, the outcome in New York State was determined by only a few thousand votes.

3474

Editorial: Blueprint for ruin

…

3475

americavotes1944

Editorial: Poland and politics

Winston Churchill was frank in his report to Commons on his Moscow negotiations and the Polish-Russian deadlock. Not that he told all. But he did reveal again that Britain in general is on Russia’s side.

While Mr. Churchill recognizes the right of the British people and Commons to such information, our President keeps Americans in the dark regarding American negotiations and policy on this subject and most others.

Mr. Roosevelt’s fear of losing Polish-American votes on Nov. 7 doubtless is an additional reason for his silence, though his secret diplomacy is almost as complete when he is not in a political campaign. As usual he is bidding for votes on both sides of the fence, in this case for the pro-Polish and the pro-Russian votes. That was not so easy after Mr. Dewey came out for the Poles. But the President then tried to stay on both sides without really binding himself to either.

He had Senator Wagner of New York make this statement on Pulaski Day:

I believe with every fiber of my being that the complete independence of Poland – the complete restoration and protection of its boundaries reflecting the history and aspirations of the Polish people – is one of the things for which we are fighting this war… I know that this has always been the aim and intent of the administration of Franklin Roosevelt.

That is a broad pledge, but Mr. Wagner cannot commit Mr. Roosevelt.

In fact, four days later, when a group tried to smoke out the President on the issues of Polish territorial integrity and freedom from puppet control by Russia, Mr. Roosevelt brushed them off with an evasive generality – “to reconstitute Poland as a strong nation but also as a representative and peace-loving nation.” That is a paraphrase of Stalin doubletalk, and as such most acceptable to pro-Russian voters.

But while Mr. Roosevelt plays politics and secret diplomacy with this Polish-Russian deadlock – which might be broken by a fair and open American policy – it is prolonging the war and jeopardizing the peace. Even Mr. Churchill, who unblushingly favors the Russian territorial grab, admits that:

Anything like a prolonged delay in settlement can only have the effect of increasing division… and hampering the common action which the Poles and Russians and the test of the Allies are taking against Germany.

Since Roosevelt’s secret diplomacy has only prolonged the deadlock which interferes with united action against Germany, the least the President can do now is to state American policy openly. He owes that to the American troops. And that is only fair to both Poles and Russians, as well as to the other United Nations. For the American Congress and people are not, and cannot be, committed to any secret deal.

3476

americavotes1944

Editorial: Clever speech

President Roosevelt was in good voice Friday night, as he told his story of the progress of the war.

He claimed the credit, as he was entitled to, for picking Gens. Marshall and Arnold and Adm. King to run the war. They are so good at it that Mr. Roosevelt’s opponent, Governor Dewey, has said that he would keep them running it. Which makes it unanimous.

In developing the rest of his story – of how this country, in the three years since Pearl Harbor, mobilized its military strength, helped munition our allies, built the grandest navy and army and air force, checked the enemy’s advance and took the offensive – Mr. Roosevelt gave himself none the worst of it in the telling. Which is to be expected, of course, in an election year.

It was a clever speech by the cleverest politician of our time.

Yet, after granting credit for the Marshall-Arnold-King selections, the President’s other implied claims will have to be salted down a little on a cold morning-after analysis. After all, neither Mr. Roosevelt, nor Harry Hopkins, nor even Harold Ickes, built all those warships, landing craft and airplanes with his own hands, Other Americans had something to do with that, and we know some industrial workers and managers who contend it was done “in spite of Washington” and notwithstanding all the boards, commissions, bureaus, alphabetical agencies and cross-purposed directives.

And it is not a matter of record that the New Deal actually discovered sulfa drugs, penicillin and blood plasma, so it is hardly due credit for the fact that a smaller percentage of soldiers have died from wounds in this war than in the last war.

Anyone with a short memory listening to the President’s speech would get the impression that when Pearl Harbor came, he was ready for it.

If so, why did those same military commanders lament to Congress that we were unprepared? Why did we spend so many months retreating?

How explain those third term promises that we would not have to give up any of our social gains, that we could have enough bullets without cutting down on butter?

Why was he so insistent that Congress go home, and not stick around pushing the defense program?

Why his failure to lay in those stockpiles of rubber, tin, etc., authorized by Congress?

And why did we have to muddle through the Defense Advisory Council, the Office of Production Management, the Supply Priority and Allocations Board, the War Production Board, the Office of War Mobilization, etc.?

The Commander-in-Chief and Candidate-in-Chief told a thrilling story of American accomplishments at home and in the field. But a true account of his leadership through all that requires a few shadings.

3477

americavotes1944

Taylor: That ‘silent’ vote

By Robert Taylor, Press Washington correspondent

The “apathy” toward the election that politicians were complaining about a few weeks back has entirely disappeared as the campaign swings into its last nine days, and in its place is an interest on the part of voters amounting, in some cases, to zeal and bitterness.

The campaign suddenly came alive within the past two weeks, apparently with the realization that Pennsylvania, still standing 50-50 in the Gallup Poll, may decide this election for the nation.

Republicans, knowing they have a chance to carry the state, are sniffing victory for the first time since 1932, and they have intensified the efforts of their organization to whip up interest and get out the vote.

Democrats, with the knowledge that this election is not just another coasting party with President Roosevelt certain to raise a safe majority for the ticket, have redoubled their efforts to bring every available vote to bear.

One sign of awakening interest is nationwide. Estimates of the total vote have jumped from 39.5 million to 47 million – or a vote of 76 percent, as compared with a total vote in 1940 of 80 percent, of the eligible voters.

Indications are that, in Pennsylvania, the vote will be higher than 76 percent and most county leaders are making their estimates on an 80 percent vote (Four years ago, Pennsylvania turned in an 82 percent vote).

Registration totals not decisive

Democrats always campaign in Pennsylvania against a Republican majority in total registrations, so a big vote – anything above 75 percent can be classified as big – is usually hailed as an advantage to the Democrats.

One puzzling feature about this year’s election, however, is that registration figures, with the exception of those of some small or politically stable counties, don’t mean what they say, and that the vote can go against the majority of the party registration.

In the places where the fight is hottest, therefore, county leaders are almost unanimously of the opinion that the state will be won by the side that gets out the highest percentage of its vote – by stirring up the voters with campaign issues, by personal appeals and by hauling them to the polls, if necessary.

They’ve been working along this line and, in the process, they have discovered what may be the deciding factor of the election – the existence in populous counties of considerable groups of voters who just aren’t saying anything about the election.

This vote is reported in many counties and is described as a “quiet” or a “silent” vote. It occurs in farm, mining and industrial counties and it 1s variously estimated at from 10 to 15 percent of the county registration. It has been found in both Republican and Democratic counties.

They can’t tell which way

The unclassified vote shows up in the public opinion polls under the heading of “undecided,” and is estimated as representing the same proportions of Roosevelt and Dewey sentiment as that expressed by the voters who speak their minds.

County leaders of both parties are banking heavily on this silent vote to help them increase their own majorities or cut down the opposition’s, but, at this writing, they can’t be sure which way it will go.

A 10 percent silent vote in the more heavily-populated counties could amount to some 200,000 voters who apparently are going to keep their own counsel on how they’ll vote. In a race as close as this one, they can decide the election.