nrairj
X THE OMAHA GUIDE Q
Q TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION $2.50 Per Yr.O
Q All News Copy of Churches and Organiz-X
A ations must be in our office not later than U
X 6:00 p. m. Monday for current issue. Alin
v Advertising Copy or paid articles not later a
Q than Wednesday noon, preceeding date of V
A issue, to insure publication. __U
A Race prejudice must go. The Fatherhood U
X of God and the Brotherhood of Man must pre- M
X vail. These are the only principles which will A
Q stand the acid test of time. __X
Q James H. Williams, James E Seay, Linotype A
0 Operators and Pressmen V
X Paul Barnett, Foreman U
0 Published every Saturday a 2418:20 Grant 0
A Street, Omaha, Nebraska— 1 hone WE. 161'M
X Entered as 2nd Class Matter March 15, 1927A
y at the Post Office at Omaha, Nebr., under V
A Act of Congress of March 3, 1879. y
MUNICIPAL BEGGARS
Tnat this nation has been indulg
ing in the greatest peace-time spend
ing spree in the history of the world,
is common knowledge. We hold the
world's record for public debt.
Realistic citizens and editors have
for several years been pointing out
the dangers of a spendthrift nation
al policy. They have shown that a
curb on public spending must emanate
from the people. As long as a major
ity of our people think they are get
ting something from the government
for nothing when they get their nose
in the public tax ticmgh, there is little
hope for the financial future of the
nation.
• •
That public sentiment is growing
against financial handouts from the
government, is slowly becoming evi
dent. The people begin to realize that
they and not the politicians, foot the
tax bills. A number of communities
have taken pride in refusing to go on
a municipal pauper list and advertise
themselves as municipal beggars.
The day is coming when self-res
pecting communities will be ashamed
to accept federal funds furnished by
all the people to construct purely lo
cal enterprises for the benefit of a
privileged few. Such cities will be ob
jects of charity just as truly as the
unfortunates who are cared for by the
government in public institutions.
As evidence that pride in munici
pal financial care has been growing,
an editorial in the Bucyrus Telegraph
Forum of Bucyrus, Ohio, points out in
no uncertain terms that Bucyrus citi
zens should build a proposed swim
ming pool in the old American way,
from their own financial resources, in
stead of asking the federal govern
ment to make them a donation to build
such a prjject. In concluding the edi
torial, Editor Peters says:
For six years it has been cfeciarect in
this and probably every other Amer
ican community, that ‘we might as
well get ours; if we don’t some other
community will.’- •• That is why we
have today a $40,000,000,000 indebted
ness against our unborn generations.
The limit has been reached. It is time
for communities to take hold of them
selves and begin plugging for improve
ments as communities plugged for im
provements for 150 years. . Not so
many years ago Bucyrus built a new
high school building. Before that the
city built a number of grade school
buildings. The government didn’t help
build them. We built them ourselves
and we paid for themm. . Why can’t
Bucyrus return to that era of inde
pendence of community spirit, get a
swimming pool and pay for it with
out kissing the feet of a gang of poli
ticians? What was done for 150 yrs.
can be done now if we have not sacri
ficed our last speck of resourcefulness
and independence • •”
Editor Peters puts the issue plain
ly. Are our towns and cities going to
continue on the municipal pauper list
or are they going to again take pride
in being self-supporting, independ
ent and solvent political subdivisions?
-0O0—
WHY INVESTMENT LAGS
Any number of fact:rs are blamed
for the present dearth of new invest
ment. Banks, for instance, come in for
criticism. But, in the view of experts,
blaming banks is a poor excuse.
Some time ago a banker, in reply
ing to a query concerning the reluc
tance to invest, made these pertinent
observations: “Despite the fact that
many business men are willing to try
anything with other people’s money the
fact remains that the majority of busi
nesses, large and small, will n :t engage
additional capital unless prospects are
favorable. Sound situations are not
now seeking new capital, s> investment
opportunity is choked at the source- A
discussion of reasons would became
something of a political treatise.”
That goes straight to the heart of
the problem. For seven years the rab
ble-rousing politicians have attacked,
frightened, discouraged and burdened
capital. They have expbited the suc
cessful in order to subsidize the failure.
They have apparently regarded the a
bility to create, to save and to make mo
ney as something of a crime. They have
deliberately adopted a tax policy which
takes the profit out of speculative un
dertakings (and anything which is new
is usually speculative) in case they suc
ceed, while leaving the investor t > take
all the loss if they fail. And now they
are crying because there isn’t more
productive, job-making investment!
It would be mire logical to wonder
why there is even as much investment
and employment as there is. You can’t
beat business over the head continually,
without forcing it bo draw in and re
trench. You can’t batter the investor,
large or small, ‘from pillar to post’ and
expect him to spend savings that would
produce good times and make jobs for
the unemployed. The dearth of invest
ment is the inevitable result of a flood
of suicidal laws and regulators that
could do nothing but discourage invest
ments and destroy business. What a
laugh to watch the wiseacres hunt
theoretical excuses for present condi
tions, when the real reasons are
staring them in the face on all sides.
_ifln
LABOR ANI) THE LAW
The action of the House in approv
ing a resolution to investigate the Na
tional Labor Relations Bo,ard deserves
commendation—from worker as well
as employer. For, rightly or wrongly,
this BAird, and the Act creating it, has
probably done more to damage the in
terests of legitimate organized labor
than any law ever put on the statute
books.
The Labor Relations Act was, ac
cording to its sponsors designated to
end labor strife. In practice, it has
fomented it, and been the direct cause
of the bitter warfare between the CIO
and AF of L. It was supposedly design
ated to put feelings between manage
ment and employes on a fair and equi
table basis. Instead it has deprived the
employer of vital rights and placed al
mosts unlimited authority over indus
trial policies, in the hands of a politi
cally appointed group. It was sup
posedly going to call a halt to labor
rackeetering. Instead, it has encour
aged it, and gone' a long way toward
placing the workingman at the none
too tender mercies of professional
labor leaders.
That three are good things in the
Act no one will deny. These things can
and should be retained and every pro
tection shvmld be given the worker
against the occasional unscrupulous,
sweat-ship-minded employer. But this
doesn’t mean that the lazy and incom
petent worker is to be given a life
lease on his job — that the workers’
rights supersede the rights of every
one* els?—or that one union should be
favored by the law at the expense of
another. The welfare of the honest
workingman can never be served by
any law that is opposed to the public
interest and to decent and fair indus
trial relations.
It is unfortunate that Congress
has so long delayed needed revision of
the Act. The’ proposed House investi
gation should lay the groundwork for
making necessary and fair changes
next session.
—-oQo
A LESSON WELL LEARjNED
ft^re and more of the products of
the farm pass into the channels of
consumption through cooperative mar
keting organizations. More and more
djies the farmer depend on voluntary
cooperation with his fellows as a sol
ution to his economic problems.
That speaks well for the farm
er’s good sense—he’s seen a score or
so of so-called government ‘‘farm re
lief” schemes collapse with a dull thud
and he’s found out from harsh exper
ience that real and permanent “farm
relief” must largely come from with
in the ranks of agriculture, rather
than from without. And the coopera
tive marketing movement is going
ahead accordingly.
rv
-Jv/u
RAILROADS BREAKING RECORDS
Although the railroads of the
United States have been steadily in
creasing train speeds in a phenomen
al manner, they established their best
general safety record in fifty years in
1938, according to figures just an
nounced by the Association of Ameri
can Railroads.
The number of train accidents, as
compared with the number of miles
run by trains, was the lowest on re
cord in 1938—one-third less than in
1937 and two-thirds less than in 1929.
The accident record for employes
on duty, all causes, was the lowest in
50 years, tDtaling 479 in 1938, com
pared with 666 in 1937 and 1,348 in
1929. The number of such fatalities
was a reduction of 28.1 per cent com
pared with 1937 and 64.5 per cent
compared with 1929. Compared with
the number of man-hour, the reduc
tions were 13.5 per cent and 31.6 per
cent, respectively. Nori-fatal injuries
to empires were reduced proportion
ately for same periods, in numbers
and frequency.
Passenger fatalities from train
accidents totaled 52 in 1938 compared
with 3 in 1937. Of the total 40 resulted
from one accident for which a cloud
burst was responsible; eight passen
gers were killed in a collision result
ing from man failure; three were fa
tally injured in train-truck highway
grade crossing collision and one from
a collision of two passenger trains.
Fewer persons lost their lives or
were in injured in accidents at high
way-railroad grade crossings in 1938
than in any year since 1915—with the
exception of one year, 1933. This
means there was a reduction of 21.1
Der cent in the number of casualties
at grade crossings in 1938, compared
with 1937.
Taking casualties for all classes—
passengers, employes persons at high
way-railucad grade crossings, and
trespassers—the number of fatalities
in 1938 was reduced by 15.9 per cent
and number of non-fatal injuries by
25.7 per cent compared with 1937.
Compared with 1929, the reductions
were, respectively, 30.7 per cent and
64,6 per cent.
-oOo
TAKE YOUR CHOICE
The policy of the federal govern
ment toward the utility industry has
%
taken a strange form in recent
months. Periodically, high officials
appeal- with reassuiing pledges of
euoperaton, and requests that this
vital industry make pia^s for expan
sion and betterment, to tne end that
billions of private productive dollars
be spent and that thousands of un
pioyed be given real jods. then, a day
ci- a week or a month iacer, some oth
er o-iiieials or bureaus come but with
acts or statements widen, ink effect
give the industry a hard Kick \in the
pants.
Not so long ago, for example,
Secretary HopKins made a strpng
speech advocating governmental fair
ness toward the utilities. And the very
next day a congress}, onai committee
approved a $17,000,000 appropriation
for an ther federal dam in the South
east, situated in an area which has
never lacked low-cost powrer provided
by heavily taxed private companies.
This sort of thing has happened time
and again. It’s reached the point
where responsible utility leaders are.
actually worried when go vernment
spokesmen say a kind word concern
ing the industry—for fear that it will
be immediately followed by another
anti-utility blast from political extre
mist. • *
The utility industry has gone on
record with what it can and will do,
given reasonable assurances that it
will be allowed to stay in business and
earn a fair return. It will continue
to carry one of the greatest tax loads
of any industry. It will pay a modest
profit to the millions of owners of its
securities most of whom are persons
of small cl’ moderate means. It will
throw its tremendous weight behind
real recovery, paid for with private
dollars, and furnishing private jol?s
and opportunities.
We can have our choice betw'een
this kind cf pi\)gress—or socialistic
encroachments which frighten all in
dustry, send the relief rolls soaring
and drive savings into hiding.
—-oOo
GOING PLACES
They’re getting together “down
on the farm.”
The get-together in question in
volves the fast-gi bwing agricultural
marketing c:)operative movements
the most significant in the farm his
tory of our time.
Already the movement has im
proved prices in many instances,
broadened and stabilized markets,
dealt with all manner of problems
affecting agriculture, and served the
consumer by helping assure him of a
constant supply of first-class farm
products at a fair price.
Those who have watched the
moVen^ent have been little short of
amazed by its achievements in a few
brief years. And it is going places fas
ter all the time.
—————oOo
MAKING IT LAST
There is an old saying to the ef
fect that “Man’s problem is not how
to make money first, but how to make
money last.”
You can see many a tragic exam
ple of that in your own comunity, in
men who once earned good salaries or
owned profitable businesses—yet, in
their declining years, found them
selves penniless and forced to live on
the bounty of relatives, friends or or
ganized charity.
That’s were such systematic sav
ings plans as those offered by life in
surance, provide an invaluable public
service. They take and hold today’s
easily-earned dollars and return them
to you or your dependents at a time
when dollars are needed most, and are
hardest to get. It’s no fun to pay pre
! miums—but it’s a lot less fun to reach
old age without income. ,
*aU d
