repair and refitting facilities throughout the entire United States.

Besides helping to keep our defenses in good operational order, an increase in orders to the New York-New Jersey area would give many skilled workers in this area jobs and help to relieve the unemployment situation.

I feel it would be of great benefit to the Nation and to the area, if the decline of ship repair, refitting, and recommissioning facilities could be relieved and begun on the road to recovery.

Mr. DANIELS. I wish to thank my very able and distinguished colleague from the 13th Congressional District of New Jersey for his remarks.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New York [Mr. CAREY] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

There was no objection.

Mr. CAREY. Mr. Speaker, I commend my distinguished colleague, DOMINICK DANIELS, for taking this time to call the attention of the House to the deplorable situation involving ship repair allocations to the great port of New York. Unwise and unwarranted shutdown of defense installations, such as the Brooklyn Navy Yard and the Brooklyn Army Terminal, have created conditions severe enough in the employment of skilled workers. If anything, because of the effect of these projected shutdowns, there rests a real obligation on the appropriate agencies of our Government to channel and direct repair, overhaul, and construction work to the port area to offset these conditions. Instead, on the one hand we see the prospect that naval construction agreements may be made with Great Britain and on the other hand ships in the Reserve Fleet being made ready for active service are directed outside the port area without good reason. Recently I received the following telegram from the distinguished president of the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce, John C. Hilly, concerning this diversion of ship repair work and I commend Mr. Hilly's very sound and timely message to the attention of colleagues.

my

BROOKLYN, N.Y.,

August 26, 1965.

Capt. THOMAS A. KING,

Director, Atlantic Coast District,
U.S. Maritime Administration,
New York, N.Y.:

The Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce wishes to go on record as being unalterably opposed to any action by the Federal Government in diverting ship repair work from the port of New York on the spurious grounds that the port is lacking either the facilities or the skilled labor to handle such work.

There are few, if any, harbors in the United States with a more complete and diversified range of ship repair facilities than are available here. Further, we question the logic of any statement contending that there is a shortage of shipyard manpower when the current level of employment in the shipyards in this port is only a fraction of what it was at the time of the Suez crisis. It is true that many former shipyard workers have perforce found employment in other industries because of the uncertain nature of this business in recent years. But it is equally true

that many of these skilled craftsmen would be willing to return to these yards if they had some assurance that their employment would not be subject to the vagaries of Federal policies seemingly bent upon favoring shipyards in other ports at the expense of the port of New York.

We join Brooklyn Borough President Abe Stark in decrying this diversion of work needed by our yards here, and make special note of the fact that the borough of Brooklyn, once a thriving shipbuilding and ship repairing center, has been reduced by this repairing center, has been reduced by this type of attrition to its present lowly state, and that even the few remaining yards here and their employees are threatened by continued diversion from the port of ship repair work essential not only to these yards but also to the national security.

Unless remedial action for the port of New York shipbuilding trade is forthcoming it is my suggestion that the interested members of the delegation from

New York and New Jersey meet to determine the course of action that will arrest mine the course of action that will arrest and correct this inappropriate governmental action by calling before a joint mental action by calling before a joint meeting of the delegation, the Federal meeting of the delegation, the Federal officials responsible.

have perforce found employment in other industries because of the uncertain nature of this business in recent years. But it is equally true that many of these skilled craftsmen would be willing to return to these yards if they had some assurance that their employment would not be subject to the vagaries of Federal policies seemingly bent upon favoring shipyards in other ports at the expense of the port of New York.

We join Brooklyn Borough, president, Abe Stark in decrying this diversion of work needed by our yards here, and make special note of the fact that the borough of Brooklyn, once a thriving shipbuilding and ship repairing center, has been reduced by this type of attrition to its present lowly state, and that even the few remaining yards here and their employees are threatened by continued diversion from the port of ship repair work essential not only to these yards but also to the national security.

JOHN C. HILLY, President, Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce.

AGAINST WARM WATERS POLICY

Mr. FINO. Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of the gentleman from New Jersey in his protest against the decision of the Maritime Administration to have repair and construction work on ships by shipyards

outside the port of New York.

New York is, and has every right to In January, I sent a letter to the continue as, the greatest port in the continue as, the greatest port in the President protesting both the proposed world. Its facilities, personnel, and skills closing of the Brooklyn Navy Yard and merit the appreciation and recognition of merit the appreciation and recognition of the corollary failure to increase the our Government. We were good enough amount of Navy repair work awarded to for the fleet of Lord Howe and Henry for the fleet of Lord Howe and Henry the port of New York as some compensaHudson 200 years ago and we are more tion for the Navy yard phasing-out. As than good enough we are the best and than good enough we are the best and I said at the time, I am completely opmost efficient bargain for the U.S. Gov- posed to the policy of cutting corners ernment today. on repair costs by transferring an undue portion of these repairs to the warm waters of the right-to-work States. I do not like the idea of transferring repair work to States which have built their economic attractiveness on unfair labor policies. Even though the rightto-work laws are now near the end of

Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, I rise in total opposition to a recent announcement by the Maritime Administration, that repair work being done in connecthat repair work being done in connection with the restoration of certain federally owned ships will be transferred from the port of New York.

Just why the Navy Department and the Maritime Administration should treat the port of New York as stepchildren is hard to fathom. What have we dren is hard to fathom. What have we in the New York area done to deserve such callous treatment at the hands of the Federal Government.

I should like to read into the RECORD a telegram received last week from John C. Hilly, president of the Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce, in reference to this shameful situation.

The telegram reads as follows:

AUGUST 26, 1965.

Capt. THOMAS A. KING, Director, Atlantic Coast District, U.S. Maritime Administration, New York, N.Y. The Brooklyn Chamber of Commerce wishes to go on record as being unalterably opposed to any action by the Federal Government in diverting ship repair work from the port of New York on the spurious grounds that the port is lacking either the

facilities or the skilled labor to handle such work.

There are few, if any, harbors in the United States with a more complete and diversified range of ship repair facilities than are available here. Further, we question the logic of able here. Further, we question the logic of any statement contending that there is a shortage of shipyard manpower when the current level of employment in the shipyards in this port is only a fraction of what yards in this port is only a fraction of what it was at the time of the Suez crisis. It is true that many former shipyard workers

their existence, their influence persists in the low wage levels they have permitted. The warm waters policy is still living on the fruits of unfair labor policies, and will be for some time.

To me, the administration's position here reeks of hypocrisy. As far as I am concerned, I do not think that the President is simply getting the Navy into warm waters-I think he is getting his administration into hot water. I do not like to see him pat unfair labor practitioners on the back. These actions are an insult to the labor council membership in the Brooklyn Navy Yard and other installations, which are not even being decently treated by the Government. These actions are also an insult to the private shipyards of the North, whose noncompetitiveness, I am coming to feel, is mainly a product of their fair and equitable labor policies.

Mr. Speaker, at present the port of New York receives only 6 percent of the total Navy repair program in private shipyards. We can expect this problem to increase as the warm waters policy is further implemented. I would like to register my strong disagreement with any repair program that does not shift repair work to New York to make up for the closing of the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The whole shoddy handling of

the Navy yard closing takes on an even darker coloration in the light of the seeming plans to also deemphasize repair work in New York, in order to profit from the wage scales of the South.

I urge the affected unions-and indeed the American labor movement in general-to take a long, searching look at the policies of this administration in penalizing northern unionists by shifting repair work to reward the cheap labor segregation bastions of Dixie. The maritime and ship repair workers are certainly getting the back of the hand from an administration that seeks out the cheap labor shipyards and also doublecrosses the American merchant marine and maritime workers so as to be able to peddle wheat to Russia more cheaply. This is to say nothing of the shoddy way the workers of the Brooklyn Navy Yard have been treated. I would suggest that the American labor movement look beyond the neat gift package of repeal of section 14(b) of Taft-Hartley and carefully analyze the multitude of mistakes that characterizes the administration's labor record.

Mr. Speaker, I agree with the gentleman from New Jersey in his vigorous protest and in his demands that something be done to alleviate this condition which has aggravated the unemployment problem in the port of New York. I hope that the administration will take note of these comments made here today.

GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND Mr. DANIELS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to extend their remarks at this point in the RECORD On this subject.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

There was no objection.

POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT HIRING PRACTICES

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under previous order of the House, the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. QUIE] is recognized for 60 minutes.

Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, on various occasions during the past months I have brought to the attention of my colleagues certain abuses practiced by the Post Office Department in the hiring of youths under President Johnson's socalled youth opportunity campaign.

I have pointed out how political patronage was used in filling many of these jobs. The Post Office Department now admits that 3,380 of 8,577 jobs were filled through patronage appointments.

I have pointed out how many of these jobs went to young people who are in no way educationally or economically disadvantaged, although when he announced the youth opportunity campaign on May 23 the President said the jobs should go "so far as practicable" to needy youths. Many disclosures in the public press have shown that the intent of the President's message was often disregarded in political patronage hiring by the Post Office.

There have been many facets to this case-too many to fully explore at this time, although I shall present my colleagues with a fuller explanation of the facts that have come to my attention at a later date.

However, there is an issue which has developed out of this case that I believe must be dealt with promptly and judiciously. That is the issue of departmental secrecy regarding nonsecurity governmental information.

Mr. Speaker, a clammy, gray cloud of secrecy has descended to envelop all who would inquire or anyone who might question, the procedures of the Post Office Department.

For instance, I have requested the names of the people hired by the Post Office Department under the so-called youth opportunity campaign. My requests have been denied. I have introduced a resolution, pending before a committee of the House, which would committee of the House, which would require the Post Office Department to provide this information to Members of Congress.

I have written the President of the United States, pointing out to him that if Members of Congress cannot obtain the most innocent information from executive branch agencies and departexecutive branch agencies and departments, that representative government is dead. I have respectfully requested him to require the new Postmaster General, to require the new Postmaster General, the very able Mr. Lawrence O'Brien, to voluntarily provide this information to Members of Congress. I anxiously await the President's reply.

Representatives of various news media have repeatedly requested the names of have repeatedly requested the names of these people and related information from the Post Office Department, both at the regional and national levels. They have been shrouded in the cloud of postal secrecy.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that all of this centers around a basic issue the right of the people to know the operation of their Government. If elected Members If elected Members of Congress can be denied this information-harmless to anyone who has nothing to hide-by appointive officials of the Post Office Department, I do not see how Congressmen Congressmen can truly représent the people of their districts and their States.

If Congressmen are to work only with the information agencies or departments believe it expeditious for them to obtain, it means that Congressmen are being effectively propagandized by the executive branch.

If this occurs, the Congress of the United States will only be described in the term that every conscientious Member of Congress fears—as a rubberstamp.

To meekly bow to the withholding of nonsecurity information means that the Congress of the United States bows to a role as a secondary branch of the Federal Government which supposedly has three coequal branches.

between Government and people. The press then becomes a propagandizer of the people and the people are propagandized and no longer in a position to carry on their responsibilities of self-government.

Mr. Speaker, if the people see their elected Representatives turned into rubber stamps and their free press turned into propaganda by the secrecy of departments and agencies, the people's right to know is gone.

And if that is gone, democratic government is gone.

I ask my colleagues to picture in their minds the spectacle of a huge department of the executive branch, charged with grave responsibilities, using the distribution of 3,380 summer jobs for 16to 21-year-olds as political patronage. And, picture in your minds the spectacle of this same supposedly responsible department, having distributed these jobs for partisan political purposes, adopting a fierce stance of defensiveness toward Members of Congress and representatives of the press, as they wrap this episode in a cloud of bureaucratic secrecy.

Mr. Speaker, if such unworthy actions are taken regarding a trivial matter, what of the important matters?

This is an issue of the gravest principle. If the Congress of the United States, and, ipso facto, the people of the United States, are to be denied a list of 8,577 names, what more serious matters are shrouded from our legitimate scrutiny?

And as though this were not serious enough, we come down to the sorry spectacle of a man removed from earning his means of livelihood for practicing his constitutional right of free speech. Now, I hear there is some question about the ability of this man to continue his job and I make no judgment on his competency. His name is John Cunavelis and he lives in Burlington, Vt. Until August 24, he was Director of the Youth Opportunity Center there.

Mr. Cunavelis spoke out about this political patronage hiring.

He called the way a part of the program had been run in Burlington, Vt., a "flagrant violation" of the intent of the program, as announced by the President on May 23.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the attention of my colleagues to the following newspaper article, which appeared in the August 21, 1965, edition of the Burlington Free Press of Burlington, Vt.:

PAIR GET WORK NOT INTENDED FOR AFFLUENT: POSTAL HIRINGS IGNORED JOBS-FOR-YOUTH CONCEPT

The director of the Youth Opportunity Center here declared Friday that the hiring of two youths for the summer in the Burlingtion post office was a flagrant violation of the terms of the President's summer work program for high school graduates.

Four youths are working in the post office for $2.28 an hour as part of the youth oppor

If the press is to work only with such information as the executive branch agencies or departments desire to release, it then is stripped of its role as the link

agencies and private industry are to provide summer jobs for 450,000 high school and college students.

John Cunavelis, who runs the war on poverty clearinghouse for the State department of employment security here, said he has no

TURNS DOWN DEMOTION-CUNAVELIS TELLS

WHY HE'S SURE SPEAKING OUT COST HIS
JOB

John Cunavelis, ousted Monday as director of the Youth Opportunity Center here, said Friday night he is quitting the Department of Employment Security job to which he was transferred "effective immediately."

He said he had worked Friday but would not be on the job Monday.

Asked if he thought his removal from the Youth Opportunity Center was connected with a statement published in last Saturday's Free Press, Cunavelis replied: "Definitely."

During an interview Cunavelis criticized the hiring of two youths from affluent families for summer jobs in the Burlington post office as part of the Youth Opportunity Campaign.

He called hiring the two, whom he said are not economically or educationally disadvantaged, a "flagrant violation" of the terms set by President Johnson when he initiated the summer work program.

Employment Security Director John White called Cunavelis that Saturday night and told him to be at the Department of Employment Security in Montpelier on Monday morning, Cunavelis said.

On Monday morning, Cunavelis was told that he was through as director of the Youth Opportunity Center.

Vermont's Commissioner of Employment Security, Mrs. Stella B. Hackel, said the story had no connection with Cunavelis' removal,

and that he was transferred from the directorship because of his lack of administrative experience.

She said the matter had been under consideration for some time and the decision had been made Friday, the day before the story appeared.

Cunavelis, a former newspaperman and former employee of the U.S. Information Agency in Washington, D.C., said he doesn't have another job but will look for one and I would like to remain in the Burlington area.

Cunavelis said on Monday morning White

and Mrs. Hackel told him he was being transferred to the counselor job and wanted to know if he would go along with it.

He said he took the lower paying job (Mrs. Hackel estimated his pay cut at about $15 a week) because of the welfare of his family but he said his family has urged him to quit the employment service.

He said he is quitting directly because of the removal from the Youth Opportunity

Center directorship.

Cunavelis said his contention that the post office jobs, which pay $2.29 an hour, should go to the youths who need work is based

on the President's initial announcement.

When President Johnson announced the program early this summer, he directed Federal agencies to make every effort to find meaningful work for 1 youth for every 100 employees. He included this statement as part of the announcement:

"These jobs should go, so far as this is practicable, to boys and girls 16 through 21 who need them the most because of economic or educational disadvantages."

Cunavelis quoted this statement by the President earlier when he called hiring two of the four youths in the post office a "flagrant violation" of the youth opportunity campaign.

The Post Office Department has refused emphatically to divulge the names of youths in the summer program and a journalist for national publications in Washington said

Friday that the names are not even available

to Members of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, there is another Burlington, in Iowa. And there, in Burlington, Iowa, attempts to enforce secrecy were underway at the same time that events were transpiring in the Vermont city.

In Burlington, Iowa, postal inspectors were busy interrogating the staff of the local newspaper, in an attempt to find out how that scion of the free press had obtained its information.

The Des Moines Register of Des Moines, Iowa, reported on August 28 that postal inspectors from the St. Louis, Mo., regional office questioned an editor of the Burlington newspaper in an investigation to discover how the names became known.

Mr. Speaker, this is how the clammy, gray cloud of secrecy works, as administered by the Post Office Department, if we are to believe these reports. Fire a man for speaking. Interrogate members of the press for printing the facts.

Mr. Speaker, I, for one, object.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that it is obvious that there is bipartisan distaste for the manner in which the Post Office Department has conducted itself in this matter.

I respectfully urge my colleagues to avail themselves of any opportunity to aid in making public the names of youths hired by the Post Office Department under the so-called youth opportunity campaign. I believe that until the Post Office Department makes this information available to Members of Congress, we must doubt our ability to obtain any information necessary to our duties as the elected representatives of the people.

A SOUND BANKING SYSTEM: A TRIBUTE TO THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under previous order of the House, the gentleman from New York [Mr. HALPERN] is recognized for 10 minutes.

Mr. HALPERN Mr. Speaker, I take this time today to reflect some observations I have made in my tenure as a member of the Committee on Banking and Currency. In this capacity, I have had the opportunity to view firsthand, and to study in depth, the banking industry and the manner in which it is regulated. Out of this experience has come a great confidence in our banking system, and a growing admiration for the man who has given new impetus and vitality to American banking, the Comptroller of the Currency, James Saxon.

In the brief time I have today, I would like to summarize my views on banking in America and bring to the attention of the American people, through this great forum, the historic contributions the Comptroller of the Currency is making in this complex and vital area of our economy.

Banking, along with certain other industries, is regulated by the Federal Government and by the authorities of the 50 States, not as some believe, because bankers need to be watched or protected, but to assure that banking is meeting the public's ever-changing needs for an ever-increasing variety of services. If less stringent regulation of banks will better fulfill the needs of the public and better fulfill the needs of the public and at the same time advance our Nation's economic goals, then it is in the interests economic goals, then it is in the interests of us all to see that artificial or outmoded

restraints are relaxed. restraints are relaxed. If we find evidence that bankers generally are derelict in their responsibilities to society, then we must reexamine our regulatory structure and the policies and procedures of the regulators. History has taught us, I hope, that we can never again tolerate the laxity and indolence which were responsible for our economic mistakes of the twenties. But history has made us aware, too, of the dangers of overregulation in an effort to compensate for some of the excesses of the past.

In recent years, it has become clear that banking has been hobbled unduly by crisis-oriented laws and rules and regulations. Codes under which enterprises operated and prospered three decades ago when the gross national product of our economy was at a level of $181 billion cannot be justified for businesses desiring to compete for their fair share of a $510 billion gross national product. Banking laws and rules and regulations have in recent years been reexamined in the light of changed and changing conditions. One of those most persistent and diligent in this reexamination has been our Comptroller of the Currency, Mr. James J. Saxon, who is responsible for the regulation of the national banking segment of our dual banking system. For 4 years, he and his colleagues in this oldest and one of the smallest, in terms of personnel, of the Federal Government's regulatory agencies-have been engaged in an effort to broaden the opportunity for private initiative in the national banking system. They have kept their eye on a dual objective and a dual responsibility: Permit this private sector to make a viable contribution to our economy, while sustaining the public purpose. How can we test whether this objective has been achieved and how ef

ficiently the agency has met its responsibility? There is ample statistical evidence to demonstrate that, under the

stimulus of new powers granted to this industry, banking performance has reached a new high level—in deposits, loans, investments, and earnings. Banking and those who are served by banks have profited. There seems to be an eagerness on the part of bankers to explore fully the many new opportunities that lie ahead. And there certainly has been an appreciation and recognition by those served by banks--confirmed by the services now open to all, where once-in simple test of public acceptance of the the memory of many of us here—such services were available to only a relative

few.

useful addition to the bibliography of economic education.

Change is not always easy, and the proponents of change must be stouthearted men, invulnerable to attack from those who advocate the status quo. James Saxon is such a man. He has been resolute in his determination to bring needed reform to the national banking system. Almost 4 years ago James Saxon came to Washington equipped with the ability and the experience to do the job. He had been here before; in fact, it was here, before World War II, that he embarked upon a career that has combined public service, private business and the law. In his first Government job in the Insolvent Bank Division of the Comptroller's Office in the thirties, he witnessed at first hand the sad results of the near collapse of our private banking system. Later, as Treasury attaché to our High Commissioner in the Philippines, Francis B. Sayre, he encountered a different kind of problem. At the outbreak of war he was assigned as Treasury aid to Gen. Douglas MacArthur, and at age 26, his became the task of taking over the assets of Japanese-owned banks. As the fall of the Philippines neared, he went with MacArthur to Corregidor and handled the destruction of currency in the face of the enemy's advance. The day before MacArthur was directed by President Roosevelt to leave Corregidor, Jim Saxon, carrying the general's personal papers, boarded a submarine carrying U.S. gold bullion as ballast and went to Australia. Upon his Upon his return to the United States and delivery of the general's papers, he was given another assignment: Treasury aid to Robert Murphy to handle currency and monetary affairs for the U.S. invasion force landing in North Africa.

During and after the war came other foreign assignments for the Treasury. Back in the United States, he pursued studies at Georgetown for his law degree. He left Government to serve with counsel to the American Bankers Association, and after a few years in the Washington office he accepted a position as an at

torney with the First National Bank of Chicago. There he was exposed to the full impact of the regulatory agencies upon the regulated industry. When the late President Kennedy called him to Washington to take over the administration of the national banking system, Jim Saxon came armed with the experience and knowledge of having seen at first hand the harmful effects of overrestrictive and outmoded banking legislation. It became apparent early that Jim Saxon was not destined for the bureaucratic mold. One of his first steps was to ask each national bank to suggest necessary changes to the laws, policies, and regulations which affect its operations. At the same time he appointed an advisory committee of top bankers and lawyers to review the banker's responses and to make specific recommendations.

Out of this came "National Banks and the Future," one of the most searching studies ever made of American banking. By giving the regulated a chance to participate in their own regulation,

Saxon not only underlined his belief that a free enterprise system must place

primary reliance on individual initiative,

but made quite clear that as he read the National Banking Act, it was not a fixed, immutable code, but rather a framework within which national banks "may employ their inventiveness and capacity for change" in order to respond to the needs of a growing industry.

Moreover, by putting into effect some 80 percent of the recommendations advanced in "National Banks and the Fuvanced in "National Banks and the Future," he showed himself to be a regulatory official who recognized that governmental limitations should be imposed mental limitations should be imposed only where there is a clear public purpose to be served, and that precedent pose to be served, and that precedent is no excuse for maintaining a useless is no excuse for maintaining a useless or outmoded regulation. Inevitably, this or outmoded regulation. Inevitably, this clear eyed boldness rubbed some people clear eyed boldness rubbed some people the wrong way. But timidity was never the wrong way. But timidity was never Jim Saxon's long suit. With a principle at stake, he seldom balked at taking on even the most powerful and firmly entrenched opponents. In his philosophy of bank regulation, the present Comptroller of the Currency believes that the presumption should be in favor of freedom of initiative and innovation by the individual banker. The same policy, he feels, is incumbent upon the bank regulatory agencies. The bank regulatory authorities, State and Federal, as any other regulatory authority, have an affirmative responsibility to assure that the regulated industry has the tools and the capacity to carry out its role with maximum effectiveness.

He has said:

Excessive reliance on the negative crutch of all-knowing government-whether at the State or Federal level-can lead only to stagnation and regression. Not all the financial nation and regression. Not all the financial know-how of this great country is lodged in the genius of the financial and monetary regulatory agencies in Washington. Hence, the banking authorities should set, as their goal, the broadest reliance upon the initiative of the individual banker consistent with the specific proscriptions of the banking statutes.

The process of innovation and adaptation that Jim Saxon brought to the na

tional banking system has not been con

fined to the national the national banks alone. Although many of his critics are from the other side of the dual banking system, the State-chartered banks and the State officials who regulate them, Jim Saxon has never wavered in his conviction that the dual banking system is the great strength of our economy. He looks on it as an effective instrument for perceptive adaptation of banking to the Nation's needs. As the Comptroller points out in his latest report, this dispersion of banking controls among the States and the Federal Government enables either segment of the dual banking system to supplement the other where deficiencies arise in service to the public.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, Comptroller Saxon has been a courageous and able exponent of this philosophy, and in implementing it, he has rendered inestimable service to the banking community and to all Americans whose hope for a better future rests with a safe and sound banking system.

A GRAPHIC CONTRAST The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under previous order of the House, the gentle

man from Ohio [Mr. ASHBROOK], is recognized for 10 minutes.

The

Mr. ASHBROOK. Mr. Speaker, while American soldiers are sacrificing their lives in support of this Nation's policy in Vietnam, some extreme elements protesting our Vietnam stand are straining the limits of the American people's patience. The New York Daily News of August 10 highlighted this contrast on page 6 with two provocative items. tain Slain in Viet Gets Four Decorafirst story was entitled: "A Gallant Captions," and told of the death of Capt. Christopher O'Sullivan in Vietnam on Memorial Day. The second headline read: "Scores Seized at District of Columbia Viet Protest," and can be best summarized by citing its opening sentence:

Scores of biting, kicking, screaming pacifists, protesting U.S. policy in Vietnam, were arrested and tossed into paddy wagons on the Capitol grounds today.

The protesting demonstrators were associated with the so-called Assembly of

Unrepresented People, which Congressman EDWIN WILLIS, chairman of the House Committee on Un-American Activities and myself, as ranking minority member of that committee, commented extensively in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Of August 4. Chairman WILLIS noted:

on

The chief movers of the assembly include leaders, key activists, and members of the following organizations: The Communist Party; the W. E. B. DuBois Clubs of America, the new national Communist youth group; the Progressive Labor Party, the ultra revolutionary Peiping-oriented Communist organization.

This is just a partial listing of participating organizations.

At the same time, I inserted in the RECORD three exhibits of the assembly's literature describing their plans for concerted action. One recommendation from exhibit 3 was most interesting:

Students for a democratic society have tenative plans for mass burning of draft cards in Washington and elsewhere.

short shrift of extremist opposition to To show that Congress intends to make duly constituted authority, a bill calling for a 5-year prison term, a $10,000 fine or both for deliberately destroying selective service cards was made into law yesterday, less than a month after the destroying of draft cards was recommended.

A more vicious protest against our Vietnam policy has recently come to light in the form of abusive and threatening phone calls to survivors of American soldiers killed in Vietnam. The widow of the above-mentioned Captain O'Sullivan was one recipient of a cruel phone call mocking his death. One would be hard pressed to imagine a more revolting or extreme method of voicing opposition to our country's action in Vietnam.

In the hope that this harassment will be dealt with as expeditiously as the draft card business, I am introducing legisla