Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.

Page 8 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved

The clipping this text was read from
The clipping this text was read from

YOUR

CONGRESSMAN

REPORTS

By Rep. Burr P. Harrison.

Nikita Krushchev, the Kremlin boss, told us recently in an inter'view filmed and presented on American television:

“I can prophesy that y o u r grandchildren in America will live under socialism.”

He meant, of course, the particular brand of socialism which we know as Soviet Communism. His blunt prediction of a socialized America within two generations produced a rash of scorn from American editorial writers. But should we dismiss this show of Communist bravado so lightly?

Krushchev may have been studying with interest and approval the growth of an arrogant Federal bureaucracy in this country, the arrogation of law-making powers by the Federal courts and the enactment by the national legislature of statutes tightening the Federal controls over individual freedom.

For example, apparently the official American position is that a GI may be imprisoned by a Japanese court, that a Southerner may be imprisoned wi.thout a trial by jury, but that a Communist advocating the violent overthrow of the Government may not be imprison** ed by an American court and jury. All branches of the Government appear to be participating in the development of a dangerous climate attended by profligate and paternalistic government spending, infringement of individual liber' ties by denial of trial by jury and other elements of due process historically accorded persons accused of crime, and by an attitude that the Constitution is an o 1 d-fashioned document which may be dusted off, ignored or altered as policital or philosophical convenience demands. :,A majority of the judges of the Supreme Court serve as handmaidens of the pseudo-liberals who believe, apparently, that the only personal “rights” worth safeguarding are those which are disruptive of established social or economic patterns, or run counter to Constitutional principles.' IT

62.2%