-Caveat Lector-   <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">
</A> -Cui Bono?-

an excerpt from:
Treason's Peace
Howard Watson Armbruster�1947
A Crossroads Press Book
Beechurst Press
New York
438 pps.  -- First/Only Edition -- Out-of Print
-----
CHAPTER X

Senators and Congressmen -Who Never Knew

MENTION IS made elsewhere of the concealed interference by the German dye
trust with tariff and patent legislation; also the strange desire of members
of the House and Senate to force through the act of 1928 for the payment of
claims and the restoration of German property which had been seized in the
First World War. One of the Senators who joined with King and Moses to help
put through that 1928 statute, was Doctor Royal S. Copeland.

The nonpartisan broadmindedness of the German dye trust in chosing its
American friends is shown by the fact that Copeland held office and was a
candidate, from time to time, as a Republican, a New Deal Democrat and an
anti-New Deal Democrat. Farben also appeared to have no objections to the
friendship of a doctor whose medical attainments did not qualify him for
membership in his own county medical society, or for the dubious honor of
belonging to the American Medical Association. Copeland once made the claim
that he was a former professor in the Medical School of the University of
Michigan but, according to the University authorities, his teaching
experience was in a defunct homeopathic college which was in no way related
to Michigan's famous school of medicine.

As a Senator and a doctor of medicine, Copeland's name and picture and voice
were seen and heard in press advertisements and radio broadcasting for patent
medicine-or home remedies, as they were politely termed. And among those
advertised nostrums were preparations manufactured and sold by two of the
leading American affiliates of I.G. Farben-Sterling Products and Standard Oil
of New Jersey. Such arrangements for the Senator's services were presumably
made at the New York offices of Copeland Service, Inc., where one Ole Salthe,
his manager (of whom more later), was also prepared to arrange for the advice
of the Senator on matters pertaining to the enforcement of Food and Drug
Laws. These were, of course, strictly business or semiprofessional
arrangements and bore no relationship to the Senator's engagements as a
statesman, or his daily newspaper contributions as a literary authority on
public health matters.

As to his kindly feeling towards I.G. Farben and its affiliates, our
Senatorial healer made the record very clear in a speech on the Senate floor
on February 21, 1928, just before the final approval of the statute to pay
Farben's claims and to return Farben's properties. His address, in part, was
as follows:

Can we doubt that international business partnerships are the best
preventative of international wars and conflicts that statesmen can devise?
It is time to cease ringing the changes upon war hatreds and animosities, and
extend the helping hand of friendship to our former enemies .....

Let it be remembered that some of our infant industries are predicated upon
the confiscated inventions of the people of a nation originally invited into
our midst by the terms of our Constitution. No compensation has 'ever been
paid to them. I am glad they are to be paid under the terms of the bill
passed yesterday .....

The domestic problems of farm relief, of national defense. of destruction of
industry by ruinous foreign competition, would be brought nearer to solution
by such commercial alliances. The occupation of some paid Jeremiahs
constantly prophesying war and woe would probably be rendered superfluous
.....

Let us have done with vituperative attacks on nonexistent enemies   we have
read from time to time in the chemical trade journals and in the lay press of
how wicked, designing, unashamed and dangerous were those corporations whose
patents we confiscated for the benefit of a privileged few .....

European combinations in these industries provide additional products for
farsighted Americans who have formed alliances with the possessors of the
'know how.' The question is shall we welcome alien industry and capital to
our shores, in accordance with the traditional policy of our nation, or shall
we lend ear to the affrighted clamor, denunciation and invective of a selfish
minority? It is high time that we had an official expression of the
administration's attitude in the interests of world peace and domestic
prosperity.

American capital is hesitant. American industrialists are reluctant to enter
into agreements with other manufacturers to obtain for this country that
which we have not, and which would be of benefit to us, so long as the
newspapers are filled with vituperative abuse and vague suggestions of
Sherman Act prosecutions.

This address is important to this story because it records the beginning of
the second postwar decade when Farben and its American stooges had decided
that everything was under control, and therefore their plans for expansion
could be more open, with safety to all concerned. The speech is also
important because it is a condensation of substantially every false argument
and sophistry of Farben propaganda. Copeland also, unwittingly, recorded
officially the unheeded protests at Farben's comeback, and the unheeded
demand for Sherman Act prosecutions. Copeland, in the name of the United
States Senate, was bidding Farben welcome just as the Hoover subordinates,
and Donovan, in the name of the executive branch of the government had
extended a similar invitation a few days earlier, as related in Chapter via.

>From its earliest days, the German dye trust has utilized the patent laws of
the United States to obstruct, cripple or control our dye, drug, and chemical
munitions industries. The president of the American Bayer company, acting on
instructions from Berlin, persuaded the State Department to send our
Commissioner of Patents as a delegate to the International Patent Convention
in Stockholm prior to World War 1. The result was that our unsuspecting
commissioner wound up as the guest of honor on Kaiser Wilhelm's yacht, and
upon his return was in complete accord with the desires of his Teutonic hosts.

As a result, the United States negotiated a new treaty with Germany which
complied with the dye trust's wishes that the working of a patent in either
country was sufficient to protect the inventor, or his assignee, in both
countries. And the president of Bayer boasted openly of his smart trick in
getting the Kaiser to help soften up our patent laws.

Meanwhile Herman Metz turned up on the Congressional Committee on Patents.
Metz was irritated at any attempt to interfere with the rights of his German
friends to do as they pleased, saying:

Legally there could be no reason at all why the Germans should not obtain a
patent in this country for which a patent could be obtained, and do with that
patent what they pleased.

Again Metz declared that German patents:

. . . . . have no value a ssuch[sic] except for the purpose of keeping out
infringing products. They are simply clubs to keep out other manufacturers.

After World War I, when tariff and embargo barred German imports, the dye
trust began using its patents to implement the illegal tie-ups by which it
reestablished itself in the United States.

It is obvious that this reestablishment would not have been possible if our
antitrust laws had been enforced. Nor would it have been possible had
Congress interceded to prevent misuse of United States patents, especially
those relating to the national defense.

Can anyone doubt that Congress would have been compelled to take drastic
steps had Mr. Teagle, or Mr. duPont, or Dr. Weiss, or even Herman Metz, ever
protested to Congress or even to the public at the illegal agreements
proposed by Farben. The fact is that they did neither.

All through this second prewar period the public was largely uninformed, or
greatly misinformed, about these Farben tie-ups. But the record proves that
Congress had known for many years that the more important of the illegal
agreements were in operation, and that others were in the making.

Members of the Senate and the House of Representatives uncovered evidence of
the dye trust's plans and agreements in almost every session of Congress from
the end of World War I to the beginning of World War II. They also knew the
identity and the activities of the horde of lobbyists who haunted the
hallways of the Capitol and the bars and club-rooms of Washington in the
interests of Farben and Farben's American partners.

Despite this knowledge Congress did nothing until the 1941 and '42 exposures
and prosecutions. Then loud were the lamentations of some of its members at
the "surprising" revelations of what Farben had been doing to keep the United
States disarmed.

In order to comprehend the breadth and scope of the Farben pattern, we might
examine some of the crocodile tears shed so publicly at not knowing things
that had been blazoned on the records of Congress all along. It is necessary
also to observe how these facts come to be on those records, and what
influences may have caused them to be ignored.

One member of the Senate who in 1942 appeared not to know anything about the
Farben tie-ups in the United States was the Honorable Scott W. Lucas,
Illinois Democrat, who was elected to Congress in 1934 and moved up to the
Senate in 1938.

In April, 1942, Senator Lucas, as a member of the Patents Committee, made
some comments about the ignorance of official Washington regarding the
activities of I.G. Farben. An official of the Justice Department had just
testified that some of Farben's illegal affiliations had been secret until
the Attorney General's office went into their files. Said Senator Lucas:

But before the Attorney General's office went into the files to inspect these
documents nobody in the government as I understand it, or in this country,
knew anything about these international cartel arrangements .....

I am not condemning anyone particularly for what happened in the past, but I
am speaking for the future. We all learn by experience. This country ought to
have a right at least to examine and ascertain whether or not a contract of
this kind, if it went into effect, would affect the life and security of the
United States.

Anxious as the Senator appears to have been to learn by experience, something
must have caused him to conclude otherwise, because he was one of the five
members of the Senate Patents Committee who later voted to prevent Senator
Bone, its chairman, from continuing these hearings into Farben's agreements
with Sterling, and the relations of the Sterling executives with subversive
activities of their German partners.

    Senator Tom Connally, Texas Democrat, started as a Congress-man in 1917
and became a Senator in 1929. The Senator is re-puted to be a political
colleague of former Governor William P. Hobby of Texas, who, with the late W.
S. Farish, organized the Humble Oil Co., and sold control of that company to
Standard. Senator Connally contributed a naive conclusion as to the
inno-cence of all concerned about Farben's intentions. The Senator was a
member of the Truman Committee which was examining Mr. Farish of Standard Oil
in March 1942 at a closed hearing. When
Mr. Farish appeared uncertain as to just what testimony he should give about
Standard's relations with Farben, Senator Connally asked him:

When you entered into these negotiations with Farben . . . in Germany  . . .
did you do it with any contemplation of war or of our becoming involved in
war and needing these
articles in the way that we now find ourselves needing them? Or was it simply
a commercial business transaction that you were contemplating?

Mr. Farish responded:

It was always. Senator, on a commercial or business basis, and with only
commercial objectives in mind .....

Senator Homer T. Bone, Washington Democrat, came to the Senate in 1932, and
two years later sat through the lengthy hearings of the Senate Munitions
Investigating Committee which went deep into the Farben activities. In 1942
Senator Bone, as Chairman of the Senate Patents Committee, investigated the
activities of Farben for several months-until the aforementioned five members
ganged up on him and refused to permit the investigation to be completed.

At these 1942 hearings Senator Bone did recall that the subject was not a new
one, but he also indicated an unfortunate lack of memory about the
revelations before the Nye Munitions Committee and elsewhere concerning Farben
. The Senator's comment was:

I know little about I.G. Farbenindustrie in Germany because it is shrouded in
mystery. I know back in 1934 and '35 when I served on the Senate Munitions
Committee, we were not able to get anything definite out of Germany. There
was great secrecy manifested even in some of our own departments    At that
time I was fearful that what our nationals were doing might be aiding in the
rearmament of Germany,
thus making her a menace to the world.

Assistant Attorney General Thurman Arnold, while testifying before the Truman
Committee in March, 1942, paid a peculiar tribute to his own belated
investigation of the Farben tie-up arrangements, and put the entire blame for
the continuance of these agreements on the lax enforcement of the anti-trust
laws during the Hoover Republican administration from 1929 to 1933. For some
reason he did not mention that this lax enforcement continued right on from
1933 to 1941 during the Democratic administration, Mr. Arnold's comment in
part was that:

The cost of preventing such cartel restrictions in the future is eternal
vigilance and the existence of a wide-awake investigating agency to enforce
the Sherman Act. Had there been such an agency operating in 1929, had this
conduct been actually hazardous at that time, these arrangements would never
have been contemplated. But from 1929 to 1933 business men felt safe from
discovery.

In view of these and other Senatorial-Congressional expressions of ignorance
about what Farben was up to, it is of interest here to refer to some of the
extensive evidence available, from 1919 to 1939, to members of the House and
Senate.

This consideration is warranted in order to understand the precise detail
with which the Congress of the United States first explored and recorded the
activities and purposes of the German dye-trust leaders, then ignored its own
findings and finally, when disaster had arrived, began pitifully weeping "we
didn't know." It is for the reader to decide from these facts whether the
representatives of the American people were dolts or knave�or an unhappy
combination of both.

During the decade that followed the close of the first World War, the German
Dye Trust was the subject of many hours of discussion and thousands of pages
of testimony before committees of the Senate and House. Later hearings
brought out more facts about Farben; about its lobby and campaign
contributions; about its industrial tie-ups and subsidiaries; and about its
propaganda and its expenditures for espionage and other subversive activities.

>From 1919 to 1922 there were a number of hearings before the committees of
the House and Senate which recorded the testimony of a great number of
witnesses who argued whether high tariff duties or an absolute embargo would
best protect the new American dye industry from the threat of German imports.
At these hearings there was very little left unsaid about what Farben's
predecessors in I.G. Dyes would do to this country's new chemical industry if
they were given the opportunity; or of the probability of another war of
conquest, if and when Germany got the chance.

When the next war did start more than a dozen members of the Senate, and
several times that many members of the House, still occupied the same
positions at Washington as they had during those early hearings at which the
records and plans of the German dye trust were spread upon the Congressional
records. A number of these legislators were members of the committees that
held the hearings. Coming down to the 1934-1936 period when further hearings
delved deep into Farben's consummated plans, we find that an actual majority
of the members of both chambers were still representing their constituents
when the last war began.

It would appear from the record, therefore, that the failure of Congress to
act has not been due to lack of ample information about Farben, nor to lack
of repeated warnings as to what disaster that neglect might bring about.

There were many charges and countercharges against lobbyists and German
agents at those early hearings. Francis P. Garvan, among others, made
definite charges that the German dye trust had attempted to influence
legislation in the past and was still doing so at the very time that Senator
King and his campaignfund contributor, Herman Metz, were denouncing everyone
who wished to protect America's new chemical industry. Garvan accused Metz of
standing on the floor of Congress, as representative of the German I.G.,
shaking his fist at American manufacturers in the gallery and exclaiming, "I
got you licked�I got you licked."

"And then," said Garvan, "we were like the blind beggar at the gate in
Kipling's story, 'I cannot see my enemy but I can hear his footfalls.'"

In another of, the Senate hearings in 1920, before the Finance Committee, Mr.
Irenee duPont, president of the duPont Company, made the rather remarkable
request that in addition to embargo and high tariff to keep out Getman dyes,
Congress might well pass legislation which would authorize some government
official to set aside the Sherman Act as it applied to the dye industry, if,
in the opinion of the official, it became necessary for the dye manufacturers
to get together on short notice to exchange information.

Congress did not then pass such a law, but Mr. duPont had little cause to
complain about any enforcement of the Sherman Act until Thurman Arnold got
busy after World War 11 had started. Then duPont and all the other leading
American dyestuff makers were indicted for conspiring with I.G. Farben, and
the Congress kindly did permit the Attorney General to waive or suspend
prosecution of all concerned on the pretext that prosecution would interfere
with the war effort. The case finally ended when duPont, among others,
pleaded nolo contendere and took a fine. But that belongs in another part of
this story.

There was much testimony in these early hearings which gave unmistakable
warning of what the German dye trust might do when the next war should come.
Here, again, it was Francis Garvin who put those warnings into pungent,
dramatic form which, it is hoped, some members of the Senate may now recall
with shame.

Time and again Garvan denounced the German dye leaders as a menace to the
peace of the world�in the future as in the past. For example, in 1920 he
warned the Senate Finance Committee:

Industrial Germany waged this war; and industrial Germany was the first to
see defeat, and forced the military peace in order that with her industrial
equipment intact she might continue that same�war by intensified and
concentrated economic measures. It was Germany's chemical supremacy that gave
her confidence in her avaricious dream of world empire, it was Germany's
chemical supremacy that enabled her to wage four years of pitiless warfare,
and it is Germany's chemical supremacy upon which she relies to maintain the
war.

Another emphatic warning was sounded to members of the Senate by Dr. C. J.
Thatcher, one of the smaller dye manufacturers, when he told that same Senate
Committee:

"No matter what importers or their friends of Germany may say . . . The
ruthless war for chemical domination by Germany, started at least�as early as
1880    was not ended by the Armistice or by the Treaty of Versailles
.....any treaty, law, or other provision which a German can by any means
avoid in the warfare for industrial chemical su-premacy is, just as in actual
warfare, 'a mere scrap of paper.'"

Rear Admiral Ralph Earle, Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance of the Navy
Department, also gave the Senate some words of advice at that time which were
complacently forgotten. In discussing the need for encouraging and protecting
our coal-tar industry as a vital measure of national defense, Admiral Earle
said, in part:

During the war we used as much toluol as could be obtained, but the
production of that material was not sufficient . . . . .Time is a very
important element . . . . in reference to war   from the standpoint of
national de-fense we do not think we ought to be put in that position again.

The admiral also advised the committee that the production of synthetic drugs
from coal tar should be encouraged through protection of the industry, as
coming under the general head of preparedness.

Another unmistakable warning is to be found in the report of a Senate Finance
Subcommittee in 1920, which said, in part:

One who has read the story of the German Government in the United States just
prior to the war, knows that the chemical industry in this country which was
under the control of the German Government was the center of espionage,
German propaganda, and direct government activities. They prevented the use
of coal-tar products in the munitions industry .....

We know what Germany will do to regain her hold on the industry in this
country. We know that she will resort to state and cartel combinations, trade
export premiums, dumping. bribery, espionage and propaganda. She did this
before, and she will do it again.

In 1930 the records of the Senate Lobby Committee were embellished with a
detailed history of the I.G. Farbenindustrie which was presented by Senator
Arthur R. Robinson of Indiana. This document had been filed by the American
I.G. Chemical Corp. with the New York Stock Exchange, and it included much
information regarding the enormous size and growth of Farben; its huge
production of synthetic nitrogen and its other products. The 1929 agreement
between Farben and Standard Oil was described, and the negotiations for later
tie-ups were mentioned.

Senator Robinson's minority report, with which Senator Caraway, its chairman,
and other members of the committee declined to be identified, summed up the
status of the American I.G. as a subsidiary of the German I.G., and the
detailed recital in these hearings that Farben had become far stronger in the
United States than prior to the first World War was sufficient to warn any
member of the Senate or House that the menace to American industry and to
national security was already a very real one.

Additional detailed data about Farben went into the record in 1931 when the
late Representative Louis T. McFadden of Pennsylvania, testifying before the
Senate Committee on Banking and Currency on the nomination of Eugene Meyer to
the Federal Reserve Board, inserted several lengthy documents describing the
German chemical trust and its American I.G. subsidiary. McFadden commented
that the "queer purpose" of the latter was to buy up American companies
dealing in chemical and allied products. Mr. Meyer was not accused of
participation in Farben's subsidiary, but this record made much additional
data about Farben available to members of the House and Senate-had they been
interested.

The Senate Special Committee to investigate the munitions industry was
appointed in 1934, under the chairmanship of Gerald P. Nye, Republican
isolationist and pacifist from North Dakota. The other members of that
committee were Walter F. George, Georgia; Bennett C. Clark, Missouri; Homer
T. Bone, Washington; James P. Pope, Idaho; Democrats, and A. H. Vandenberg,
Michigan; and W. Warren Barbour, New Jersey, Republicans. Six of the seven
were still members of the Senate in 1941 when Germany declared war on this
country, and when revelations of the subversive activities of I.G. Farben's
affiliates had attracted so much public notice that the Senate began a new
series of investigations to rediscover, amid loud protestations of surprise
and indignation, many of the very same facts about Farben which the Nye
Committee had recorded back in 1934. In general the public has accepted those
expressions of surprise as genuine and it is, therefore, necessary to go into
some detail in discussing how voluminous were those revelations of 1934.

The Nye Committee delved into all kinds of munitions and implements of war.
Farben's tie-ups not only were discussed generally as a menace to world peace
and to the national security of the United States; they were presented in
great detail in charts and lists of companies and products showing that the
Farben agreements at that time in the United States covered explosives and
ammunition, dyestuffs, drugs, photographic materials, rayon, magnesiurn
alloys, synthetic oil products,  miscellaneous chemicals and insecticides;
also that products on which possible arrangements were contemplated included
synthetic nitrogen, synthetic rubber, and plastics.

it might be remarked here that this list of chemical-munitions is almost
identical to the products I had listed as under the control or influence of
Farben in the diagramatic chart which I had sent to the members of the Senate
and House of Representatives in 1931. Copies of that chart, like so many
other documents of mine, stirred up the usual tempest in the waste baskets of
Washington. However, this time, three years later, they dug out the facts
themselves and put them in the record and on large elaborate charts of their
own devising.

Among the most important contributions which the Nye Committee hearings
recorded and which both the committee and the Senate thereupon promptly
ignored, were the proofs which indicated plainly that Farben and the Hitler
government were on extremely close terms, and that the rearming of Germany
and preparations for war were proceeding at an alarming rate.

In one instance while Lammot duPont was testifying, Senator Clark, Missouri
Democrat and isolationist, queried him on the possibility that secret and
patented explosive formulas which duPont had turned over to Farben for
commercial uses might be utilized for military purposes. The Senator asked
the witness:

There would be nothing to prevent them from taking those processes and using
them in the manufacture of war explosives, would there?

Mr. duPont apparently had no answer to that.

Repeated warnings that Germany was rearming included advice from duPont's
Paris representative in 1932 and 1933 that the Nazis were armed with American
machine guns, and that a regular business had been established (not by
duPont) of bootlegging weapons from this country to Germany.

>From another duPont foreign relations representative came the advice in March
1932 that:

It is a matter of common knowledge in Germany that I.G. Farben is financing
Hitler . . . . There seems to be no doubt whatsoever that Dr. Schmitz is at
least personally a large contributor to the Nazi party.

,This was supplemented by a later report from the duPont London office which
stated:

    Dr. Bosch   spends practically all of his time between his dwelling in
Heidelberg and the government offices in Berlin, thus leaving little, if any,
time for the affairs of the
I.G. Farbenindustrie.

Limitations of space permits inclusion here of only these few bits of the
very complete evidence assembled by the Nye Committee relative to the
rearming of Germany, and Farben's part in it.

The Nye Committee charts and lists also showed many companies in Belgium,
France, Holland, Italy and other countries that were tied to Farben. Thus
pictured graphically, Farben was revealed as the greatest aggregation of
industrial strength and military preparedness ever assembled under the
direction or influence of a single small group of men. Readers of this book
may wonder why the proven propensities of relatively small makers of
munitions to bribe and corrupt government officials merely to sell them guns
and powder did not suggest to the Senators that the greatest munition makers
of all time, self-designated supermen and self-eIected for world conquest,
would not hesitate to utilize bribery and corruption on a huge scale to
accomplish their aims among the officials of our own government. Perhaps the
title of this chapter should be, "Facts of Life that a Prewar Senator Ought
to Have Known."

The Nye Committee spent many days and recorded many pages with testimony
about scheming lobbyists who worked against disarmament and bribed officials
of foreign governments in the interest of builders of warships and war
weapons; it also, unjustly, grouped with such sordid individuals various
American scientists of the most distinguished character, like Dr. Charles H.
Herty and Dr. Edgar Fahs Smith, beloved provost of the University of
Pennsylvania and president of the American Chemical Society, whose
attainments were recognized the world over and whose probity not even a
Senate Committee could attack.

However, no attempt was made to record on the pages of these hearings the
names and activities of the lobbyists who were haunting the capital in the
interest of I.G. Farben, and who were on the payroll of certain of its
American affiliates.

The committee report on chemical munitions came in 1936 after long and
painful consideration of the evidence. Its recommendations were tortured and
ponderous, they appeared to ignore the significance of the Farben tie-ups in
the United States, but did not hesitate to condemn practices of lobbying and
of bribery which "tends to rob the governments concerned of the inability to
work freely for peace." The issue to these Senators was our disarmament-not
Farben's rearmament.

The committee apparently was obsessed with the thought that war could be
prevented by government ownership of the chemical industry. However, it
finally recorded its dilemma:

The committee recognizes the difficult problems involved in the control of
the chemical industry in view of the extent of its peacetime activities.

With this profound thought, the members of the Nye Committee allowed the
visible intrigues of Farben to rest in peace until after a new war had begun.

While the Nye Committee was fumbling with Farben's war chemicals, a committee
on the other side of the capital was bringing to light some other Farben
activities of an equally dangerous but more insidious character-propaganda.
In March 1934 a special committee was appointed in the House of
Representatives, to investigate foreign propaganda and other subversive
activities. This was the origin of what later became famous, or perhaps only
notorious, as the Dies Committee.

Its Chairman, in 1934, was the Honorable John W. McCormack, of Massachusetts.
Samuel Dickstein, New York; Carl M. Weideman, Michigan; Charles Kramer,
California; Thomas A. Jenkins, Ohio; J. Will Taylor, Tennessee, and U. S.
Guyer, Kansas, were the original members.

Among the witnesses examined by the McCormack Committee were Mr. Ivy L. Lee,
the famous public relations counsel, his partner Burnham Carter, and one
Dudley Pittenger, bookkeeper for the Lee firm. The testimony of Lee and his
associates revealed that the firm had been employed by the American I.G. ever
since the latter was organized in 1929, and that in 1933, when Hider became
Chancellor, the German I.G. also retained Lee to give advice as to how to
improve relations between Germany and the United States.

Some of Mr. Lee's testimony was confusing. For instance, his annual retainer
from Farben was $25,000 paid in odd sums by the Swiss I.G. and the American
I.G., yet he paid his own expenses, and these appeared to include the $33,000
a year which he paid to his son to stay in Berlin and study the German mind.

The Lee bookkeeper could throw no light on the discrepancy between the
$25,000 which the firm received from Farben and the $33,000 which it paid out
to keep its mind reader in Germany. Mr. Pittenger knew of no other work which
young Lee was doing in Germany except on the Farben account.

Mr. Ivy Lee's testimony on his relations with the Hitler government were also
confusing. At the start of the examination he stated positively that he had
no contract with the German Government and that his arrangement was solely
with the I.G. However, Mr. Lee did get around a bit, and found time to advise
the Nazi big shots on their propaganda. Testified Mr. Lee:

I first talked, of course, with my friends in the I.G. They all sympathized
with my advice and they asked me if I would repeat that advice to different
officers of the government. So, Dr. Ilgner introduced me to various
ministers. He went with me to see Goebbels, the Minister of Propaganda; Von
Papen, the Vice Chancellor; Von Neurath, the Foreign Minister; Schmidt, the
Minister of Economics .....

In explaining that his Farben contract was made within two or three months
after Hitler's advent as head of the government, Mr. Lee also stated:

At that time I did not contact any government officials except Hitler
himself. They were anxious for me to meet him, just as a personal matter, to
size him up.
     I had a half hour's talk with Hitler   asked him some questions about
his policies, told him I would like better to understand him if I could, and
he made me quite a speech.

When asked whether it had occurred to him that because of the contract with
the German I.G. he was acting at least indirectly in behalf of the German
government, Mr. Lee replied in the negative.

Mr. Lee's partner, Mr. Carter, appeared to differ on the purpose of the
contract. He testified that sending advice to the German firm was, in a
sense, advising the German Government; and stated:

    The contract    was an advisory one whereby we were to report to them
concerning American opinion in regard to Germany. The general purpose of the
contract being to pro-mote better understanding between the Germans and
Ameri-can people.

The reluctance of Mr. Lee to admit that he had been hired to advise the Nazi
Government on how to win the friendship of the United States is
understandable, especially after examining some of the recommendations which
his firm sent to Farben. The following memorandum was identified by Mr.
Carter as having been supplied by the Lee firm�a sort of press release which,
it was recommended, should be broadcast to the world by some responsible
German official:

Questions have been raised concerning the status of Germany's so-called
"storm troops." These number about 2,500,000 men between the ages of 18 and
60, physically well trained and disciplined, but not armed, not prepared for
war and organized only for the purpose of preventing for all time the return
of the Communistic peril. In view of the misunderstanding in regard to these
civil forces, however, Germany is willing to permit an investigation into
their character by such international arms control organization as is
eventually established.

According to Mr. Carter. the Lee advice also recommended that Joachim von
Ribbentrop undertake a definite campaign to clarify the American mind on the
disarmament question, first by a series of press conferences, then by radio
broadcasts to the American people, and, finally, by articles in important
American publications.

Mr. Lee finally conceded that his intention was that these suggestions should
ultimately be considered by the officials of the German Government, and while
he was not making the suggestions for dissemination in this country, they
were for the benefit of the whole world, including the United States.

One point was apparently lost sight of by all concerned. The question was not
asked, nor was information volunteered, as to whether or not what Mr. Lee was
actually doing, as a hired Farben publicity agent, was to outline highfalutin
speeches for Nazi officials to send back to America, regardless of whether or
not they were truthful, in order to make the American people less suspicious
of the real objective of I.G. Farben.

Mr. Lee appeared unable to agree with members of the committee as to just
what kind of material came under the classification of propaganda. Asked
whether he ever received any propaganda material from Germany he replied:

It is a question of what you, call propaganda. We have mreceived an immense
amount of literature . . . . books and pamphlets and newspaper clippings and
documents, world without end.

Congressman Dickstein questioned Mr. Lee about one particular lot which he
described as a "tremendous quantity of propaganda, shipped from Germany on
the steamship Bremen, addressed to Ivy Lee & Co., New York." Mr. Lee could
not remember that particular shipment.

The committee heard many other witnesses in the course of its 1934 hearings
on un-American activities, some of whom could also have been tied into the
Farben propaganda machine without difficulty if the committee had been so
minded. However, this testimony of Ivy Lee and his colleagues was so
definitely related to Farben and Farben's part in the rearming of Germany,
that it must be considered in all its sinister significance along with
similar evidence uncovered during that same period by the Senate Munitions
Committee.

Appeals which I made to Chairman McCormack and other members of his committee
to unmask fully this "German I.G. control of American affairs," and my offers
of evidence pertaining to same, were brushed aside as out of order. It was
also in 1934 that the Hon. James F. Byrnes, who was to go from the Senate to
the Supreme Court and then become postwar Secretary of State, ignored my
offer of pertinent data relating to the unsenatorial activities of his
colleague, Dr. Copeland. And, over the next several years similar rebuffs
were received from the Senate Lobby Investigating Committees headed by Hon.
Hugo L. Black, who was also to move on to a seat on the High Court.

In April 1935 every member of the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States received a brief, in the form of a printed thesis prepared by
Francis P. Garvan, protesting against the extension of reciprocal trade
treaties to Switzerland. This brief had been prepared in 1934 and was
submitted in behalf of "Chemistry in the United States." Mr. Garvan's
authorization to present it came from the Chemical Foundation and several of
the other important organizations which represented the chemical industry of
this country. It was also sent to Cabinet members, officers of executive
departments and others. This brief faced all concerned with a powerful and
unanswerable indictment of the policy of governmental inaction in ignoring
the dangers to our economic security and national defense which was apparent
in the penetration of our industries by I.G. Farben, and the latter's
identification with Hitler and the Nazi government.

The reciprocal trade-treaty statute, authorizing the President to enter into
foreign trade agreements, had been passed by Congress in June 1924, and among
the first countries to ask for the advantages in reduced tariff rates to be
derived from such a treaty was Switzerland, where the chemical industry was
completely dominated by Farben. In his brief, Mr. Garvan paid his respects to
those who were attempting to breach the tariff walls that protected our
chemical industries from a renewal of dumping by Farben through its backdoor
in Switzerland, and castigated them with these words:

I say it with all solemnity�that this industry is as sacred to the American
people as the grave of the Unknown Soldier, and only a traitor or a fool dare
touch it.

Of Farben's ties with Hitler he said:

.....   the chemical industry is under the direct supervision and control of
a Minister of Industry who in turn is subject to the absolute will and word
of Adolph Hitler, the Fuehrer. Therefore, in all dealings with the Swiss
chemical industry, the actual partner and active member of the European dye
cartel which is dominated and controlled by the German I.G., you are dealing
with Adolph Hitler.

Garvan sketched the history of what the German dye trust, its Herman Metz,
and its spies, had done before and during World War I; his own early fight
against them, and the efforts of the Wilson Administration to aid in the
development and protection of a coal-tar chemical industry in America. His
paper made clear the vital importance of an independent and powerful chemical
industry for the United States, in peace and in war; and he came back time
after time to what Farben bad done and was still doing with the aid of its
many new industrial patents, its I.G. subsidiaries, and its literary Ivy Lees.

In one respect Garvan's brief was prophetic, although he was mistaken in the
optimism on which his forecast was predicated. He warned of the time when our
supply of natural rubber might be cut off by Japan, but he erred in a belief
that the development of our chemical industry was a guarantee that we would
have a substitute sufficient for our needs when that time should come.

The contemptuous response of Congress to the Garvan brief might be observed
in the adoption of a reciprocal treaty with Switzerland in 1936, and
subsequent reductions in the duties on coal tar and other chemical products
from that country. In 1943, after Congress had again "found out" about Farben
and Farben's war, a clause was actually inserted in the renewal of the
Reciprocal Trade Agreement Act which purported to deprive cartels of any
benefit from such treaties.

As confirmation of his own warning, Mr. Garvan quoted in his brief from the
then-scorned statesman of another nation who was also attempting, in vain, to
arouse his fellow countrymen and the world to what was con-ling. The man who,
six years later-when he was called upon almost too late, was to win immortal
fame as the inspired defender of human dignity and liberty against the Nazi
brutality which Farben had planned and armed. Garvan�s quotation was from a
debate in the English House of Commons in 1934, in which Winston Churchill
had said:

The great new fact that is riveting the attention of every country in Europe
and the world is that Germany is rearming. This fact throws everything else
in the background. Her factories are working under practically war
conditions. Germany is rearming on land, to some extent on sea; and what
concerns us most, in the air.

The most dangerous attack is the incendiary bomb ..... Ten days of intensive
bombing of London would kill or maim thirty or forty thousand people . . . .
We must face this peril where we stand; we cannot move away from it. I hope
the Government will not neglect the scientific aspect of protec-tion of the
population', but pending some new discovery, the only practical measure for
certain defense is being able to inflict as much damage on the enemy as he
can inflict. That procedure, might, in practice, give complete immunity.

This historic premonition and warning from England's future Prime Minister
went unheeded, and in America as in the British Empire, professonal[sic]
politicians took refuge beneath a shabby umbrella covered with the flimsy
fabric of pacifism, and refused to act on the evidence under their noses of
what Germany, and Farben, were again preparing to do.

pps. 181-201

-----
Aloha, He'Ping,
Om, Shalom, Salaam.
Em Hotep, Peace Be,
All My Relations.
Omnia Bona Bonis,
Adieu, Adios, Aloha.
Amen.
Roads End

<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soap-boxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds�is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to