Blog Mirror: CB Radios Not Yet Obsolete; Veteran Truckers Say They’re Still Useful

 CB Radios Not Yet Obsolete; Veteran Truckers Say They’re Still Useful

Interesting, but why don't they switch to GMRS?

The Work Truck Blog: GMC New Design flatbed truck.

The Work Truck Blog: GMC New Design flatbed truck.:

GMC New Design flatbed truck.

This is a nice example, at least appearance wise, of a GMC New Design truck, the style of which is identical to the Chevrolet Advanced Design Truck.

The Advanced Design was introduced in 1947 and produced through 1955, although oddly you'll often see it claimed that it was produce through 53.  Indeed, 1953 seems to be associated with them, as people will often simply refer to the series as a "53".  We recently featured another example of it here:

Chevrolet Panel Truck

 Posted elsewhere some time ago, a beautifully restored Chevrolet panel truck.

Chevrolet Panel Truck

An exceptional example of a restored Chevrolet panel truck circa late 40s early 50s.

The one we're showing now is located out in front of the College Bar in Douglas, Wyoming, and it advertises that establishment.  It never moves, so I don't know if it's functional.  It's likely a 6100 2 ton truck or a 4100 1 1/2 ton truck.

The series was enormously successful and many examples of them remain in use.

Saturday, June 21, 1923. Somewhere West of Laramie and somewhere near Hutchinson, Kansas.

Earlier this week, we noted this:

Thursday, June 21, 1923. Dawn of the advertising age. Somewhere West Of Laramie.

The modern advertising age dawned on this day in 1921 with an ad for the Jordan Playboy automobile:

Today In Wyoming's History: June 21: 1923   This advertisement first ran in the Saturday Evening Post:

The advertisement is the most famous car ad of all time, and the ad itself revolutionized advertising.  Based on the recollection of the Jordan Motor Car Company's founder in seeing a striking mounted girl outside of Laramie, while he was traveling by train, the advertisement is all image, revealing next to nothing about the actual product.  While the Jordan Motor Car Company did not survive the Great Depression, the revolution in advertising was permanent.

Anyway you look at it, it's still a great ad.

This, by the way, is the print date.  The actual issue of the magazine would be a few days later.

On this date, the advertisement actually ran.  I've always thought that it ran in the form set out above, but there were multiple versions, and it would appear that in actuality, the version below is the one that ran.

It's similiar.

But I like the one set out at the very top better.

Sculptor Guzon Borglum began carving the Stone Mountain Memorial bas-relief.  He'd work on the Confederate memorial until 1925, and then abandon the project, blasting his carving of Robert E. Lee off the mountain.  None of his work at Stone Mountain remains.

Harding stopped in Hutchinson, Kansas.

Summer themes were the topic of illustrations on the weekly magazines.

The Aerodrome: Blog Mirror: Laramie Regional Airport Digs Out Fr...

The Aerodrome: Blog Mirror: Laramie Regional Airport Digs Out Fr...:   

Blog Mirror: Laramie Regional Airport Digs Out From ‘Unbelievable’ 45 FAA Violations

 

Laramie Regional Airport Digs Out From ‘Unbelievable’ 45 FAA Violations

The Work Truck Blog: 1930s? International

The Work Truck Blog: 1930s? International:  

1930s? International

 

I saw this parked on the street the other day, with a for sale sign in the window.  I didn't stop, so I don't know the year for the truck.

International manufactured pickup trucks from 1907 to 1975.

Friday, June 22, 1923. Harding in Kansas City.

Harding's tour of the country stopped in Kansas City, where he delivered this speech:

My Countrymen:

Stopping as I am, en route across the continent, to make an official visit of inquiry to the vast territory of Alaska, I stand before you to offer greetings, and bring, if possible, the federal Government a little closer to you and the people of the United States closer to their Government. I confess it has been something of a problem to select subjects for localities, and take cognizance of the territorial interest in the spoken word, and at the same time keep in mind that the printed speech, in the days of modem publicity, is available to all America. I do not mean that there are any circumstances under which the President would say a thing in Kansas City that he could not say in New York, New Orleans, or San Francisco, because our varied national interests are wholly mutual in their last analysis.

Ours is a common country, with a common purpose and common pride and common confidence. I am thinking rather of the enlarged audiences with the marvels of the radio. I was speaking to you last night in St. Louis, precisely as I am speaking to Denver, Chicago, and elsewhere to-night. We have come into very close communication in the United States, and we shall infinitely profit if it brings us into closer and fuller understanding. I know of nothing which will so promote our tranquility and stability at home and peace throughout the world as simple and revealing and appealing understanding.

Production is the very lifeblood of material existence and commerce is its vitalizing force. Put an end to commerce and there will be no cities, and farm life will revert to the mere struggle for subsistence. And there can be no commerce without transportation. In all the exchanges which make for commercial life, transportation is as essential as production.

Not long ago, while discussing the distressing slump in agricultural prices which threatened the very existence of farm industry, a caller drew from his pocket an old Ohio publication, a weekly newspaper of the early forties of the last century, and turned to the quotations on live stock, dairy, and farm products. Wheat was 40 cents the bushel, pork 3 cents the pound, butter 5 cents the pound, .potatoes 8 cents the bushel. Not many automobiles in returns like those. But that was before the age of motor cars, that was in the flatboat era, when a cargo of farm products had to be floated down the Scioto and Ohio Rivers 250 miles to market. The prices were a reflex of the crudity of transportation. And manufactured products were correspondingly high to the consumer, because there was the same crudity of transportation in distribution. The stage coach, the wagon train, and the flatboat were speed wonders of that day, and the canalboat was the last word in luxury on many waters. The great Missouri Valley was then unrevealed, and only awakening transportation was the revealing agency. In the infinite bounty of the Creator the measureless riches of the West were bestowed, but they availed little until the whistle of the steam locomotive proclaimed its westward march with the Star of Empire.

It is a curious trait of human nature that we acclaimed railroads in the building and then turned to hamper them in the operation. Missouri and Kansas were doubtless like Ohio. We gave from our purses to contribute to needed building funds, we donated vast areas for right of way, we witnessed financial exploitation with little protest, because of our eagerness to acquire, and acclaimed the acquisition. Marvelous development attended, but we omitted the precautions which would have avoided many present-day difficulties.

Everybody knows how necessary transportation is in this modem world of specialized industries and extensive exchanges. Everybody knows that our very social scheme, as now organized, is dependent on the maintenance of adequate transportation media. A good many people, indeed, have latterly come to wonder if it might not be possible even that we have committed our welfare and prosperity too largely to the assumption that it would always be possible to provide all the transportation that the community might desire, at costs which would not be prohibitive. That we have even staked our very existence on the daily continuity of transportation. There is a new, and I think increasing, school of thought on this subject. Its adherents are beginning to ask whether, in the long run, it would not be better to attempt making local communities more nearly self-dependent, by diversifying their range of production, and thus reducing the amount of transportation and exchange of products over long distances. But such a course would be a reversion to the old order, which no modem community willingly would accept, back to the farm self-contained, back to the restricted community, with its candle burning beneath the half-bushel measure.

Of one thing we may be reasonably assured, and that is that since railroads first began to be built in the world there never was a time when so many people, in so many communities, were frankly and intelligently questioning the future as regards its instrumentalities of transport. They are asking very frankly and pointedly how they can attain railroads enough in the next few generations to supply them, along with other agencies, with the transportation they will require. I doubt if there is a country in the world in which railroads have come to be a considerable transportation factor which has not some sort of a railroad crisis on its hands right now. There are some countries which merely need more railroads, and are willing to pay almost any price to get them, just as we would have done a generation or two generations ago. There are others which have more railroads than current traffic and insistent demand for lower rates make profitable, so that they have been made in some fashion or other, a burden on either industry or the public treasury. There are still others which have excellent railroad systems but have found, in the increased cost of capital and operation which came with the World War upheaval, that the cost of transportation is threatening to become too heavy for the producing industries to bear it.

Our own country, although it possesses something like forty per cent of the world's railroad mileage, is confronted with all these difficulties. In much of our territory we need more railroad facilities, and somehow will have to supply them in the near future. It is stated on high authority that the indirect losses in industry and commerce due to insufficient transportation run into figures equal to the burdens of federal taxation. On the other hand there are some railroads in this country the building of which would better have been deferred, for they were born out of misguided enthusiasm, or unjustifiable speculation, or the mere purpose of levying a sort of transportation blackmail upon systems already in the field. Finally, we have many railroads which, though apparently well managed and absolutely necessary to the communities they serve, are finding it difficult to earn a living and quite impossible to provide the necessary maintenance and the means of expanded facilities.

Every passing year adds to the cost of producing new railroads. Most of our railroads were begun in a time when land was the most plentiful and least valuable thing we possessed, and their rights of way and terminals cost, as compared with the present expense that would be involved in reproducing them, very little indeed. Everybody is doubtless familiar with the story that a few years ago a great engineer was commissioned to make preliminary calculations of the cost of a complete new trunk line system between New York and Chicago. He is said to have reported that the purchase of real estate for terminals on Manhattan Island alone would require as much capital as would the physical construction of the entire line from New York to Chicago.

There could hardly be a better illustration of the increasing difficulties which the country must face in any considerable expansion of its railroad system. Of course, this hypothetical new trunk line from Lake Michigan to the Atlantic coast was not constructed. If it had been, it could not have earned returns on its enormous cost unless rates had been greatly increased for its benefit. But if rates had been increased for it, they would have had to be increased also for the lines competing with it. Otherwise, the new road would have no business at all. An increase of tariffs which would have permitted such an expensive new property to earn even a moderate return on its investment would have enabled the older and less expensive properties to earn absolutely preposterous returns.

It is worth while to bear in mind, in the face of current agitation, that we could not replace our railroads for a vastly larger sum than the valuation placed upon them by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and it is fortunate for our people that we do not have to contemplate a rate structure founded upon replacement cost.

I have referred to the previously recited instance because it so perfectly illustrates the whole situation which the country must meet in dealing with its railroad problem. Events of the last few years have made us all realize that the railroads must be administered under some policy that will make it possible to find the capital wherewith to expand the existing systems as business shall require, without imposing an impossible burden upon industry and consumption.

It is no theoretical problem. It is not an imaginary thing to be swept aside with the wave of the hand. When the Government undertook operation during the war, and standardized wages, and was caught in the sweeping current of mounting cost, it created a situation to ignore which would quickly develop a national menace. At an awful cost we learned the extravagance and mounting burden of Government operation. Yet there are to-day very insistent advocates of Government ownership. Frankly, I do not share their views. Our political system has not reached a state of development when we can insure proper administration.

I believe it would be a colossal blunder which would destroy initiative, infect us with political corruption, create regional jealousies, and impose incalculable cost on the public treasury. But we must find a solution of the rate problems and the necessary expansion of facilities and find that solution in spite of the prejudices of the present-day sponsors for operations and the present-day destroyers who would bankrupt or confiscate, else Government ownership and operation will become an accepted necessity. Nor do I share the views of those who would lower rates without regard to railroad good fortune. The prosperity of the railways is the prosperity of the American people, and the property rights in railway investment are entitled to every consideration under our Constitution which is due to property rights anywhere. Any tendency toward confiscation will lead to confusion and chaos, and destroy the very foundation on which the republic is builded.

It is easy to understand how many people contemplate the abolition of competitive carrying charges, and the elaborate machinery of Government regulation, and argue that the logical step is to put them all in one common pool under Government ownership. That would effect an adjustment between the fat and the lean, if it didn't make them all lean. It would equalize profits and losses between favored lines and the less fortunate ones, it would abolish profits and saddle all the losses on the public treasury. More, it would completely disarrange the economic relationship between our different communities, upon which our present- day commerce is builded. It is preferable to preserve initiative and enterprise, to maintain the inspiring competition of service, and it is vital that the cost of transportation be borne by the commerce which is served.

No, my countrymen, I am not proposing nationalisation, nor a renewed experiment in Government operation, the cost of which we have not yet settled. The federal treasury can not well bear any added burdens until we have lifted many of those already imposed. I had rather solve a difficulty than embrace a danger.

I do believe there is a rational, justifiable step, full of promise toward solution. It will effect a diminution in rates without making a net return impossible. It will make sound finance possible for expansion. I refer to the program of consolidating all the railroads into a smaller number of systems, the whole to be under rigorous Government supervision, and die larger systems to be so constituted that the weaker and unprofitable lines would be able to lean upon the financial strength of the stronger and profitable ones until the growth of the country makes them all earn a just return upon capital invested. The transportation act of 1920, known as the Cummins-Esch law, contemplated this kind of a consolidation, but made it permissive rather than mandatory. In effect, it left to the railroad managements, subject to the master plan set up by the interstate Commerce Commission, to arrange the system groupings of the roads.

That provision was adopted only after long and detailed consideration by men of wisdom and experience, and seemed to represent the best judgment of leaders in both political parties. Its weakness was that it was doubtful whether the railroads would be able, of their own volition, to reconcile all the conflicting interests involved in so enormous a reorganization. It was frankly recognized when the legislation passed that it was necessarily somewhat experimental. Likewise, it was extremely uncertain whether the wisdom of a dozen Solomons, sitting as railroad presidents and chairmen of boards, and as financial backers of these great properties, would be equal to the task of organizing a group of systems which would represent fair treatment of all the interests involved, including those of the public.

There now appears to be no difficulty about any constitutional inhibition to the voluntary consolidation as authorized by Congress. But the problem of reconciling the interests of the hundreds of different ownerships and managements of lines to be merged into systems has proven a task for which no solution has been found.

It is, therefore, being seriously proposed that the next step be to further amplify the provisions for consolidation so as to stimulate the consummation. It is my expectation that legislation to this end will be brought before Congress at the next session. Through its adoption we should take the longest step which is now feasible on the way to a solution of our difficult problems of railroad transportation.

There has been undue alarm in many communities, Kansas City included, concerning the effect of such consolidations upon commercial centers like yours. Let me allay the alarm by reminding you that the whole question is one of adjustment, and the whole program is to be constructive, looking to enhanced service, and destruction is as much to be avoided as failure is to be prevented.

Though no other nation in the world offers a parallel in railway development, those of us who believe that this program of regional consolidation would produce highly beneficial effects find our belief sustained by recent experience in Great Britain. The railroads of that country have in the last few years passed through an experience which, considering the vast differences between the two countries as to area, geographic configuration, industrial and social organization, has more or less paralleled that of American railroads. The United States and Great Britain were, when the World War flamed, the only two great countries which had clung unalterably to private ownership of railroads.

In every other important country a considerable portion or all of the railroad mileage was owned or operated by the government. In Britain, as here, the necessities of war persuaded the Government to take over the roads, place their operation under more rigorous control than before, and extend financial guaranties. In both countries, the results were expensive from the viewpoint of the treasury, and highly unsatisfactory from that of the public's convenience and the accommodation of business. In both countries, again, the experience went far to dispel whatever illusions had been entertained about the desirability of government railroad management.

The parallel does not end here. When the war ended opinion in both countries urged return of the railroads to corporate management as soon as possible. In both this was effected, and—here comes the most striking coincidence of all—in both the return was accompanied by a legislative provision looking to consolidation of the many systems into a small group of great ones. The difference was that in Great Britain the legislation was mandatory, requiring that by January 1, 1923, the roads should be consolidated into four great systems; here it was permissive, and, of course, a much larger number of systems is proposed. The British program has been carried into effect; there are now four systems in the country, all organized around the same general idea of increasing efficiency and providing their financial stability.

While this reorganization has been in effect only a few months, its early results are reported to justify fully the expectation of better conditions under it. It is regarded as a long step toward permanent settlement, on a basis fair to the owners of the properties, and to the public interest in good service at the lowest possible rates.

The necessity for early adoption of this or some other program to place the railroads on a sound basis is so pressing as to make it a matter of deep national concern. There is no other issue of greater importance, for herein lies in large part the solution of the agricultural problem, and with it the assurance of our industrial position. Nothing else can possibly prosper with agriculture depressed; and agriculture is calling loudly for relief from present transportation burdens.

Quite recently Senator Cummins, the veteran chairman of the Senate Interstate Commerce Committee, made the startling statement that probably 75,000 miles of our railroads are earning so little and costing so much to operate that with scant incomes they can not be adequately maintained and expanded in facility to meet traffic requirements. If we realize that this means near one-third of the country's railroad mileage, we will appreciate the gravity of the situation. Yet there it is, grimly staring us in the face, challenging our statesmanship and business capacity.

Not long ago the Interstate Commerce Commission actually granted the necessary authorization to tear up and abandon one piece of over two hundred and thirty miles of railroad. It was no frontier line, in an undeveloped, uninhabited section; it was in the rich and populous state of Illinois. If the spectacle of a railroad literally starved to death in such a community is alarming, it is yet less a calamity in some ways than it would be in a region possessing fewer lines capable of taking over the public service. A majority of the people tributary to it will, by going a few miles farther, get transportation from other roads. But there is no such solution of the problem for many extensive communities now served by roads in financial distress.

There are some roads—many of the smaller ones in fact—whose continued operation is absolutely vital to many thousands of people, to considerable towns, to large areas of country, whose revenues simply can not provide financial facilities through earning, pending a considerable growth in community population, say nothing of earning any return whatever on capital invested. No legerdemain of court processes, receivers' certificates, or financial juggling, can save them. They must get more revenue or stronger support or quit operating until the country is more largely developed. We shall contribute nothing to solving their problem by agreeing that they ought not to have been built so soon. Nor shall we help by talking about the wickedness of men who, years ago, exploited the public, watered stocks, and did other reprehensible things. No panacea will be found in statistics proving that some other roads are earning more than they need, unless we find an equitable way to coordinate the activities of the strong roads to develop the weak ones. .

The railways have become publicly sponsored institutions, and government must find a way to avoid confiscation, avoid starvation, and maintain service and a proper return upon capital which will assure them a growth commensurate with the country's development.

We are all agreed that to abandon any important share of railroad mileage is inconceivable. We can not do it because people already dependent on the railroads would be ruined; and because, further, in a not very distant future we should be compelled by the country's development to put them back, or their equivalent in capacity for service. They must be saved. There are just three possible ways to do it:

1. For the Government to take and operate the weak roads, and thus bear all the loss without any of the profits of railroad management.

2. For the Government to take all the railroads, convert them into one gigantic pool, and plunge into the enormous responsibility thus incurred. In the present state of the public treasury and of tax burdens, and in the light of recent sad experience with Government management, this is not to be considered. I believe it would be politically, socially, and economically disastrous.

3. The plan of consolidations already outlined, bringing economies in operation, financial stability, ability to secure needed capital, adjusting rates and regulations to the necessities of the position, and preserving the real advantages of competition in service, while avoiding the evils of Government ownership.

As among these possibilities there can be little doubt of the public preference for the third program. It is not unjust to the strong roads, for the prosperity of these, like the prosperity of all industry, depends on keeping the country as a whole prosperous. Every mile of railroad trackage in the land helps to make business for every other mile. The transportation system must be considered as a unity, precisely as the nation itself must be considered. In this manner we will best help to insure the credit of the railroads, assist them to new capital for future expansion, and insure, for the future, against the sort of wildcat and competitive railroad construction which in the past has been responsible for giving us a great share of the trackage which now proves economically unjustified.

There is another particular reason which urges the early adoption of the larger-system plan. It would be a long step toward solving the problem of keeping the railroad equipment adequate. Many financially weak roads are unable to provide all the rolling stock they need. Inadequacy of car service hindered the relief of the coal situation last winter, it denied the farmer a market when prices were most advantageous, and has impeded manufacturing industry time and again. It is fair to say the railways were helpless because they were financially and otherwise unable to keep up with the demands for service. Prevailing practices further embarrassed the situation. Roads inadequately equipped make up their deficiency by borrowing the cars of other roads. When a foreign car comes to one of these parasite lines it is not returned promptly, but often is deliberately retained. The free movement of cars is prevented; no company can be certain of commanding even its own equipment when it is needed; seasonal congestions or shortages of cars follow; and an unfair burden is imposed on those roads which sincerely try to meet the demands of this demoralized situation.

To meet this condition, the proposal of a nation-wide car pool has lately attracted much attention. The Pullman Company fairly illustrates what is meant. This great corporation provides most of the railroads with certain kinds of cars, on a rental basis. Applying the same idea to the provisions of freight cars, you have a rough notion of the proposed car pool. It is urged by advocates that it would unify the rolling-stock organization; make possible the enlistment of adequate capital to pro-vide for the weak and strong roads alike; place the entire organization under a single centralized control which would insure equity to all roads and sections. There are others who insist it would not correct the present evils, and would divide responsibility and make regulation and supervision more difficult. In any event the system of consolidation would in effect clear up many difficulties in car distribution.

We come now to an entirely different phase of this transportation question. Quite regardless of its cost, the continuity, the assurance of service at all times is absolutely necessary in transportation. Business that is done to-day depends on the certainty that the goods tan be delivered to-morrow. If there is doubt about the trains running and the deliveries being made to-morrow, there will be unwillingness to buy and sell today. All of which brings us to consideration of the relations between the transportation organization and its employees.

There is no other business, so far as I know, in which suspension of operations can produce such disastrous results as in transportation. The vital importance of this service has brought many people to the conclusion that it ought to be possible absolutely to forbid and prevent railroad employees from striking. I do not believe it possible under our form of government to compel men to work against their will, and do not think it desirable under any form of government. I say this, fully recollecting my vote in the Senate in favor of the antistrike provision of the railroad act of 1920. That was not a provision denying men the right to strike. It was merely a requirement that before the men should strike or the employer should lock them out, both sides should submit their differences to a properly constituted and impartial tribunal, empowered to consider the facts, determine the merits, and make an award.

It was believed that in the vast majority of cases this procedure would prevent lockouts and strikes; and, in view of the enormous loss to the carriers, to their employees, and to the public resulting from strikes, I profoundly regret that it should not have been possible to give the plan a fair trial. When I say a fair trial, I mean a trial under conditions fully and frankly acceptable to all interests. I do not believe that in such a situation a fair trial is possible unless both sides have absolute confidence in the fairness of the tribunal and are sincerely willing to accept its verdict. If human wisdom shall ever be capable of setting up such a tribunal as that, and of inspiring both sides of the controversy with complete confidence in it, we will have traveled a long way toward industrial peace.

Personally, I have confidence that the thing is possible. I believe so firmly in the underlying common sense of both organized industry and organized labor, and in the fairness toward both on the part of the great public on which both of them are finally dependent, that I believe at last it will be possible to arrive at settlement of industrial disputes in public services by such a method. Let me say so plainly that there will be no misunderstanding, that in most disputes which end in strikes or lock outs I do not believe the difference which at last divides the two sides very often represents any underlying question of human rights and human justice.

There was an interesting illustration in the strike last year of the railway shopmen. The Government sought to effect a settlement that had for its firm foundation the pledged acceptance by both managers and employees of the decisions of the Railway Labor Board. To such a settlement the spokesmen of managers and employees gave their pledge, but the managers rejected the agreement on the ground that it did not do justice to the new employees who were taken on after the strike began. Much was made of the issue, but in the end all settlements were effected on precisely the terms the Government proposed. Yet the agreement to abide by the Labor Board decision was lost in the days of anxiety and the separate settlements which were effected.

It is inescapable that the Government feels the importance of public interest and right in connection with the settlement of such questions. t The vital existence of the Nation now depends upon continuity of transportation. In recent years it has come to be accepted that there are three parties, rather than two, to every controversy between the employer and employee of a public-service corporation. The employer is one, the employee is another, and the great public, which must have the right to consume and to be served, is the third. If we are quite frank among ourselves we will have to admit that in dealing with such controversies the third party in interest has, down to this time, decidedly received the least consideration. Yet the public is the party on which finally must be placed the burden of whatever adjustment is effected.

As a means of making possible righteous adjustment between railroads and their employees, with due regard for the interest of the public which pays, the Government established a Railroad Labor Board. It was assumed that this organization, required to represent in equal numbers the employers, the employees, and the public, would command the confidence of all sides and that its determinations would be accepted. Unfortunately, for reasons which are the subject of no little controversy, the board has never had the cooperation of employer and employee for which its authors hoped. For myself, I am not convinced that the test has been a complete or entirely fair one, and I favor, not its abandonment, but its continuance under such modifications as seem most likely to make the plan successful. But there is little to hope for until all concerned are ready to comply promptly with the board's decisions. I am frank to say I do not hope for compliance on the part of employees so long as decisions are ignored by the managers.

There is another highly important phase of the transportation problem very much worth our attention. I believe the use of our inland waterways offers the one sure way to reduced carrying charges on basic materials, heavy cargoes, and farm products. Probably all of us acknowledge the urgent need of diminished cost on agricultural shipments and many bulk cargoes essential to manufacturing industry. While it is well established by the Boston Milk Case decision that public necessity justifies carrying a commodity at less than cost, the service at less than cost on the larger tonnage of the country does not offer the righteous solution. We ought to try the experiment of coordinating rail and water shipments, we ought to avail ourselves of the waterways developed through expenditures of enormous public funds, and we ought to give the waterway carriers a chance to prove their capacity for helpful service.

The Federal Government has expended approximately $1,130,610,000 on river and harbor improvement. Only last spring the Congress appropriated $56,589,910, in spite of a budget recommendation of less than half. For the stuns spent on harbors we have most beneficial results. The millions expended on inland waterways, on rivers and canals, have brought small returns because we have put them to no practical use. Though we expended to cheapen carrying charges and to facilitate transportation, we have failed in coordinating service and have allowed the railroads to discourage every worth-while development. Where barge and packet service has been established there has been such an unfair division of the joint carrying charge that waterway development has been impeded, and where service lines by water have been established the hoped-for diminution of rates has been denied or avoided until the plea of cheapened transportation by water has seemed a mockery.

I believe we should encourage our water service, we should encourage and enforce coordinated service, we should see to an equitable division of rates, and exact rate reductions whenever practicable to operate successfully under rate reductions.

It is a very discouraging picture to contemplate the expenditure of $50,000,000 of public funds on an inland waterway when the tonnage on that waterway has diminished more than half, while the waterway itself is made better and better year by year. We have either wasted many hundred of millions in blind folly or have been inexcusably remiss in turning our expenditures to practical account.

I wish the railway leadership of the country could see the need of this employment of our water routes as an essential factor in perfected transportation, and join in aiding the feasible plan of coordinating service and cheapening charges, not alone as a means of popularized and efficient public service, but as a means of ending the peril of their own fortunes.

No thoughtful sentiment in America will tolerate the financial ruin of the railroads. But the people do wish, now that exploitation has been ended, to have their transportation adequate to the country's needs, and desire all our facilities brought into efficient service. They wish to make sure of the ample agencies, and they demand the least carrying charge which will make an adequate return to capital and at the same time permit extensions and additions and enhanced equipment essential to the best transportation in the world.

We have not fully appraised the evolution from the ox-cart to motor age. The automobile and motor-truck have made greater inroads on railway revenues than the electric lines with their intimate appeal to the local community. There will never be a backward step in motor transportation. But we shall do better if we find a plan to coordinate this service with the railways, rather than encourage destructive competition. Indeed, the motor transport already promises relief to our congested terminals through better coordination. We have come to the point where we need all the statecraft in business, to find the way of making transportation in its varied forms adequate to the requirements of American commerce, to afford that transportation its due reward for service, without taking from production and trade a hindering exaction.

I can not too greatly stress the importance of this great problem. It can not be solved by those who commend the policy of confiscation or destruction, nor can it be solved by those who make a prejudiced appeal for political favor. We must frankly recognize the exactions imposed upon the American farmer during the war expansion of rates, take note of the wage development which will yield no reduction in the principal item of operating cost, and seek conditions under which we may have the requisite reductions in fixed charges which will afford encouraging relief. If the system consolidations, with diminished overhead costs, with terminal advantages largely improved and terminal charges greatly reduced, will not afford the solution, then our failure will enforce a costlier experiment and the one great commitment which I hope the United States will forever escape.

We are dwelling now amid a gratifying return to prosperous conditions. I do not share the feeling that the recovery is a mere temporary one, with impending relapse. The guaranty of permanence lies in our doing the things essential to the equitable sharing of our good fortune. There can be no abiding prosperity in industrial centers, in transportation or elsewhere, unless it is properly shared by American agriculture. Government can make no direct bestowal of good fortune, but it is the duty of government to maintain conditions under which equal opportunity for good fortune is the heritage of every American everywhere.

Under our representative democracy we find ourselves absorbed in issues which more or less concern us in our individual affairs, but we lose the aspect of government as a whole and take it as a matter of course. It is our accepted practice rather than a deliberate intent.

Americans ought ever be asking themselves about their concept of the ideal republic. I take it to be one of universal good fortune, where freedom is as complete, under the law, as justice is unfailing within the law. A land where the equality of freedom's opportunity and the reward of merit are held as sacred inheritances and citizens are made fit to embrace beckoning opportunity.

Above all else, since we are the great exemplars of representative democracy, ours should be a land of unquestioned loyalty to the great fundamentals on which we are builded, to which Americans are committed by birth, or declare allegiance when they are adopted. We have achieved most notably in development; let us make sure of the preservation and hold ourselves equipped for the continued triumphs of progress at home and unafraid to play a great people's becoming part in the affairs of the world.

Monday, June 18, 1923. Ford says no, Government runs surplus.

Henry Ford put to rest speculation that he would run for President on this day, noting that he was too busy with his own affairs.

The government looked to run a budgetary surplus for 1923.

The first Kalamazoo Checker Cab was produced.

The Aerodrome: A "rash decision" on pilot retirement age.

The Aerodrome: A "rash decision" on pilot retirement age.: 

A "rash decision" on pilot retirement age.

The House Committee on Transportation, operating in a Boomer dominated era in which there's a persistent belief that nobody every gets old, voted to extend airline pilot retirement age from 65 to 67.

The Air Line Pilots Association, a commercial pilot's union, opposed the measure, stating:

The rash decision to move an amendment on changing the statutory pilot retirement age, without consulting agencies responsible for safety, or studying potential impacts of such a change as has been done elsewhere, is a politically driven choice that betrays a fundamental understanding of airline industry operations, the pilot profession, and safety.

The measure now goes to the full House. 

Blog Mirror: Kids with Bicycles Wanted for Wartime Deliveries

 

Kids with Bicycles Wanted for Wartime Deliveries

Monday, June 4, 2023. Frank Hayes and Sweet Kiss.

The United States Supreme Court decided in Meyer v. Nebraska that school could be conducted in languages other than the English, striking down a Nebraska law.  In so doing, it stated:

262 U.S. 390

43 S.Ct. 625

67 L.Ed. 1042

MEYER

v.

STATE OF NEBRASKA.

No. 325.

Argued Feb. 23, 1923.

Decided June 4, 1923.

Messrs. A. F. Mullen, of Omaha, Neb., C. E. Sandall, of York, Neb., and I. L. Albert, of Columbus, Neb., for plaintiff in error.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 391-393 intentionally omitted]

Messrs. Mason Wheeler, of Lincoln, Neb., and O. S. Spillman, of Pierce, Neb., for the State of Nebraska.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 393-395 intentionally omitted]

Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

Plaintiff in error was tried and convicted in the district court for Hamilton county, Nebraska, under an information which charged that on May 25, 1920, while an instructor in Zion Parochial School he unlawfully taught the subject of reading in the German language to Raymond Parpart, a child of 10 years, who had no attained and successfully passed the eighth grade. The information is based upon 'An act relating to the teaching of foreign languages in the state of Nebraska,' approved April 9, 1919 (Laws 1919, c. 249), which follows:

'Section 1. No person, individually or as a teacher, shall, in any private, denominational, parochial or public school, teach any subject to any person in any language than the English language.

'Sec. 2. Languages, other than the English language, may be taught as languages only after a pupil shall have attained and successfully passed the eighth grade as evidenced by a certificate of graduation issued by the county superintendent of the county in which the child resides.

'Sec. 3. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction, shall be subject to a fine of not less than twenty-five dollars ($25), nor more than one hundred dollars ($100), or be confined in the county jail for any period not exceeding thirty days for each offense.

'Sec. 4. Whereas, an emergency exists, this act shall be in force from and after its passage and approval.'

The Supreme Court of the state affirmed the judgment of conviction. 107 Neb. 657, 187 N. W. 100. It declared the offense charged and established was 'the direct and intentional teaching of the German language as a distinct subject to a child who had not passed the eighth grade,' in the parochial school maintained by Zion Evangelical Lutheran Congre ation, a collection of Biblical stories being used therefore. And it held that the statute forbidding this did not conflict with the Fourteenth Amendment, but was a valid exercise of the police power. The following excerpts from the opinion sufficiently indicate the reasons advanced to support the conclusion:

'The salutary purpose of the statute is clear. The Legislature had seen the baneful effects of permitting for eigners, who had taken residence in this country, to rear and educate their children in the language of their native land. The result of that condition was found to be inimical to our own safety. To allow the children of foreigners, who had emigrated here, to be taught from early childhood the language of the country of their parents was to rear them with that language as their mother tongue. It was to educate them so that they must always think in that language, and, as a consequence, naturally inculcate in them the ideas and sentiments foreign to the best interests of this country. The statute, therefore, was intended not only to require that the education of all children be conducted in the English language, but that, until they had grown into that language and until it had become a part of them, they should not in the schools be taught any other language. The obvious purpose of this statute was that the English language should be and become the mother tongue of all children reared in this state. The enactment of such a statute comes reasonably within the police power of the state. Pohl v. State, 102 Ohio St. 474, 132 N. E. 20; State v. Bartels, 191 Iowa, 1060, 181 N. W. 508.

'It is suggested that the law is an unwarranted restriction, in that it applies to all citizens of the state and arbitrarily interferes with the rights of citizens who are not of foreign ancestry, and prevents them, without reason, from having their children taught foreign languages in school. That argument is not well taken, for it assumes that every citizen finds himself restrained by the statute. The hours which a child is able to devote to study in the confinement of school are limited. It must have ample time for exercise or play. Its daily capacity for learning is comparatively small. A selection of subjects for its education, therefore, from among the many that might be taught, is obviously necessary. The Legislature no doubt had in mind the practical operation of the law. The law affects few citizens, except those of foreign lineage.

Other citizens, in their selection of studies, except perhaps in rare instances, have never deemed it of importance to teach their children foreign languages before such children have reached the eighth grade. In the legislative mind, the salutary effect of the statute no doubt outweighed the restriction upon the citizens generally, which, it appears, was a restriction of no real consequence.'

The problem for our determination is whether the statute as construed and applied unreasonably infringes the liberty guaranteed to the plaintiff in error by the Fourteenth Amendment:

'No state * * * shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law.'

While this court has not attempted to define with exactness the liberty thus guaranteed, the term has received much consideration and some of the included things have been definitely stated. Without doubt, it denotes not merely freedom from bodily restraint but also the right of the individual to contract, to engage in any of the common occupations of life, to acquire useful knowledge, to marry, establish a home and bring up children, to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and generally to enjoy those privileges long recognized at common law as essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men. Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36, 21 L. Ed. 394; Butchers' Union Co. v. Crescent City Co., 111 U. S. 746, 4 Sup. Ct. 652, 28 L. Ed. 585; Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U. S. 356, 6 Sup. Ct. 1064, 30 L. Ed. 220; Minnesota v. Bar er, 136 U. S. 313, 10 Sup. Ct. 862, 34 L. Ed. 455; Allegeyer v. Louisiana, 165 U. S. 578, 17 Sup. Ct. 427, 41 L. Ed. 832; Lochner v. New York, 198 U. S. 45, 25 Sup. Ct. 539, 49 L. Ed. 937, 3 Ann. Cas. 1133; Twining v. New Jersey 211 U. S. 78, 29 Sup. Ct. 14, 53 L. Ed. 97; Chicago, B. & Q. R. R. v. McGuire, 219 U. S. 549, 31 Sup. Ct. 259, 55 L. Ed. 328; Truax v. Raich, 239 U. S. 33, 36 Sup. Ct. 7, 60 L. Ed. 131, L. R. A. 1916D, 545, Ann. Cas. 1917B, 283; Adams v. Tanner, 224 U. S. 590, 37 Sup. Ct. 662, 61 L. Ed. 1336, L. R. A. 1917F, 1163, Ann. Cas. 1917D, 973; New York Life Ins. Co. v. Dodge, 246 U. S. 357, 38 Sup. Ct. 337, 62 L. Ed. 772, Ann. Cas. 1918E, 593; Truax v. Corrigan, 257 U. S. 312, 42 Sup. Ct. 124, 66 L. Ed. 254; Adkins v. Children's Hospital (April 9, 1923), 261 U. S. 525, 43 Sup. Ct. 394, 67 L. Ed. ——; Wyeth v. Cambridge Board of Health, 200 Mass. 474, 86 N. E. 925, 128 Am. St. Rep. 439, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 147. The established doctrine is that this liberty may not be interfered with, under the guise of protecting the public interest, by legislative action which is arbitrary or without reasonable relation to some purpose within the competency of the state to effect. Determination by the Legislature of what constitutes proper exercise of police power is not final or conclusive but is subject to supervision by the courts. Lawton v. Steele, 152 U. S. 133, 137, 14 Sup. Ct. 499, 38 L. Ed. 385.

The American people have always regarded education and acquisition of knowledge as matters of supreme importance which should be diligently promoted. The Ordinance of 1787 declares:

'Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.'

Corresponding to the right of control, it is the natural duty of the parent to give his children education suitable to their station in life; and nearly all the states, including Nebraska, enforce this obligation by compulsory laws.

Practically, education of the young is only possible in schools conducted by especially qualified persons who devote themselves thereto. The calling always has been regarded as useful and honorable, essential, indeed, to the public welfare. Mere knowledge of the German language cannot reasonably be regarded as harmful. Heretofore it has been commonly looked upon as helpful and desirable. Plaintiff in error taught this language in school as part of his occupation. His right thus to teach and the right of parents to engage him so to instruct their children, we think, are within the liberty of the amendment.

The challenged statute forbids the teaching in school of any subject except in English; also the teaching of any other language until the pupil has attained and successfully passed the eighth grade, which is not usually accomplished before the age of twelve. The Supreme Court of the state has held that 'the so-called ancient or dead languages' are not 'within the spirit or the purpose of the act.' Nebraska District of Evangelical Lutheran Synod, etc., v. McKelvie et al. (Neb.) 187 N. W. 927 (April 19, 1922). Latin, Greek, Hebrew are not proscribed; but German, French, Spanish, Italian, and every other alien speech are within the ban. Evidently the Legislature has attempted materially to interfere with the calling of modern language teachers, with the opportunities of pupils to acquire knowledge, and with the power of parents to control the education of their own.

It is said the purpose of the legislation was to promote civic development by inhibiting training and education of the immature in foreign tongues and ideals before they could learn English and acquire American ideals, and 'that the English language should be and become the mother tongue of all children reared in this state.' It is also affirmed that the foreign born population is very large, that certain communities commonly use foreign words, follow foreign leaders, move in a foreign atmosphere, and that the children are thereb hindered from becoming citizens of the most useful type and the public safety is imperiled.

That the state may do much, go very far, indeed, in order to imporve the quality of its citizens, physically, mentally and morally, is clear; but the individual has certain fundamental rights which must be respected. The protection of the Constitution extends to all, to those who speak other languages as well as to those born with English on the tongue. Perhaps it would be highly advantageous if all had ready understanding of our ordinary speech, but this cannot be coerced by methods which conflict with the Constitution—a desirable and cannot be promoted by prohibited means.

For the welfare of his Ideal Commonwealth, Plato suggested a law which should provide:

'That the wives of our guardians are to be common, and their children are to be common, and no parent is to know his own child, nor any child his parent. * * * The proper officers will take the offspring of the good parents to the pen or fold, and there they will deposit them with certain nurses who dwell in a separate quarter; but the offspring of the inferior, or of the better when they chance to be deformed, will be put away in some mysterious, unknown place, as they should be.'

In order to submerge the individual and develop ideal citizens, Sparta assembled the males at seven into barracks and intrusted their subsequent education and training to official guardians. Although such measures have been deliberately approved by men of great genius their ideas touching the relation between individual and state were wholly different from those upon which our institutions rest; and it hardly will be affirmed that any Legislature could impose such restrictions upon the people of a state without doing violence to both letter and spirit of the Constitution.

The desire of the Legislature to foster a homogeneous people with American ideals prepared readily to understand current discussions of civic matters is easy to appreciate. Unfortunate experiences during the late war and aversion toward every character of truculent adversaries were certainly enough to quicken that aspiration. But the means adopted, we think, exceed the limitations upon the power of the state and conflict with rights assured to plaintiff in error. The interference is plain enough and no adequate reason therefor in time of peace and domestic tranquility has been shown.

The power of the state to compel attendance at some school and to make reasonable regulations for all schools, including a requirement that they shall give instructions in English, is not questioned. Nor has challenge been made of the state's power to prescribe a curriculum for institutions which it supports. Those matters are not within the present controversy. Our concern is with the prohibition approved by the Supreme Court. Adams v. Tanner, 244 U. S. 594, 37 Sup. Ct. 662, 61 L. Ed. 1336, L. R. A. 1917F, 1163, Ann. Cas. 1917D, 973, pointed out that mere abuse incident to an occupation ordinarily useful is not enough to justify its abolition, although regulation may be entirely proper. No emergency has arisen which renders knowledge by a child of some language other than English so clearly harmful as to justify its inhibition with the consequent infringement of rights long freely enjoyed. We are constrained to conclude that the statute as applied is arbitrary and without reasonable relation to any end within the competency of the state.

As the statute undertakes to interfere only with teaching which involves a modern language, leaving complete freedom as to other matters, there seems no adequate foundation for the suggestion that the purpose was to protect the child's health by limiting his mental activities. It is well known that proficiency in a foreign language seldom comes to one not instructed at an early age, and experience shows that this is not injurious to the health, morals or understanding of the ordinary child.

The judgment of the court belo must be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Reversed.

Mr. Justice Holmes and Mr. Justice Sutherland, dissent.

The US decided to ignore foreign protests on booze rules.

The now ineffective Zero Milestone in Washington D.C., intended to be the starting point for all U.S. highways, was dedicated.

Horse trainer Frank Hayes, serving as a jockey on Sweet Kiss, died during the race which the horse won.  A very lightweight individual to start with, he'd lost twelve pounds for the race and perhaps accordingly imperiled his health.

Tuesday, June 1, 1943. The attack on Flight 777.

The Luftwaffe shot down a civilian DC-3 airliner belonging to BOAC flying out of Portugal, killing the passengers on board, which included actor Leslie Howard.

The flight, 777, was a regularly scheduled flight of which the Germans were aware.  As odd as it is to think of this in the context of a global war, commercial aviation continued on during the war where it could.  The fact that the aircraft was shot down has led to speculation that the Germans may have thought Winston Churchill was on board the craft, although other conspiracy theories exist including that Howard was the target, as, it is theorized, he was a British spy.  Some speculation exists that the Germans targeted the plane simply to cause British demoralization, which they theorized would occur with the death of Howard.  Having said all of that, the plane had been attacked by German aircraft twice before during the war.

The flight was overbooked and Howard actually joined the passenger list late, bumping off another passenger who accordingly was spared his fate. Some other last moment changes have led to some confusion over who was originally supposed to be on the flight.   Catholic Priest Father A. S. Holmes, vice president of the R. C. English College, left the plane at the last moment in order to take a phone call.  Actor Raymond Burr claimed that his wife Annette Sutherland, an actress, died in the crash, but no record of her being on the plane exists, nor of Burr having ever been married to an Annette Sutherland.

Howard is best known to American audiences for his role as Ashley in Gone With The Wind, a role which I feel he was miscast in.

The SS John Morgan, carrying explosives, exploded when it accidentally struck the tanker SS Montana in Baltimore's harbor. Sixty-five of the 68 men on the John Morgan died in the explosion, while 18 of the 82 men on the Montana were killed.

The United Mine Workers went into a coal strike.  It lasted only a week.

Friday, May 14, 1943. The sinking of the AHS Centaur.

The AHS Centaur hospital ship was sunk by the Japanese submarine I-177 killing 268 of the 363 personnel on board. There were no patients. They were all Australian and British medical personnel and the crew.

The sinking of the marked Australian hospital ship sparked British and Australian outrage and an official protest.  Japan denied the sinking, but after the war, in the 1970s, blame was generally fixed in the I-777.  The I-777 was sunk in 1944, but it's commander, Hajime Nakagawa, survived the war, having been transferred to other duties prior to that time.  He never publicly spoke on the event.

On the same day, the Japanese lost the Ro-102 to American action, potentially PT boat action.  The German's lost three submarines at Kiel due to an American air raid, although all three would later be restored to action.  The U-640, sunk by a PBY off of Greenland, would not, however.

The United States Public Roads Administration reported that only a few states were observing the 35 mph wartime highway "Victory Speed Limit" imposed by the Federal Government.

35mph is slow, but not quite as slow as it would now be regarded.  Most cars were lower geared than they presently are, and pickup trucks were very much so.  Many state highways were narrow single lane highways at the time.

"Lummis reintroduces bill to raise pilot retirement age to 67"

Oh, crap. Why not just raise it to 167?

Or better yet, why not just have a special bill that Boomer get to run absolutely everything for a good decade after they're all dead.

Is there literally nothing whatsoever the Boomer generation won't get out of the way on?

Southern Rockies Nature Blog: Shootout at the Watering Hole

Southern Rockies Nature Blog: Shootout at the Watering Hole: Photo: Colorado Sun  "Pastoral cultures are always violent," I read once in an anthropology book.  You know the scenario: two herd...

Industrial History: 1929 Jacques Cartier Bridge over St. Lawrence Rive...

Industrial History: 1929 Jacques Cartier Bridge over St. Lawrence Rive...: ( Historic Bridges ; 3D Satellite , 3,445 photos) Pont Jacques-Cartier, Pont du Havre (Harbor Bridge) Street View , Aug 2022 Street View , J...

Crossing over this bridge frightened me as a child. 

Easter Sunday, April 1, 1923

Members of the Wasatch Mountain Club members on the porch of the Hermitage, Ogden Canyon, Utah, Easter Day, 1923

It was Easter Sunday for 1923. 

The silent classic Safety Last!, starring Harold Lloyd and Mildred Davis, premiered.   The movie is famous for its harrowing stunts, which were preformed by Lloyd.

The United Kingdom began numbering its highways.

France reduced the compulsory military service period from two years, to 18 months.

Friday, March 30, 1942. The Laconia comes home, Mussolini ponders Italian emigration.

The SS Laconia completed its circumnavigation of the globe, becoming the ship to complete an around the world pleasure cruise.

It had departed in November 1930 and, before returning to New York, would be at sea for 130 days and call on 22 ports.

She'd be sunk on September 12, 1942, by a U-boat.

Mussolini addressed emigration from Italy in a famous speech, which stated:

The Sig. Director has compromised me, because he has announced my speech. Now almost all Italians know that I do not like speeches, but I accept with joy and resign myself this morning to this exception. He was also moved because he recalled with a warm voice of passion the history of the school—a superb history which all of Milan knows and admires. Also in this area, which could be defined as related to the problem of emigration—without prejudice to the question of whether migration is good or bad—is the "Carlo Tenca" School, and it has done very well, since when discussing the thesis you can argue endlessly regarding a conclusion.

For better or for worse, emigration is a physiological necessity of the Italian people. We are forty million squeezed into our narrow but adorable peninsula, with its too many mountains, and its soil which cannot feed everyone. There are around Italy countries that have a population smaller than ours and a territory double the size of ours. Hence it is obvious that the problem of Italian expansion in the world is a problem of life or death for the Italian race. I say expansion: expansion in every sense: moral, political, economic, demographic. I declare that the Government intends to protect Italian emigration: it cannot be indifferent to those who cross the mountains and travel beyond the Ocean, it cannot be indifferent because they are men, workers, and above all Italians. And wherever there is an Italian there is the tricolour, there is the Fatherland, there is the Government's defense of these Italians.

I feel all the excitement of life that stirs this new powerful generation of the Italian race. You certainly have meditated a few times on what you might call a miracle in the history of mankind; it is not rhetoric, it is said that the Italian people are the immortal people who always find a spring for their hopes, for their passion, for their greatness. Some two thousand years ago Rome was the center of an empire that had no boundaries except in the extreme limits of the desert; the civilization that Rome had given, its great legal tradition, as solid as the monuments, to the world—Rome had built a huge miracle that still moves us even to our most intimate fibers.

Then the empire decayed and crumbled. But it is not true that all the centuries which followed the collapse of the Roman world were centuries of darkness and barbarism. However, after a few centuries the Italian spirit suffered from an eclipse, but during that period of rest it was powerfully reinforced by new achievements, and so here the Italian spirit blossomed again through the creation of the immortal Dante Alighieri.

We were great in 1300 when other people were ill or were not yet born to history. Here followed the superb centuries, the Renaissance; Italy was once again the bearer of civilization to all races, all peoples. Then followed another political eclipse of division and discord, but it was barely a century and the Italian people recover, regaining consciousness of their historical unity. Rome returned, still playing its fanfare of glory for all Italians, it recovered the use of weapons that are necessary when it comes to saving its freedom, its greatness and its future. Then followed small wars, one state, conspiracies, the revolution of a people, martyrs, tortures, jails, exile. And just a century after the last war we made our political unity. However, alongside this political unity and geographical unity, the Italian people lacked the moral consciousness of themselves and their own destinies, even though after a victorious war this formation of conscience was in place. Under our eyes Italy will gradually become indestructible in its unity.

My Government will abolish bell towers so that Italians may see the august image of the Fatherland. This is the work to which my Government intends all its passion and a sense of religious faith. I am confident, gentlemen, of the destinies of Italy! I am optimistic for a simple act of will, because the will is a great force in people's lives and the lives of peoples.

We must will, strongly will! We must want, strongly want! Only with this power of the will we can overcome any obstacle. We must be ready for all sacrifices.

Recollect, then, in a moment of meditation after this rapid advance into the past. We love our willingness to project proudly of our time into the future. This young Italian people—fierce, fearless, restless, but strong. I am most certain that Italy will march towards a future of freedom, prosperity and greatness. Recollect in this vision, we tend all our nerves and all our passion towards this future that awaits us and we cry with a religious fervor.

Viva l'Italia!

It's hard to know what to make of this speech, but the vague references to past empire offer a clue of future fascist actions.

Blog Mirror: 1948 Driving Safety Hints

 

1948 Driving Safety Hints

Saturday, March 17, 1923. St. Patrick's Day

Threats of the IRA notwithstanding, Irish boxer Mike McTigue fought and defeated world champion Light Heavyweight Louis Mbarick, the Battling Siki.

A bomb was in fact detonated, wounding two children, but the fight carried on anyhow.

McTigue was Irish by birth but had immigrated to the United States at age 21.  After a long boxing career he retired to successfully run a saloon, although in later years he declined into ill health and poverty.  He died at age 73 in 1966, a fairly old age for somebody with this early career.

Dobrolet, the predecessor to the world's most dangerous airline Aeroflot, was formed by the Soviet merger of private airlines.

U.S. Attorney General Harry M. Daugherty announced that Warren G. Harding was going to run for reelection, unless ill health precluded it.  An announcement through the Attroney General would be regarded as odd now, and was regarded as odd then.

Harding in fact was plagued with health problems, not to mention personal problems, that would take his life later that year.

The local paper ran a tribute to the Irish, something that probably didn't hurt circulation given the large Irish community that then existed.

Blog Mirror: Using Bird Dogs for Kicksledding

 

Using Bird Dogs for Kicksledding