WASHINGTON (Jan. 26)
Action against the operations of Nazi groups in the United States and recommenlations for official protests against be persecution of Jews and certain Christians in Germany, will come from the lower branch of Congress and not from the Senate, it was indicated here today.
That the Senate will not act on resolutions of protest to Germany, made itself evident Wednesday, ob#ers said, when Senator Millard E. Tydings introduced a resolution which would have the Senate Express its profound feelings of surprise and pain as representatives of the people of the United States, upon learning of the discriminations and oppressions imposed by the Reich upon its minority groups, including its Jewish citizens”. The resolutsion also would have the Senate. “expess its earnest hope that the German Reich will speedily alter its policy, restore to its minority groups the civil and political rights of which they have been recently deprived, and un#lo so far as may be, the wrongs hat have been done.”
Less than three weeks ago, Senator Tydings had introduced a resolution which if passed by the Senate vould require President Roosevelt to make an official protest on behalf of the United States to Germany against that country’s discrimination against minority groups, especially Jews.
PASSAGE WAS EXPECTED
At the time this resolution was introduced, prospects for its passage were favorable. No other resolutions of protest to Germany had been presented. The Tydings resolution was a center of interest.
But the introduction of the second resolution by Seantor Tydings, this one calling upon the Senate to express its feeling on the Jews’ plight in Germany is giving many Senators something to think about. These men believe that, the Senate should adopt a “hands off” policy on this particular probelm. Several of these Senators for personal reasons, are against the last Tydings resolution. They are expected to pigeonhole it.
As long as the protest to Germany was to have been made by the President, the Senators had very little objectons. But, with a resolution asking that they make the protest, there is reported to be considerable ofjection, both for personal and political reasons.
This state of affairs, members of Congress have stated privately, divides the Senate distinctly into two groups. One group, a large one, is in favor of the President making the protest. The other group, a small one, is in favor of the Senate making the protest.
The result is a complicated situation weakening prospects for passage of any one of the two resolutions introduced by the Senator from Maryland.
In the House a different situation prevails. A large number of members are in favor of the Dickstein resolution calling for an investigation of Nazi progaganda activities in the United States.
The Committee on Immigration and Naturalization, of which Representative Samuel Dickstein of New York, author of the resolution is chairaman, is on record farvoring that a Nazi investigation. With unanimous support of the committee, the resolution is expected to pass the Senate.
Representative Dickstein said that as soon as Congress has completed work on legislation for which the President is pressing, he would take steps to get action on the anti-Nazi resolution.
But all is not easly sailing on Capitoll Hill, There are a few members in the lower branch of Congress who are definitely against anything Jewish. The most outspoken one is Representative Louis T. McFadden of Pennsylvania. Fortunately his words are not taken very seriously by his follow House members.
Addressing the House on the mo#etary bill which was passed last Saturday by a vote of 360 to 40, Represetative McFadded launched an lack on the measure, assailed the Administration for its new monetary policy, and charged that this policy was instigated by the money Jews of Wall Street and foreign parts.”
Actually, McFadden’s attack was lirected against Henry Morgenthau Jr., secretary of the Treasury. The representative from Pennsylvania implied in his talk that Secretary Morgenthau would literally walk off with the treasury.
McFadden’s performance on the floor of the House last Wednesday indicates he still believes that the “Protocols of Zion” as published in the Dearborn Independent are true. In his remark Wednesday McFadden said, after reading the statement made by him in the House last May: “Do you not see in this ‘kitty’ bill the identical features outlined in the Protocols of Zion ? Do you not see the Protocols of Zion manifested in the appointment of Henry Morgenthau as Secretary of the Treasury ? It is not by accident, is it, that a representative and a relative of the money Jews of Wall Street and foreign parts have been so elevated ?”