 It's time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, a presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope? Edward P. Morgan and Winston Burdett, both of the CBS television news staff. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable Warren Lee Pearson, chairman of the United States Council International Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Pearson, it hardly goes, it actually goes without saying, that in addition to your present post, you are also chairman of the Board of Transworld Airlines and an ex-president of the Export-Inport Bank, which makes you ipso facto, whether you like it or not, an expert on finance and world trade. Now these two things are matters that trouble and puzzle people, I think, and most of us are wondering if our government's grants to foreign countries may not be unnecessarily subsidizing, trade abroad, spending too much money. As a matter of fact, Mr. Humphrey, the secretary of the Treasury just has made a speech. In which one, from which one infers, that the government policy on money abroad except for military expenditures is going to be very carefully looked at. What are your comments on that general subject, Mr. Pearson? Well, Mr. Morgan, I think what Secretary Humphrey had in mind was that the so-called giveaway program or at least the rather abundant foreign aid, which we've been giving to the world the last five years, is coming to an end. I think he was pointing out what's pretty common knowledge now, I think, to all of our citizens. Well, both the Europeans and ourselves are agreed now that it's trade and not aid that is the problem. Well, yes, I don't like those cliches, but I think what they really mean is they'd like to do business and and so far as possible, forget about this foreign economic aid. Well, Mr. Pearson, I think it would be helpful if you would spin out for us in a few words. What your own philosophy is about world trade? Should it be a high level, a low level? Should we be isolationist and tend to our own knitting or just what? Well, I feel this way, ever since the end of World War II, I think our business people, our exporters, have been living in a fool's paradise. They have had they've had trade at a high level. They can only continue that trade at a high level if we're prepared, if we, the people of the United States are prepared to keep on our foreign aid programs. Otherwise, we must do one of two things. We must let the let our imports drop and that means that our exports will drop or we have to keep up what we've been doing before and let the taxpayer carry the burden. My, my hope would be that we'll find some means of maintaining high export trade and the only way we can do that without costing the taxpayer a lot of money is to take some foreign goods. It's my thesis that what we want to do is to get rid of our what I would call our historic protectionist policy and make it a national policy to liberalize trade, to accept more goods. Well, Mr. Pearson, Chancellor Adnauer of Germany has been one of the most ardent and consistent European champions of free trade and lower tariff policy and Adnauer has just been triumphantly re-elected. What effect do you think his re-election will have on the trade picture in Europe? Well, I think it's going to have a very beneficial effect. I think that that Adnauer's election marks a great turning point in European history. For the last year or so, there's been a very apathetic attitude in Europe, if I may put it that way. The question of defense is are European friends have been dragging their feet on that? After Stalin's death and Melanchov started his so-called peace offensive that that apathy was accentuated. I regard Chancellor Adnauer's election as a great change. I think that it may be recognized in the future as the beginning of what I would call the economic unification of Europe. Well, Mr. Pearson, in this struggle that we're involved in with the East, is it correct to say that for the purposes of our particular discussion now about trade, that we have two objectives. First, our own economic solvency in this country, without which we won't be able to do anything. Second, the economic solvency of Europe, which many people say can only be achieved by European unity. And is it true, are those two things true, and does it also follow that Mr. Adnauer's election is going to hasten European unity, in your opinion? Well, I think it's going to hasten it. One very interesting side-light of this whole matter is that about three days after Chancellor Adnauer's election, we find our French friends, Premier Laniel and George B. Doe, the foreign minister, meeting with their cabinet, and it's common knowledge that what they're discussing is the European defense community and the possible unification of Europe. I think it's a good sign. Well, Mr. Pearson, just exactly how does European unity fit into the trade picture, and how is it going to promote freer trade in Europe and a healthier Europe? Well, you just have to remember that you have all these small, highly industrial countries contiguous to each other. They're cursed by boundaries and customs between all these boundaries. It's very difficult for one to do business with the other. The industries of one country are dependent largely upon the customers of that country. Whereas with real, the real economic integration of Europe, they would have at their disposal a market of around 200 million people, which really is more than we have in the United States. It would give them a chance to have mass production, something they don't have now. Mr. Pearson, it's often most valuable for us to learn and know what other people are saying about us, whether it's beneficial or whether it isn't. Mr. Stevenson, Mr. Adelaide Stevenson, who has just come back from a world tour, made a remark in a nationwide speech that he feared we might be returning to economic nationalism. There has been a lot of criticism in Europe that we were returning to protectionist policies, and I know that you and your capacity with the International Chamber of Commerce have recently returned from a meeting in Vienna. What was the atmosphere in Vienna? Were we criticized? And what were the criticisms? Well, the attitude of our European friends towards the United States is that in their opinion we lack a definitive policy. They say that we blow hot and cold on what we're going to do. They were very much disturbed about some hearings we had in Congress, which had to do with the renewal of the reciprocal trade agreements program. They took all the things that were said in the press by the opponents to the continuation of the reciprocal trade agreements program as though it were the actual feelings of the American people. I think they were unnecessarily disturbed, although you know and I know that the Congress of the United States is at the moment far from being unanimous towards liberalizing our trade policies. As a matter of fact, I think Congress is leans to the side of protectionism at the moment. Well, sir, the Europeans are asking continually for assurances of a new and liberalized foreign economic policy by us. Where do we stand at the moment? What is being done about it? Well, you know that the President has taken a quite a firm stand towards liberalization of the United States trade. He has in very recent weeks signed the bill which set up the commission on foreign economic policy, which is being headed by Mr. Clarence Randall of Chicago. The purpose of that commission is to give a thorough, full-dress study to this question of American trade policy. The terms of reference given by Congress are exceedingly broad. If the commission can answer half the questions that Congress has asked in the act, it'll be doing very well. Well, right along that line, Mr. Pearson, Mr. Lewis Douglas, our former ambassador to Great Britain, has recently given a report at the President's request specifically in relation to our trade with Great Britain, and he's emphasized that unless we liberalize our trade policies, we're going to be in for trouble. And as I understand it, that report has been turned over to Mr. Randall's committee for further study. What are your views very briefly on that, sir? Well, I think that Mr. Douglas has in his report to President Eisenhower found what a lot of us who've given some thought to the matter have also found, and that is that it would be to our best interest, and that the best interest of the European countries, if we could as a national policy, mind you, open our markets. It would be, I think, not a selfish policy at all. I think we would benefit by it. Well, now, as a last question, Mr. Pearson, and tying into these other things that we've been talking about, you have just said that in your estimation Congress had a protectionist lean. But you've also said that world trade is very important to us. What do you think are the prospects of that policy being followed by the next Congress? Well, I think it's going to have a lot to do with what Mr. Randall's committee can accomplish. And I'd like to put in just one last word on that general subject, and that is we must remember that it was a disunity of Europe that brought the Russians into the scene and put them in position to disturb Europe. We must remember, too, that if ourselves in Europe can together work out our trade policies, we will be doing the best thing we can to protect ourselves from that particular menace. Thank you very much, Mr. Pearson. The opinions you've heard our speakers express tonight have been entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the launch in Chronoscope was Edward P. Morgan and Winston Burnett. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Warren Lee Pearson, Chairman of the United States Council International Chamber of Commerce. If you're contemplating the purchase of a very fine watch, it would be profitable to compare the facts about long gene watches with the fact you have about any other timepiece. And you'll find that the facts about long gene are convincing proof of surpassing quality. Factual evidence that in a long gene watch, you have one of the world's very finest timepieces. Now, in competition with the world's best watches, long gene watches alone have won for elegance and excellence, 10 World's Fair Grand Prizes and 28 gold medals. For accuracy, highest honors from the leading government observatories. For dependability, a position of leadership in sports, in aviation and in science. Yet, though long gene is one of the very finest watches made anywhere in all the world, a long gene watch is not excessively expensive. For you may buy and own or proudly give a long gene watch for as little as $71.50. And this is important. Whatever the price may be, every long gene watch is manufactured to the high standards of quality which have made long gene the world's most honored watch, the world's most honored gift. Premier product of the Long Gene Witner Watch Company. Since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday and Friday evening at this same time for the Long Gene Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour. Broadcast on behalf of Long Gene, the world's most honored watch and Witner Distinguished Companion to the World Honored Long Gene. This is Frank Knight reminding you that Long Gene and Witner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Long Gene Witner Watches. Starts this Saturday the Mirror Theater on the CBS Television Network.