 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? Larry Lusser from the CBS television news staff and Kenneth Crawford, National Affairs Editor for Newsweek magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable Peter Freely-Heisen, Jr., U.S. Representative from New Jersey. Congressman Freely-Heisen, you represent the Fifth District in New Jersey now. New Jersey went to the Republicans in 1952, and then it swung to the Democrats last year. Now, do you think this is a continuing trend? Mr. Lusser, I certainly do not. It sounds like a leading question. As a Republican, I feel very sure that it is not. I assume you're talking about whether or not we may have trouble in the congressional loans of 1954. I do not think so. I think those elections are going to be decided primarily on national issues instead of state issues, which we're at issue in the gubernatorial campaign. Well, as I understand it, your Morristown district represents a pretty good mixture of urban population and farm population. Now, what about the farm vote in New Jersey in relation to the falling prices? You take that? Well, of course, maybe I should explain a little bit more about the Fifth District in the first place that is, has been and is, and I'm sure will continue to be, strongly Republican. It's a very good district. It has a lot of variety. There are a good many farmers. There are a great many commuters, residences, and there is a growing industrialization of the area. So it's a good cross-section of America. I'm very glad to represent as articulate and intelligent constituency as I have. I don't think that my district or the state as such will be overly concerned about the farm problem. None of us are happy if farm prices fall and the, my constituents are certainly no exception. But I think, generally speaking, so far as I can find public opinion in the district, the residents of New Jersey are interested in a flexible price support program if we can work that out. Mr. Freeling-Heisen, could you tell whether the falling farm prices had much to do with the outcome of that gubernatorial election? You think it was primarily local issues, but wasn't that also affected? Well, there are so many things that could have had an effect on that campaign, but I don't think it was a major factor. I should certainly say it was a relatively minor one. Well, the president has in his program cut defense spending. He's encouraged an increase in unemployment insurance, and he's encouraged no rent housing. But what allows us that there should be a recession of long duration, Congressman Freeling-Heisen? Well, in the first place, Mr. LaSere, I don't think the president's program, as it's outlined so far, we still haven't heard all the specific recommendations that he's scheduled to make, depends on, it does depend rather, on a fairly stable economy. And I don't think there is any major allowance for a real recession. There has been a lot of talk in certain quarters that we're likely to have a recession and that perhaps we should prepare for it. But I think by and large, the administration is acknowledging there is a readjustment as a result of the buildup of the Korean War and settling back after the cessation of hostilities. Mr. Freeling-Heisen, do you feel that the cut of five billion dollars in defense spending, and it is primarily in defense spending, is dangerous to the economy? Number one, and number two, do you feel that it cuts defense too much? Those are big questions to Mr. Crawford. No, I do not. To begin with a direct answer to your question, there has been a shift of emphasis in the way we're going to spend the defense dollar. It still takes a larger part of the total dollar spent by the national government, some 68% is being spent for defense or military purposes of one kind or another. I think that the shift is all the good. It concentrates to a greater degree than we've had up to now on air power and on the new weapons of warfare. I've had the opportunity within the last 48 hours of hearing Secretary of Defense Wilson and the Secretary of Treasury Humphrey discuss the overall tax situation and the defense situation. I am sure as a result of those talks and what I've read in the President's message that we are definitely in no way jeopardizing our national security. That still is primary. Well, Congressman Freelingheisen will acknowledge that this may be a good time to take a calculated risk on defense, but the Secretary of State's latest speech on foreign policy lays emphasis on air defense rather than on local ground defense, and he implies that the next false move will mean that we will use atomic weapons on the Communists. Now, do you think that's rather gambling on a third world war and an atomic war? I don't think it's gambling on a war. I think it's a very forthright effort to prevent the outbreak of any such war. What we are saying, I think in effect to the world, to any potential aggressor, is that we are ready and prepared to go ahead and use whatever weapons at whatever place we seem most advisable. In other words, there will be immediate retaliation, as he pointed out, if there should be aggression. Mr. Freelingheisen, what does that mean in connection with a place like Indochina? What if the Chinese came into Indochina and made it much more of a fight than it is now? How would this policy apply then? Well, it's difficult to know. It does mean that we don't necessarily commit ourselves to ground troops in Indochina as we did in Korea. Until a specific situation breaks out, it's hard to know how it would be. I do think it should be emphasized that we are not relying alone, as I understand Secretary Dulles' position, on air power as such. We are still emphasizing the strong, mobile forces, naval, air and army, and of course the Marines. Well, Congressman Freelingheisen, now that we're on the subject of communism, right or wrong, a lot of people in this country think that the recent congressional investigations of communism have been rather disturbing. And I understand that you have introduced a new bill regarding those investigations. Would you care to tell us anything about that? Yes, I'd be glad to, Mr. LaServee. At the beginning of this session of Congress, I introduced a bill which would provide for a joint single congressional committee on internal security. It came to me that it would be a good solution of some of the problems which we've had in recent months, publicity-wise, in this field. It also is an attempt on my part to help take communism in government out as an issue in the 1954 campaigns. You'll remember that the President said he hoped that the executive branch would have disclosed the facts about what the menace is in such a thorough way that he hoped it would no longer be a major issue. And it's my feeling that if the legislative branch, which has a definitely subsidiary role of investigating what the threat of communists is, and if we do it in a more objective and effective way, it can be minimized as a political issue in the 1954 campaign. Do I understand, Congressman, that your bill would create a joint congressional committee that would end the rivalry between the House Committee, the Un-American Affairs Committee, and the Senate Internal Security Committee? Is that the idea? What would it accomplish? It not only would end the rivalry, it would eliminate those committees entirely, and they would be replaced by a single joint committee like the Atomic Energy Committee, which has worked well, composed of an equal number of House members and Senators. And the purpose would be to avoid the competition for witnesses and the competition for publicity, which has taken place under the existing setup. There has been, in other words, a lack of definition of the jurisdiction of the respective committees, and it seems to me this is one field where we do not need two committees. They're not legislative and character. They're really primarily an attempt to reassure the public. It's very interesting. There is a threat, but that it's under control that they know what it is. In that connection, Mr. Freeling-Heisen, what do you think has been the net effect of the Monmouth Laboratories investigation in your state? Do you think it has been overall good or overall bad? Well, Mr. Crawford, that too is not an easy question to answer. The investigation at Monmouth is not finished, as I understand it. It is a continuing affair. As I understand it also, the Army is going to make disclosures about just what the problem has been and whether there is a present problem. I have a feeling that it has had a very definite harmful effect on morale at Monmouth. On the other hand, if there is evidence of current security problems, I think we certainly should get at the root of it. Congressman, I understand that you conducted a questionnaire among your representatives, your constituents of this very representative district. Now, could you say from this questionnaire what you think the voters are actually going to be interested in in November? Well, I think they're primarily interested in the major issues which we're going to face at this session of Congress. In other words, they're interested in whether or not we are reasonably secure from aggression. They're interested in whether or not we're going to be able to reduce taxes and how much. They're interested in whether or not we are going to have a reasonable labor law. They're interested in the broad problem of the position of this country in the world and what kind of foreign trade we should have. I think very definitely that the issue in November is going to be the extent to which we Republicans have been able to present a program as outlined by the President in a series of messages to the public. Well, thank you very much, Congressman Fieldingheisen, and a great pleasure to have you here tonight. The opinions that you've heard our speakers express tonight have been entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the Lone Gene Chronoscope was Larry LaSere and Kenneth Crawford. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Peter Fieldingheisen, Jr., U.S. Representative from New Jersey. Now, the growing interest in moisture-resistant watches concerns us very greatly here at Lone Gene because of the long experience that we've had with watches of this type. Now, the first moisture-proof resistant watch was made by Lone Gene in 1909, and here is one of the very first and early models. Now, for the Bird Expedition to the South Pole in 1933, Lone Gene finished all the timing equipment, and here is one of the Lone Gene watches that was used by the crew. It's hermetically sealed. The winding stem is concealed here. It's inside the outer case, and it resisted moisture and freezing cold, resisted ice and water, and it gave remarkable service. Now, present-day Lone Gene moisture-proof watches give no indication at all of their special construction, their thin and their trim, and there is at home in the living room as they are out of doors. The keynote of Lone Gene Manufacture has always been service, service to all who wish the finest possible timekeeping. It's for inventiveness and willing to pioneer, as well as for superlative quality of manufacture, that Lone Gene watchmakers have won so many world honors. Ten World Fairground Prizes, twenty-eight gold medals, honors for accuracy in all fields of precise timing, and yet you may buy and own or proudly give a Lone Gene watch for as little as seventy-one-fifty. Lone Gene, the world's most honored watch, the world's most honored gift, premier product of the Lone Gene Witner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. This is Frank Knight reminding you that Lone Gene and Witner watches are sold and service from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jurors who proudly display this emblem, Agency for Lone Gene Witner Watches.