 Presenting as a public service the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a weekly television journal of the vital events of the hour, a presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. Good evening, this is Frank Knight. Before introducing our discussion I'd like to introduce Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch. In all the capitals of the free world, Lawn Jean watches are known and respected for their elegance, excellence, and superior timekeeping. The greater accuracy of Lawn Jean watches has been a matter of public record for many, many years. Thus, about 75 years ago, a Lawn Jean chronometer, such as this one, was the first fact-free made watch of its type to win first prize in an observatory accuracy contest. And for more than 50 years, Lawn Jean chronographs, Lawn Jean timing watches, and Lawn Jean wristwatches of many types have won highest honors in great numbers. Now, in last year's Geneva Observatory trials, as an example, Lawn Jean wristwatches won a total of 24 first prizes. That's a remarkable achievement. It's a matter of historical record that year after year, for the past 85 years, Lawn Jean watches have achieved extraordinary honors. And that is why, throughout the world, no other name on a watch means so much as Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch. The Lawn Jean chronoscope each week looks for the truth in the vital issues of the hour. And here to discuss these issues are our co-editors, Mr. Henry Haslett, a political economist of respected judgment and contributing editor of Newsweek Magazine, and Mr. William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury. Our guest for this evening is a distinguished British statesman and member of the King's Privy Council, Lord Wellmont. In this spontaneous and unrehearsed discussion, the opinions are necessarily those of the speakers. The subject tonight, quite logically, Anglo-American relations. Lord Wellmont, I believe that you are not now a member of the British government, are you? No, I'm not. I resigned from Mr. Atley's cabinet at the end of 1947. Are you a member of Commons? I'm now a member of the House of Lords, but for 17 years I was a member of the House of Commons. You mean that you are a lord and also a socialist? Yes, I think that is right. Is there any unconcruity in the statement? Not at all. The Labour Party is the largest party in England, and the House of Lords is our Senate. And naturally, the Labour Party has members in the Senate as well as in the House of Commons. And here tonight you are expressing your private opinions, I suppose. Entirely, entirely. I'd like to ask you, Lord Wellmont, this question. What's your personal opinion of this Malick offer? Do you think it's a sincere offer? Do you think anything's likely to have come of it? Well, I hope it is. But I think we've got to be cautious and make sure that it's genuine. I hope it is. What do you think the attitude of the British people is going to be about it? I think it will be very largely the same as I've expressed it. Lord Wellmont, I believe you'll agree that there's been a good deal of criticism in the United States of what we think is a soft British policy toward the Red China. Do you regard this offer of Malick as a vindication of your soft policy? We've no soft policy, not at all. We are with you, as Mr. Atley said, in fighting aggression, and we are going to see it through. But we do hope that we shall carry the Korean War to victory at an early date, and victory will be when we've turned the aggressor out of South Korea. Well, has there been any embarrassment as a result of the fact that the British recognized the Chinese communists and the Chinese communists haven't recognized them back? Well, I think there's been some misunderstanding about it, but we recognize China long before the Korean aggression. We recognize it as a matter of fact, not as a communist China. Yes, not as a matter of approval. We believe that the present government have got control of most of China on the mainland, and that being a fact, we recognize it as a fact. And that's all it means. Are you in favor now of admitting Red China to the United Nations? Certainly not, while this aggression goes on. Certainly not. Are you in favor of the Red Chinese signing the Japanese peace treaty? No, I don't think so. I think so long as they are carrying out a policy of aggression which has been denounced by the United Nations, they can have no part in the peaceful settlements of the world. More women, I think a lot of Americans are interested very much in your domestic situation, and one of the things they're very much interested in is this. At the present time, I believe, an Englishman has only about nine pence of worth of meat per week, which I understand is just about two good mouthfuls, something about not much more, not much more. And how did you get into that position where you only have that much meat? What were the steps leading up to that? Well, meat costs dollars, and dollars are very scarce. Well, haven't they simply been made scarce by the British government? No, sir, they were made scarce by Hitler. We spent our overseas dollars investment buying munitions of war before America came into the war. When you say our dollars, though, you're speaking of the British government's holdings of... No, no, the private citizen's holdings. Well, the private citizen isn't allowed to have any holdings. I mean, he has to turn them over to the government, doesn't he? That's right. And so, therefore, that's why he can't buy meat with his own holdings because the government takes the dollars over. Isn't that the situation? Yes, that's right. And that's done because we had to mobilize the dollar resources of all British citizens in the first years of the war when we had to pay cash in America and South America for what was necessary to carry on the war against Hitler. Well, do you think it's still necessary for the government to confiscate, so to speak, the foreign exchange holdings of its citizens and not allow those citizens to use those foreign exchange holdings to buy with it what they want to buy with it? Well, very few citizens have got dollar resources. Oh, well, they would have, and they were allowed to keep them, wouldn't they? No, I don't think they would. I think the best thing we can do in the present situation is to pursue a policy of reasonable fair shares. And there's so little to go round that we have to spread it round fairly evenly. What is the reasonable fair share of meat for Britain today, sir? Well, I'm sorry to say that it comes out to about eight penny worth a week, but it's very small share. Is that about the size of your hand or something about that? But, um, we couldn't really tolerate a situation which a few people had as much as they liked and the rest of people went without. Yes, but you've got a situation whether you're all going without. Yes, now we want to find out how that situation came about, and some of us over here think that British socialism brought about the situation. Oh, no, no. It created the situation. Well, now let's take the situation with vis-a-vis the Argentine, for example. Here you have the British government, which is the sole buyer of beef for the outside, the individual can't buy. And you have in the Argentine, Mr. Perone, who is the sole seller of beef. So you have a sole governmental buyer and a sole governmental seller, and you can't get together on the price. And the result is the British get no meat. Isn't that part of this picture? Well, they have got together on the price, though it's much too higher price. But, uh, when you've only got one seller, it's very foolish to have competing buyers. And, uh, if you've only got one seller, you're better off if there's only one buyer. I wish there were many sellers and many buyers, but that's not the case. But then you have two national socialisms, and the one national socialism in the Argentine won't sell beef to another national socialism in England. So that there, when I do socialisms, don't be nervous. Well, I don't like the national socialism at all. It suggests something to me about which we pour very hard. It isn't international socialism before they don't get together. Very interesting, but there's one other question I'd like to ask, uh, Lord Wilma, and that's about Iran. Uh, a great many Americans have been struck by the incongruity of your government, where which has pushed nationalization in Britain, opposing the nationalization of all in Iran, sir. Yes, I, I expect it does look like that. But in fact, there's nothing illogical about it. We don't, uh, dispute the right of the Iranian government to nationalize the oil field. What we do say is that they should honor their commercial agreements. Now, such nationalization has been carried out in Britain. Every contract was honored and every piece of private property was paid for at market value. And we asked the Iranians to do the same. Well, the statement was made by General Hurley, I believe you last week, that, uh, one of the things that, that contract calls for is about a 20 percent profit per year, and that the profit perhaps may have been a little high, the reason you have so much trouble in Iran today, or that we have. I'm afraid the general's got it wrong. The 20 percent is what the Iranians get out of it, and they get 20 percent. In top of the royalties, they get 20 percent of the total profits of the company, although those profits arise very largely from trading all over the world. And, uh, this agreement with the Anglo-Iranian oil company has meant immense benefits for the people of Iran, and it's a tragedy, really, that this thing should have been torn up in the way that it has. What do you think is likely to be the outcome, Lord Wilma, if the Iranians persist in their present policy? Well, I'm afraid the oil will go to waste and the, the economy of the country will be ruined. Well, don't you think there's a real danger of Russia stepping in there into that picture? Well, I think there's a danger, and we're doing our very best, and I'm still not without hope of success, of coming to a reasonable agreement which we've offered to do for a long time past. Lord Wilma, here in America we've been led to believe that there's considerable disillusionment with the socialistic practices in England. Have you personally shared any of that disillusionment? No, I don't think so. I think they are very much exaggerated. The government, after all, have been in power now since 1945. There's a certain amount of swing against it, as there always is, are against the government when it's been in power for some time, but it's possible, you know, to exaggerate this socialist story. After all, you've got a lot of socialism in America, you know. I've seen the Tennessee Valley Authority, which exercises vast powers over an area bigger than England, and I think it's doing a lot of good. I, whenever I go out in the streets of New York, I run into properties and assets belonging to the Port and Docks Authority here. Now, that authority in England is still privately owned. 80% of all our enterprises in England are still privately owned, but our main utilities like gas, electricity, and water are publicly owned, and we call that socialism. Well, I'm sorry, Lord Wilma, but our time is up. Thank you very much for being with us. Well, I'm very glad you've been here, and I, uh, I'm very glad to have this discussion. Thank you very much indeed, gentlemen. The editorial board for this edition of the Laun Jean Chronoscope was Mr. Henry Haslett and Mr. William Bradford Cuey. Our guest was the distinguished British statesman, Lord Wilma. Next week, the Laun Jean Chronoscope will welcome as its special guest the Chinese ambassador, Ding Fuif Chong. And now, I'd like to give you some important facts that you may find useful in the choice of the next watch you buy. In this factory, Laun Jean watches are made in their entirety from plate to stem under one single exacting supervision to one high standard of excellence for distribution throughout the world. Now, just what is this Laun Jean standard of excellence? The Laun Jean standard is the highest, the very highest in watchmaking. At World Spheres and International Expositions, Laun Jean watches have won 10 grand prizes and 28 gold medal awards. And this observatory accuracy certificate is but one of literally thousands of prizes, bulletins, and citations with which Laun Jean watches have been honored by the world's great government observatories. It is a fact that throughout the world, no other name on a watch means so much as Laun Jean, the world's most honored watch. Premier product of the Laun Jean Witner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. Next week at this same time over the CBS television network, the Laun Jean Witner Watch Company will again present the Laun Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the vital issues of the hour. This is Frank Knight speaking for Laun Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Witner distinguished companion for the honored Laun Jean, both made and guaranteed by the Laun Jean Witner Watch Company, since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. This is CBS, the Columbia Broadcasting System.