DOCSLIB.ORG

PEACE THROUGH GROWTH: POLITICAL RESPONSE to CLASS CONFLICT in INTERWAR AMERICA, 1919-1923 a Thesis Submitted to Kent State Unive

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
PEACE THROUGH GROWTH: POLITICAL RESPONSE to CLASS CONFLICT in INTERWAR AMERICA, 1919-1923 a Thesis Submitted to Kent State Unive PEACE THROUGH GROWTH: POLITICAL RESPONSE TO CLASS CONFLICT IN INTERWAR AMERICA, 1919-1923 A thesis submitted To Kent State University in partial Fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts By Alex John Fleet August, 2018 Copyright All rights reserved Except for previously published materials Thesis written by Alex Fleet B. A., Kent State University, 2014 M. A., Kent State University, 2018 Approved by Kenneth J. Bindas_______________________, Advisor Brian M. Hayashi________________________, Chair, Department of History James L. Blank__________________________, Dean, College of Arts and Sciences TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................... iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................... 14 CHAPTER TWO .......................................................................................................................... 37 CHAPTER THREE ...................................................................................................................... 65 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 89 BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 93 iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Dr. Clarence Wunderlin for all his advice and support in the development of my research, as well as his work in acclimating me with the work of previous historians and political theorists. I also owe a great debt to Dr. Kenneth J. Bindas for all his help in overseeing the completion of my thesis and his work in helping me to further develop my thesis. I would also like to thank Drs. David C. Hammack and Elaine Frantz for their input and advice on improving the analysis and organization presented in my thesis. I would also like to thank my mother, Cindy Fleet, and my father, Randy Fleet, for their support and encouragement in the times I found myself most frustrated and confused with my research. iv INTRODUCTION By the end of the 1910s, labor unrest threatened to tear apart the United States. Workers’ dissatisfaction towards capital and the state increased dramatically due to the country’s preparation for World War I, and by 1919 American workers went on an explosive series of strikes across the nation. Workers were upset due to a myriad of factors, but most notably, they were frustrated with the re-privatization of many industries that the government had taken control of for the war effort, such as the railroad industry. In addition, the closing of the National War Labor Board signified, in many ways, that the state planned to surrender its wartime role as negotiator for workers’ rights. With living standards stagnating, and the perception that labor relations would degrade to their dismal prewar state, workers across the nation rose up in revolt. In September, approximately half of all steelworkers across the country went on strike in protest against working conditions, unstable employment, lack of representation in the workplace, and many other issues. The striking workers, organized by the American Federation of Labor, would endure until January of the next year. Steel workers across Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New York abandoned the steel mills, numbering over 300,000 at their peak. At the same time, miners across the country began striking and engaging in violence against both the state and against private guards. The striking workers would engage in some of the bloodiest struggles between workers and armed forces in American history. At the same time, 1 roughly 400,000 coal miners went on strike, demanding better hour-wage packages. Workers were not simply resisting the established order, they were actively fighting against it.1 America’s leading bureaucrats and business owners feared the angry reactions of the working class. Many feared that the revolution that had occurred in Russia in 1917 might happen in the US. Both the government and private citizens attacked the striking workers, and the turmoil of this year would lead to the destructive Red Scare of 1919. At the same time, American bureaucrats and employers both recognized that change was needed, and that a violent order could not hold society together. They would need to create a new industrial order that American workers would accept. During this period, state actors restructured the ways that the government interacted both with labor disputes and with economic behavior to create a much larger regulatory apparatus than had existed prior. They declared that the postwar economy’s chaos was the direct result of profiteering and inefficiency in the private economy, and used those conditions to legitimize intervention.2 This climate of economic uncertainty and labor militancy provided the perfect climate for state actors to construct a new federal program for regulating the nation’s railroads. While both President Wilson and Congress agreed to return railroads to their pre-war owners, they developed a new system of oversight that enabled the federal government to control virtually all of the major activities that these private companies could undergo. In essence, federal control of the nation’s railroads did not end in the 1920s but continued on, albeit in a less direct manner. 1 Philip S. Foner, History of the Labor Movement in the United States, vol. 8 Postwar Struggles, 1918-1920 (New York: International Publishers, 1988), 141-169. 2 Ibid., 20-24. 2 Regulations to the nation’s railroad carriers were nothing new. The first set of regulations were established by Congress in 1887 with the passing of the Interstate Commerce Act, which established the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) The act required railroad companies to set reasonable rates for both passenger and freight travel, and the ICC would hear any disputes over rates. The federal government’s power over the railroad industry expanded further in 1906 as Congress passed the Hepburn Act. The Hepburn Act expanded the ICC’s power over rate setting. Now, Commission would set reasonable rates itself, rather than wait for disputes to reach it. The ICC’s regulatory power over railroads expanded in 1913 with the passing of the Valuation Act. This Act required the ICC to valuate all property and holdings of railroad carriers. The value of this capital would then be used in determining what would constitute reasonable passenger and freight rates.3 With the arrival of World War I, the federal government nationalized the nation’s railway systems with the Railway Control Act. Although the act stipulated that companies whose property had been seized would receive payments from the federal government to accommodate for nationalization and a guarantee for the return of rail systems to private hands following the closure of the war, the federal government had complete control over the activities of the nation’s railway systems.4 3 U.S. Congress, House, An Act to Regulate Commerce, 49th Congress, 2nd sess.; U.S. Congress, House, An Act to amend an Act entitled “An Act to regulate commerce” approved February fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty- seven, and all Acts amendatory thereof, and to enlarge the powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission, 59th Congress, 1st sess., H.R. 12987; U.S. Congress, House, An Act to create a commerce court, and to amend the Act entitled “An Act to regulate commerce,” approved February fourth, eighteen hundred and eighty-seven, as heretofore amended, and for other purposes, 61st Congress, 2nd sess., H. R. 17536; U.S. Congress, House, The Valuation Act of 1913, 62nd Congress, 3rd sess., H.R. 22593. 4U.S. Congress, Senate, An Act to provide for the operation of transportation systems while under Federal control, for the just compensation of their owners, and for other purposes, 65th Congress, 2nd sess., S. 3752. 3 The Transportation Act of 1920 gave far more power to the ICC than these previous laws and focused on giving the Commission power over more activities than simply rate-setting. Railroad carriers were now required to seek ICC approval for any expansion of existing lines; the abandonment of currently-operated branches; the purchase of other railroad companies; or even the issuance of bonds, loans, or securities;. The Transportation Act also set maximum rates of profit that railroad carriers were allowed to accrue. This law asserted that, while the state would fulfill its promise to restore private ownership of the railroad industry, it would still control almost all of the sector’s behavior.5 Historians have examined American industrial relations post- World War I through the lenses of both business and labor history, as well as by examining the history of federal institutions that changed following the war. Some have examined the changes in the relationship between workers and capitalists to the crash, as is the case in Lizabeth Cohen’s Making A New Deal: Industrial Workers in Chicago, 1919-1939 (1999). In this work, she highlights the efforts of businesses to restore workers’ confidence in capitalism through various benefits
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The US Experiment with Government Ownership of the Telephone
    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 4-1-2013 The Wires Go to War: The U.S. Experiment with Government Ownership of the Telephone System During World War I Michael A. Janson Federal Communications Commission Christopher S. Yoo University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Communications Law Commons, Economic History Commons, Legal History Commons, Other Business Commons, Policy History, Theory, and Methods Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons, and the United States History Commons Repository Citation Janson, Michael A. and Yoo, Christopher S., "The Wires Go to War: The U.S. Experiment with Government Ownership of the Telephone System During World War I" (2013). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 467. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/467 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Articles The Wires Go to War: The U.S. Experiment with Government Ownership of the Telephone System During World War I Michael A. Janson* & Christopher S. Yoo** One of the most distinctive characteristics of the U.S. telephone system is that it has always been privately owned, in stark contrast to the pattern of government ownership followed by virtually every other nation. What is not widely known is how close the United States came to falling in line with the rest of the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Narrow Gauge Politics: Railway Labor, Parties, Race, and the State
    Narrow Gauge Politics: Railway Labor, Parties, Race, and the State Daniel Schlozman Assistant Professor Department of Political Science Johns Hopkins University 3400 N. Charles Street Baltimore, MD 21218 (410) 516-5882 [email protected] 1 Workers in the American railroad and air transport industries still belong to unions.1 Fully 65.2 percent of workers in the railroad industry held union membership in 2014; in air transport, the figure was 40.5 percent. Union density is higher among railroad workers than among postal workers or than among public workers in every state but two. A distinct legal regime – a “state within a state”2 – developed to protect white railroaders, and withstood the assaults that have devastated American labor. While workers in the rest of the private sector organize under the National Labor Relations Act, the Railway Labor Act governs labor relations on the railroads and the airlines. Its consensual subgovernment among railroads, white unions, and the state has proven remarkably stable. But that labor-relations regime achieved stability precisely by avoiding large-scale ideological conflict. Rather, at the roots of stability lie political quiescence and racial intransigence in the critical New Deal and Fair Deal era. This paper situates the case of railway labor, comparing rail unions both across time and with other American labor regimes. At the end of the nineteenth century, the state repressed worker militancy (including from railroad workers) in the North and, by the extreme means of Jim Crow, in the
    [Show full text]
  • The Career of James /. T)Avis
    The Career of James /. T)avis HE depression of the 1890*3 weakened the faith of many Americans in the ability of the nation's economic system to Tfulfill its promises of prosperity and abundance, but James J. Davis emerged from the harrowing decade with a renewed commit- ment to capitalism and individualism. It was not that the young iron puddler did not experience deprivation and hardship, for the coming of the depression threw him out of work and forced him to ride the rails from Pennsylvania and Ohio to Alabama and Louisiana. He met hungry and desperate men and with them cadged meals from trackside families. He witnessed the grinding poverty of rural blacks and saw at first hand how employers used the business down- turn to slash wages. Yet, while other Americans interpreted similar experiences as a call for reform or as a summons to revolution, Davis saw them as a warning against extremism and self-pity. To him, the lesson of adversity was clear: the American way still offered bright promise, provided that the individual cultivate qualities of comradeship and charity. During a long career as fraternal order leader and businessman, Davis' emphasis on homey virtues and personal good fellowship stood him in good stead. The perspective first gained during the adversity of the nineties and validated in his private career remained with him through his twenty-four years as United States Secretary of Labor and Senator from Pennsylvania. It earned for him the reputation of a cheerful conciliator which pro- vided much of his political appeal.
    [Show full text]
  • LAW and the RAILROAD LABOR PROBLEM W.L.'Rz B
    LAW AND THE RAILROAD LABOR PROBLEM W.L.'rz B. KENNEDY A popular example of the breakdown of generalizations in the common law is Maine's famous dictum "from status to contract." This prophecy has been fair game for the legal writers in England and America." Juristic signs amply justify the criticism. Individualism has been fighting a losing battle; the principle of laissez faire has suffered from many invasions by courts and legislatures. To conserve the freedom of individual action it has been necessary to limit it. This paradox is not so startling as it seems when we attempt to infuse into the legal order the realities of equality and liberty, and to counterbalance the free play of economic forces. While we may commend the limita- tion of Maine's generalization in the industrial and social relations of our time, it is, however, the part of wisdom to avoid the danger of substituting another concept which may be equally vulnerable. This warning against the tendency of legal philosophers to generalize may be emphasized in connection with the banishment of Maine's attempt to plot out the future course of the common law. Out of the death of Maine's formula "from status to contract" there is beginning to appear a new generalization "from contract to status." In their zeal to overthrow the theory that the evolution of law is from status to contract, juristic writers are tending to construct another principle of legal evolution and to claim for it a certain perma- nency and validity in the solution of the legal problems of today and tomorrow.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbert Hoover, Partisan Conflict, and the Symbolic Appeal Of
    P1: Vendor International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society [ijps] ph152-ijps-452810 October 1, 2002 19:7 Style file version Nov. 19th, 1999 International Journal of Politics, Culture and Society, Vol. 16, No. 2, Winter 2002 (C 2002) Legacies Versus Politics: Herbert Hoover, Partisan Conflict, and the Symbolic Appeal of Associationalism in the 1920s Andrew J. Polsky,‡ and Olesya Tkacheva† The concept of a policy legacy has come into widespread use among schol- ars in history and the social sciences, yet the concept has not been subject to close scrutiny. We suggest that policy legacies tend to underexplain outcomes and minimize conventional politics and historical contingencies. These ten- dencies are evident in the revisionist literature on American politics in the aftermath of the First World War. That work stresses continuities between wartime mobilization and postwar policy, especially under the auspices of Herbert Hoover and the Commerce Department. We maintain that a rupture marks the transition between the war and the Republican era that followed and that the emphasis on wartime legacies distorts the political realities of the Harding–Coolidge era. We conclude by noting the risks of policy legacy approaches in historical analysis. KEY WORDS: policy legacy; Herbert Hoover; Republican party; partisanship; associa- tionalism. INTRODUCTION: LEGACIES THICK AND THIN Policy history scholars refer often to the idea of a policy legacy to help explain the durability or recurrence of policy patterns. The term “legacy” connotes something that has been handed down from one generation to another, an inheritance. Later generations of policy makers will look to the past as they try to grasp problems or seek lessons about success and failure; Hunter College and the Graduate School, CUNY.
    [Show full text]
  • The Railway Labor Act Howard W
    Boston College Law Review Volume 14 Article 2 Issue 5 Special Issue The Revenue Act of 1971 11-1-1970 The Railway Labor Act Howard W. Risher Jr Herbert R. Northrup Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr Part of the Labor and Employment Law Commons Recommended Citation Howard W. Risher Jr & Herbert R. Northrup, The Railway Labor Act, 14 B.C.L. Rev. 51 (1970), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/ bclr/vol14/iss5/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE RAILWAY LABOR ACT HOWARD W. RISHER, JR.* FOREWORD by HERBERT R. NORTHRUP When the editors of the Boston' College Industrial and Commer- cial Law Review asked me to contribute an article on a subject of long interest, the Railway Labor Act, I suggested that it be co-authored by my associate, Howard W. Risher, Jr. Mr. Risher has recently writ- ten a study, The Negro in the Railroad Industry,' and has been awarded a grant by the Manpower Administration, United States Department of Labor, to do his doctoral dissertation on the man- power implications of the railroad labor law. Upon receiving the con- sent of the editors, Mr. Risher proceeded to write a draft which I found so compellingly sound that I instructed him to send it to the editors on his own.
    [Show full text]
  • RTHERHOOD of Tite O Extension Division
    /RTHERHOOD OF ILR I BRQ!EROOD OP LOCOMOTIVE Pi _tite o .elatons, Extension Division - University alifornia 55 Laguna Street San Frantisco, California May 6 and 7, 1959 7tABOR LA",,Th TH- RAfIRM0 INDiSTRY FRO1. LECT JRBS BY J. J. CORCORN;'GEERAL C NAIRMAN BROTIWTHOOD OF RAILROAD TRAIflEN SOUTHERN PACIFIC COMPANY (PACIFIC LIIbWS) TI-T4, RATWAY LABOR ACTa The Railway Labor Act plays an important role in daily railroad labor- management relations. The b!tter the individual, and particularly tlhe represen- tative, understands it, the better he will be equiipped to intelliger.tly cope waith the rnany complex problems in labor-management relations that arise in our daily w,ork on the railroad. The present Act is the culmination of over sixty years of experience with Federal Legislation in the railroad industry. Before going more thoroughly into the Railway Labor Act we should deal brieRly with so.ae of the various railrway labor acts which preceded thle present law. Prior to Federal Legislation in the railroad labor field, the employees, members of the operating brotherhoods, were able to dispose of some of their grievances through union representatives meeting with management on the railroads where managerment voluntarily or otherwise entered into contracts wvith these or- ganizations. The great majority of railroad employees, outside of tihe operating groups, were unorganized prior to 1920 and, of course, grievances were handled on an individual basis, usually on management's terms. Notwithstanding these handicaps, many grievances wo3re settled in line with the standards of labor- management relations as they prevailed on the particular individual railroad. In some instances a form of voluntary arbitration or conciliation was resorted to, embodiying the principles as established by the Arbitration Act of 1888.
    [Show full text]
  • Was Born in Buffalo, NY, and Moved to Boston in 1868, Where He Worked
    1 Abrahams, Henry (1855-1923), was born in Buffalo, N.Y., and moved to Boston in 1868, where he worked for a dry-goods merchant. At eighteen he became a cigarmaker, and in 1879 he served as secretary of Cigar Makers' International Union of America 70 of Cambridgeport, Mass. He later served as secretary of Cigar Makers' local 97 of Boston (1885, 1892-1923). In 1878 he helped found the Boston Workingmen's Central Union (later renamed the Boston Central Trades and Labor Union), and he served as its secretary from 1901 until his death. He served as a delegate from District Assembly 30 to the KOL General Assembly in 1886 and was president of the Massachusetts State Branch of the AFL from 1889 to 1890. Adams, Emmet L. (1870?-1933), a member of International Association of Machinists 174 of Washington, D.C., served as a salaried AFL organizer from 1921 through at least 1924. Addams, Jane (1860-1935), the founder of Hull-House in Chicago in 1889, was an advocate of a wide variety of social and labor reforms. She was a founder of the National Child Labor Committee (1904) and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (1909), president of the National Conference of Charities and Correction (1909), vice-president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association (1911-14), and president of the National Federation of Settlements (1911-35). Devoted to the cause of peace, she helped organize and was elected chair of the Woman's Peace party in January 1915 and in April of that year was made president of the International Congress of Women at The Hague.
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Federal Power in Settlement of Railway Labor Disputes
    U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR JAMES J. DAVIS, Secretary BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS ETHELBERT STEWART, Commissioner BULLETIN OF THE UNITED STATES ) BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS f .................. No. 303 CONCILIATION AND ARBITRATION SERIES USE OF FEDERAL POWER IN SETTLEMENT OF RAILWAY LABOR DISPUTES CLYDE OLIN FISHER, A. M., Ph. D. Associate Professor of Economics, Wesleyan University MARCH, 1922 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1922 Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis CONTENTS. Page. Introduction________________________________________________________ 5; 6 Chapter I.—Early period: Law of 1888_______________________________ 7-14 Attitude of labor and railway interests----------------------------------------- 7,8 Preliminary congressional consideration and views on proposals----- 8-12 The law of 1888________________________________________________ 13,14 Provisions-----------------.--------------------------------------------------------- 13 Significance________________________________________________ 13,14 Chapter II.—The Pullman strike of 1894---------------------- 15-19 The strike, and action by Federal oflicials-----------------------------------------15-17 Attitude of the people---------------------------------------------------------- 76 Views of Members of Congress______________________ ________ 16,17 Decision of Federal Supreme Court---------------------------------------------17,18 In re Debs__________________________________________________17,18
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record-Senate May 8 2103
    8958 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE MAY 8 2103. Also, resolutions of Great Falls Post, No. 3, American When pain an(] sickness made me cry, Legion, urging passage of the Johnson, Green, and Fitzgerald Who gazed upon my heavy eye veterans' bills during the present session of Congress; to the And wept for fear t.bat I should die! Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation. My mother.· 2104. By Mr. O'CONNELL of New York: Petition of Julien Who ran to help me when I !ell N. Friant, of Cape Girardeau, Mo., favoring the pas age of the And would some pretty story tell, Haugen agriculture relief bill; to the Committee on Agricul­ Or kiss the part to make it well? ture. My mother. 2105. Also, petition of the American Association of China, favoring the passage of House bills 6753 and 6771, refer­ Who taught my infant lips to pray, ring to the construction of a new United States Government To love God's Holy Word and day, building in Shanghai, China ; , to the Committee on Foreign And walk in wisdom's pleasant way? Affairs. :My mother. 2106. By ·Mrs. ROGERS: Resolution by Andover Cl\·Iass.) And can I ever cease to be Association of Ministers and Congregational Churches, favor­ Affectionate and kind to thee, ing strict enforcement of the eighteenth amendment; to the Who wast so very kind to me-- Committee on the Judiciary. 1\Iy mother. Oh, no; the thought I can not bear; SENATE .And if God please roy life to spare I hope I shall reward thy care-- SATURDAY, May 8,1926 My mother.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arbitration of Labor Disputes E
    December, 1934 THE ARBITRATION OF LABOR DISPUTES E. L. OLIVERt Reappearance of open industrial warfare on a large scale, in 1933 and 1934,1 has forced upon the attention of industrial and political leaders the problem of finding some method for securing amicable adjustment of labor disputes. Dramatic local strikes, culminating in the San Francisco general strike, have been followed by threats of nation-wide strikes in various indus- tries. The textile walk-out, covering perhaps the largest area of any strike in our industrial history (with the exception of national railway strikes), is an indication of what may easily happen in the steel, automobile, and other of our great industries. It is true that we have had periods of violent labor conflict before, but there has never been a time when the symptoms and vigorous expression of industrial unrest have been so general and so serious. What happened in Toledo and Minneapolis may be happening tomorrow in any one of our cities. It would be a serious mistake, however, to gauge the nature or extent of the labor conflict, or to base any public policy with reference to labor disputes, solely upon strikes or lockouts. In fact, the strike bears about the same relationship to the labor problem as war does to international trade. Almost every contact between employer and employee has in it some element of controversy. Questions of wages, hours, and working conditions are being settled daily in every union and non-union establishment in the country. Individual or collective employment contracts are being made or changed continually; workers are being hired, furloughed, or dismissed.
    [Show full text]
  • LAW and the RAILROAD LABOR PROBLEM W.L.'Rz B
    LAW AND THE RAILROAD LABOR PROBLEM W.L.'rz B. KENNEDY A popular example of the breakdown of generalizations in the common law is Maine's famous dictum "from status to contract." This prophecy has been fair game for the legal writers in England and America." Juristic signs amply justify the criticism. Individualism has been fighting a losing battle; the principle of laissez faire has suffered from many invasions by courts and legislatures. To conserve the freedom of individual action it has been necessary to limit it. This paradox is not so startling as it seems when we attempt to infuse into the legal order the realities of equality and liberty, and to counterbalance the free play of economic forces. While we may commend the limita- tion of Maine's generalization in the industrial and social relations of our time, it is, however, the part of wisdom to avoid the danger of substituting another concept which may be equally vulnerable. This warning against the tendency of legal philosophers to generalize may be emphasized in connection with the banishment of Maine's attempt to plot out the future course of the common law. Out of the death of Maine's formula "from status to contract" there is beginning to appear a new generalization "from contract to status." In their zeal to overthrow the theory that the evolution of law is from status to contract, juristic writers are tending to construct another principle of legal evolution and to claim for it a certain perma- nency and validity in the solution of the legal problems of today and tomorrow.
    [Show full text]