Friday, September 22, 1950

General MacArthur . ,. . a shipload of office furniture followed

Korean landlords
want lands back

In the House of Comnions, during the “emergency” session just
eoncluded, Angus MacInnis, CCF MP for Vancouver East, pressed
the St. Laurent government to answer “some of the questions people
are asking” about Korea. Among these questions, which MacInnis
Goubtless found embarrasing in view of the CCF leadership’s whole-
hearted support of U.S. intervention, was what “economic and social
improvement” the government contemplated recommending to the
UN “as the fighting forces move north.”

This week, MacInnis got an indicative answer to his question.
It was the kind of answer which stripped his question to its contra-
diction and exposed his plea for “economic and social improvement”
as an attempt to put a better face on a war of imperialist intervention.

Using the massed naval and_aerial might of the world’s imperialist

powers to smash Korean port defenses, U.S. forces stormed ashore —

at Inchon and drove for Seoul.

While the military operations occupied the headlines, the para-
graphs tagged on to General MacArthur's vainglorious communiques
indirectly supplied the answer to Macinnis’ question.

Among those freed by U.S. troops was the former mayor of Inchon
under the Syngman Rhee regime, “once fat, but mow thinner by 70
_ pounds,” who was immediately reinstalled to head a roundup of all

supporters of the Korean People’s Democratic government.

Also clamoring for reinstatement were an undisclosed number
of South Korean landowners who wanted their land back from the
povetry-stricken peasants to whom it had been distributed under the
Korean People’s government’s land reform decrees. The reports
did mot state whether their demands had been granted, but there did
not seem to be much doubt that eventually they would get their
holdings back wherever they were retaken by U.S. forces, as would
the Wall Street owned New Korea Company.

MacInnis received an answer to another of his questions, “What
are our intentions in Korea?” from a different source, no less than
the U.S. war department's “Armed Forces Talks.”

“Although America regards the aspirations of freedom-loving Ko-
reans and others of the same kind in all parts of the world with the
utmost sympathy,” stated the latest in the “Armed Forces Talks,” “the

decision to answer gunfire with gunfire and subject American service-
_ men to the trial of battle was dictated, in the final emalysis, by prac-
tical considerations of national security.”

These “practical consideration of nationa] security” were explained
with such simplicity that any school student with a knowledge of
history could disprove them, let alone a “Socialist” MP.

Korea, stated the U.S. Army booklet, traditionally has been “a ~

dagger pointed at the heart of Japzm’—as though Korea in the past
had invaded and occupied Japan instead of Japan having seized
Korea. Now that Japan is occupied by the U.S. and regarded as the
‘United States’ western “defense” line, Korea becomes a dagger pointed
at the heart of the U.S. Oblivious to the fact that the U.S. is separated
from Asia by the wide reaches of the Pacific Ocean and that China
and the USSR have a common border with Korea, this line of argu-
ment could be extended to include all Asia, in fact, the entire world.
General Douglas MacArthur who recently extended this all-em-
bracing “love us or we'll kick your teeth in” policy to include For-
mosa, was among those who went ashdére at Inchon—with a shipload
of office furniture—heedles of the fact that he got his feet wet.

Peace Assembly hits
police intimidation

Vancouver Peace Assembly sent a Jetter to Police Chief Walter Mulligan this week,
demanding return of petitions seized by a’police officer from two women canvassers a few

days ago.

A second letter went to city hall, asking for an appointment for a peace delegation
to meet with the appropriate civic committee in order to protest ‘police attempts to intimi-

date and interfere with petition-
ers on the streets.

The peace assembly announ-
ced this week that the cam-
paign for signatures to the
Stockhelm peace petition will
continue until November 6.
Count of names ‘secured in
B.C. is not yet completed but
it is estimated that more than.
20,000 signatures have been
collected.

On Wednesday night this week
95 peace canvassers hit the
streets in the Mount Pleasant
area and reported “‘excellent
results” in a “blitz” canvass.

One housewife, Mrs. May Len-
iczek, collected’ 22 names in less
than two blocks. Two members
of the National Federation of
Labor Youth got 14 signatures,
and found that most iof the people
visited were anxious to discuss
the campaign. “I signed yester-
day at the factory where I work,”
one citizen told them.

Another canvasser told this
story: “A man came to the door,
listened to what I had to say,
read the petition, and signed.
Then he said: “I put my name
down because‘I have a particu-
lar reason for doing so. Last
Monday my 18-year-old son came
home and told me he had joined
the RCAF. I don’t want an atom-
ic war.”

Mrs. Anne Boylan, a _ house-
wife, reported that she had run
into a German couple who had
recently come from that country.
“Are they signing. this appeal in
Eastern Germany?” they, asked.
When told that 17 million people
in Eastern Germany had already
signed, the couple said, “Then
we'll sign. We don’t want war,
either.”

One peace petitioner sadlod’
at a home were an elderly
French-Canadian couple lived.
Neither could speak English
very well, but when the wife
saw the words, ‘Ban the bomb’
she reached for .a pencil to
sign.

to remove

I said; ‘No’.
NG's.
took nie upstairs.”

This shocking testimony was
given in police court by Ethel

‘Purvis, a married Negro woman,

before Magistrate Matheson Mon-
day this week.

The case was a minor One, in-
volving slight knife wounds in-
flicted on Alfred Warburton dur-
ing a street brawl last August 17.
After hearing the evidence, the
magistrate dismissed the accused,
Ethel Purvis, who was defended
by John Stanton,

The question remains: Will any-
thing be done. about the state-
ments made by Mrs. Purvis, quot-
ed above? Who was the policeman
or detective who called her a
“nigger”? Why did he dare to
tell her to take off her clothes?
Would he have treated a white
woman in this manner? And will
he be sought out, interrogated,
and dismissed from the force if
his superiors find that the charges
are true?

Some other questions remain

unanswered. Why did the daily
papers, which cover police court
cases regularly, say nothing about
the scandalous facts revealed in
this testimony?

Evidence produced in court es-
tablished the fact that Alfred
Warburton and a companion
named Fambleton, both in army

Cop orders woman

shocking evidence

“At the police station they started questioning
policeman said something about
don’t know what the word is you shouldn't use it’
takes me into a little room and said, “Take your clothes off’.
He said, “You have to be searched’.
Then the matron came in; she searched me and they

clothes;

me. A
‘nigger. I.said, “If you
He

1 Saids

uniform, were going up Main
Street about 2.30 a.m. on August ”
17, having been drinking, when
they met Mrs, Purvis walking in
the opposite direction.

Warburton’s story of how a
fight started differed from that
of the accused. He claimed he
“could not remember” what re-
marks were passed. But here is
Mrs. Purvis’ story, as brought out
by defense lawyer John Stanton.

“Just before I got to the corner
these two soldiers came. One of
them asked me if I would go with
him. I said, ‘No.’ Then he
(Warburton) called me a ‘nigger’.”

Stanton: “What did you say
then?” :
Mrs. Purvis: “I said, ‘If you

don’t know what the word means
don’t use it,’ and then he called me
a. whore, and I slapped his face

. then he started pulling on

me, by the lapels up here. . . and
he tore my pocket off.”
Some of Mrs. Purvis’ friends

standing nearby walked over, and

a fracas started. Warburton came

out of the scrap with two slight

penknife wounds in arm and

back. Police arrived, Mrs. Purvis

was arrested and taken to the .
station, when the shameful inci-

dent described in her testimony

allegedly took place.

TIM BUCK

‘Canada's
stake in
Korea’

Sunday, Sept. 24

. 8 p.m.

EXHIBITION GARDENS

COLLECTION AT DOOR

_—

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—SEPTEMBER 22, 1950—PAGE