10858 The name of a certain Mordecai Nathan ap- pears in connection with an assessment of 1694. Samuel Mendis 1s mentioned in the records of 1696. Jews also were among the first to take advantage of “the act for making aliens free in this part of the Province and for granting Mberty of conscience to all Protestants” (1696-97), as is indicated by the naturalization papers of Jacob Mendis, Abraham Avila (1697), and of Simon Val- entine who was designated as “an alien of Ye Jewish Nation” Referonce is made to David Riz and Moses Modina in 1700, and Jews are on record as having voted in the municipal election of 1703. In the eighteenth century the number of Jowish settlers in Charleston (or, a8 it was then known, Charles Town), increased stead- lly. Must of them hailed 110m London, but some came from France, Holland, Jamaica, and Barbados. In 1741, there were several arrivals from Savannah, Ga, and thereafter otherscame from New York and Rhode Island, Germany and even Poland, where the author of the Sefer Haberith (Vilna, 1798), referred to Charleston as Charlesville. These early Jewish settlers were mostly small traders, but some of them engaged in banking, agriculture, and industry on a large scale Indigo culture, which in provincial days was the most lucrative industry of South Carolina, excepting the rice trade, flourished largely through the efforts of Moses Lindo, who arrived from London in 1756. In 1762, Lindo was appointed Sur- veyor and Inspector General of Indigo, a post created especially for him. Mordecai Sheftall, Philip Hart and the Joseph family did an extensive banking and exchange bus- iness with England and other countries. Also prominent in the colonial period was Joseph Levy, who was commissioned lieutenant in the Cherokee War of 1761. In 1770, a number of Charleston Jews, in- eluding Lindo and Benjamin Hart, subscribed a substantial sum toward the maintenance of Brown University, a new institution in far-off Providence, R. I Impressed by this gencrosity, the college trustees voted that “children of Jews may be admitted to this institution, and entirely enjoy the freedom of their own religion, without any restraint or imposition whatever ” During the period of the American Revo- lution the Jews, like the rest of the popu- lation, were divided in sympathy between the Patriot and Tory camps But a remarkably largo number served the Revolutionary cause Indeed, after Charleston fell to the British, many Jewish familics preferred to flee to Philadclphia, where 10 Charleston Jews were among the founders of Congrega- tion Mikveh Israel in 1782 Of the 60 Charleston citizens who constituted the mi- ltia company of Capt Richard Lushington, about 20 were Jews, and one of them, Jo- seph Scvlomon, was killed in the battle of Beuufort. At least 384 Jews served in the Revolution Armies. Of these, David N. Car- aozo, who distinguished himself in tho at- tempt to recapture Savannah, and Markes Lazarus were sergeants major, Jacob de la Motta and Abraham Seixas were captains. Maj. Benjamin Nonos, of Philadelphia, dis- tinguished himself in the siege of Charles- ton. Mordecal Sheftall was deputy com- missioner general of issues to the Continental Army assigned to the southern department. Mordecai Manual Noah (1747-1845; not to be confused with his more famous name- sake), contributed £20,000 to the cause of the Revolution, while Myer Moses, who sup- plied the Continental Army with provisions and aided the wounded and imprisoned American patriots, earned “the good wishes and gratitude of all,” according to Gen. Thomas Sumter. In 1791, the community, now incorporated and numbering over 400 persons, decided to erect a larger synagogue, and within a short period i:aised the amount of $20,000 for the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE purpose. This “new synagogue” which La- fayette tater described as “spacious and ele- gant” was dedicated on Friday, December 19, 1794, with imposing ceremonies attended by the governor, the civil and military officers of the State, the municipal authorities, the clergy, and the public in general. It was re- garded as the handsomest synagogue in America until its destruction in the great fire on Saturday, April 27, 1838. Charleston Jews began their formal com- munal life on the day after Rosh Hashanah, 5510 (1749) when they organized Kahal Kadosh Beth Elohim (originally culled Beth Elohim Nnveh Shailom), the fourth oldest congregation in what is now the United States. Moses Cohen was elected Haham or chief rabbi of the congregation, Isaac da Costa became Hazan or reader, Josoph Tobias, parnes or president, and Michael Lazarus, secretary. The officials of the congrcgation were probably uinsalaried; they are known to have empaged in trade. The congregation was strictly orthodox, and its ritual was that of the Portuguese communities, as practiced in London and Amsterdam. A_ parochial school was also established, where the chil- dren were taught not only Hebrew and the rudiments of Judaism but secular subjects as well. In 1764, the congregation purchased the cemetery on Coming Street, adjoining the family burial ground of Isaac da Costa, Ir 1784 the Hebrew Benevolent Society was established, an organization for the care of Jewish poor, which is still active today The Hebrew Orphan Society, founded in 1801, was the first to adopt the method of placing orphans in private homes. In 1790 the congregation wrote an address of congratulations to General Washington on his elevation to the Presidency, and also joined in the felicitations sent him by the congregations of New York, Philadelphia, Newport, and Richmond to which Washing- ton graciously responded At first the congregation worshiped on Union Street (1750-67), on Kong Street (1757 64), and on Beresford Street (1764-80). In 1780, Joseph Tobias granted it a 7 years’ lease to his new house on Hassel Street for the consideration of a “Miseberach on every Yom Kippur night” during his lifetime On this site, or very near it, Kahal Kadosh Beth Elohim has been holding services for more than a century and a half The period between the Revolution and the Civil War may he called the golden age in the history of the Jews of Charleston. The community giew rapidly until, by 1816, it consisted of more than 600 souls At that time it is said to have been the largest, most culturod, and wealthiest Jewish settlement in the United States. Many of its members amassed considerable wealth and became prominent in various walks of life. Capt. Abraham M Seixas was a magistrate and warden of the workhouse (1797). Myer Moses was elected a member of the legislature in 1810, and commissioner of free schools in 1811. Lyon Levy was State treasurer in 1808 ond from 1817 to 1822, Jacob de la Motta, who in 1836 was elected &@ member of the Royal Academy of Medicine at Paris, was sec= retary of the Medical Society and the Liter- ary and Philosophical Society of South Caro- lina. Apotherary Hall in Charleston, of which he was proprietor, is said to be the oldest drug store in the country. Abraham de Leon was noted as a physician, Isaac Har. by, Mordecai Manuel Noah (1786-1851), and Jacob N Cardozo as essayist, dramatist, and journalist, respectively; while Penina Moise stood out as a poet and hymnal writer of marked ability, Solomon N. Carvalho was an artist and inventor. David Lopez, an archi- tect and builder, is credited with the inven- tion of the forerunner of the modern torpedo boat, the Little David, which attacked the United States Ironsides during the Civil War. Philip Phillips, the congressman and lawyer, achieved prominence first in Charleston, JULY 24 4 Among the leading merchants of Charles- ton prior to the Civil War were the Tobiases, the Harts, the Mordecats, Abraham Ottoleghi, and Jacob Barrett, Mordecai Cohen, 4 Polish emigrant, became, next to Robert Adger, the wealthiest citizen of South Carolina. He was also the most philanthropic, and his memory is perpetuated on a tablet erected by the city in the Charleston Orphan Home. Maj Josh- ua Lazarus, president of the Cheraw Bank, introduced the use of illuminating gas into Charleston, and Michael Lazarus, one time vice president of the Palmetto Society, opened up steam navigation on the Savannah River with a line between Charleston and Augusta, Ga. Later, Solomon S Solomons further helped the expansion and prosperity of the city by constiucting the Northeastern Railroad, of which he was president until it consolidated with the Atlantic Coast Line. Aaron Lazarus (born Charleston, 1777), was one of the first Jewish settlers in Wilming- ton, N.C. Jews were prominent also in the social life of their native or adopted city. It was chiefly due to them that Charleston became the “see city” of the Masonic fraternity. Isaac da Costa, a member of King Solomon’s Lodge No 1 since 1753, founded the Supreme Grand Lodge of Perfection in 1783, while Abraham Alexander, Emanuel de la Motta, Israel de Liebon, and Moses C_ Levy promoted the organization of the Supreme Council of the Scottish Rite of Freemasonry. There was little, if any, social discrimination against the Jews. They held memberships and were elected to office in such exclusive societies as the Palmetto, the Ubiquarians, and the St Andrews They entertained lavishly, and contributed gen- erously to Christian and nonsectarian insti- tutions They were followers of the chase, and some distinguished themselves as expert huntsmen and skillful duelists When the Marquis de Lafayette visited Charleston in 1825, the golc and silver plate used at the banquet tendered in his honor by the city, was borrowed from Mordecai Cohen, and Dr Abraham de Leon was the recipient of the grand master's jewel (a Masonic decoration) fs a personal gift of Lafayette “for the hap- piest hours of my life which you have af- forded me” Many Jews of Charleston took an active part in the War of 1812, in which Abraham A Massias served as majo: and Myer Moses as captain Solomen Heydenfelt, who served in the war againstt the Seminole Indians in 1836, later beenme chief justice of the su- preme court of California. In the Mexican War, Jacob Valentine, the youngest member of the Palmetto regiment, wag severely wounded at Churubusco. Charleston Jews made a specially brilllant record in the War Between the States. The first and largest contribution (810,000) to South Carolina's war chest was made by Benjamin Mordecai, who also fed at his own expense thousands of the widows and orphans of his fallen fellow patriots So many Charleston Jews enlisted in the service of the Confederacy that from 1862 to 1866 K. K, Beth Elohim found it impossible to obtain ® quorum of trustees, and could hold no regular meetings. Some families sent to the front every male member capable of bearing arms, while lads of 12 and 18 ran away and volunteered to act as messengers or drum- mer boys. From the Jewry of Charleston came such soldiers as Valentine, this time as captain; the hero, Marx E. Cohen, Jr.; Sgt. Maj Mailer Triest. Of the 182 who went to the front, 25 were killed It was during the prewar period that the Charleston synagogue became the cradle of the Reform movement in American Judaism, In 1824, 47 members who were dissatisfied with the traditional mode of worship, the lengthy Sephardic service, and the exclu- sive use of Hebrew which few of the con- gregants understocd, presented a petition
1950 to the board of trustees requesting changes in the liturgy and the introduction of English, Receiving no response, they seceded Trom the congregation and organized (1824) the Reformed Society of Israelites. The leading spirit in this movement was the litterateur Isaac Harby until he left Charles- ton in 1828; David Nunez Carvalho acted as its first reader. The schism caused much bitterness in the hitherto peaceful commu- nity till a reconciliation was effected in 1833, With the appointment of Gustavus Poz- nanski to the rabbinate in 1836, the Reform- ers found a new champion of their cause. During the construction of a synagogue to replace the building that had burned to the ground in 1838, the Reformers presented a@ petition to the trustees (1840) signed by 38 members urging that an organ be in- cluded in the synagogue to assist in the vocal part of the service. Poznanski sup- ported this move. The request, however, was rejected by the board, but the board wes overruled by a general meeting of the members. This brought about a split in the congregation. Poznanski eventually re- signed his post, though he had been elected in 1838 for life. When K. K. Beth Elohim proceeded with plans for the organ, forty conservative members withdrew, formed the Congregation Shearith Israel, and erected & synagogue of their own on Wentworth Street (1847). Jacob Rosenfeld, who offi- elated at the dedication, was the congrega- tion’s first Hazan, and served for a number of years. But in 1851, Shearith Israel adver- tised in the Occident for a Portuguese He- brew Reader and Scholar at an annual salary of $800. Ellis Lyons (1852-53), Solomon Ja- cobs (1853-58), and Henry 8. Jacobs (1858- 61) all served as rabbi. The congregation was disbanded in 1866, owing to the exigencies of the Civil War, however, and the membership rejoined the fully Reformed parent congregation. Forty thousand dollars was raised for the new synagogue for K. K. Beth Elohim on the Hasell Street site. The architect and builder was David Lopez. The cornerstone was laid on January 3, 1840, the building completed in February 1841, and dedicated in March 1843. It is a model of Greclan Dorie architecture. Over its doors is a marble table bearing the inscription of the Shema in Hebrew with the translation: -“Hear O Israel, the Lord our God 1s the sole Eternal Being.” It was also in the last days of the old synagogue (1838) that a religious school was organized exclusively for the instruction of the youth in the tenets of Judaism. The leaders of this project were Aunt Sally Lopez and the poetess, Penina Moise, who com- municated with Rebecca Gratz a few months after the latter established the first Jewish Bunday school in Philadelphia. They re- ceived valuable suggestions from Miss Gratz and the weekly lessons which she prepared for her own pupils. During the Civil War, the scrolls of the Torah, the records of the congregation, and other valuables were shipped to Columbia for safekeoping, but were destroyed when the city was burned at the time Sherman’s army captured it (1866). K. K. Beth Elohim continued in the van- guard of the reform wing of Judaism. In 1879 it introduced the prayer book compiled by its then rabbi, David Levi, and later tt adopted the Union Prayer Book. Its doors were kept open to nonmembers, even on the high holy days, and it was among the first congregations to admit women to full mem- bership and elect them to its board of trus- tees. In 1879 the women’s gallery was re- moved and the reading desk (Bimah) was placed in front of the Ark. In 1924 the tab- ernacle was renovated and enlarged through a bequest by Miss Anna Luryea. A score of rabbis have served K. K. Beth Bohim. These include: Moses Cohen (1750- 62), Lsaac da Costa (1760-64, approx.), CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Abraham Alexander (1764-84, approx ), Abra- ham Asuby (1785-1805), Jacob Suares (1807- 11), E_N. Carvatho (1811-14), Hartwig Co- hen (1718-28), S. C. Peixotto (1823-35), Gus- tavus Poznangki (1636-50), Julius Eckman (1850-51), Maurice Mdayer (1852-59), Abra- ham Harris (1860-66), M. H. Myers (1866-68) , J. H. M. Chumacetro (1868-74), Falk Vidaver (1875), David Levy (1875-93), Rabbi Le~-is (1893), Barnett A. Elzas (1894-1909), Isaac E. Marcuson (1910-14), Jacob 8. Raisin (1915-43), Sidney Unger (1943-45), and Dr. Allen Tarshish, who is the spiritual head of the congregation today. Among the most prominent Charleston Jews in the period since the Civil War were: Lee C. Harby, the authoress, 1n whose mem- ory the Daughters of the American Revolu- tion erected a tablet; Octavus Roy Cohen, the author; Samuel Rittenberg, member of the general assembly from 1913 to 1914; and from 1925 until his death in 1932; Dr. Leon Banev, president of the International Society cf Medical Health Officers and associate profes- sor of preventive medicine at South Caroling Medical College; Anita Pollitzer (Mrs. Eli Ed- son), vice president and member of the ex- ecutive board of the National Woman's Party. STATE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE LOYALTY INVESTIGATION—ADDITIONAL COPIES OF REPORT AND TESTIMONY Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, earlier in the day the junior Senator from Ne- braska and the Senator from Michigan sent a resolution to the desk. The reso- lution simply provides that Members of the Senate be furnished with copies of the so-calied Tydings Committee Report, and that 1,500 additional copies of it be printed for the use of anyone who is in- terested in it. The resolution asks that the proceednigs at all hearings, both open and closed be printed. Some dis- pute has arisen as to whether all the pro- ceedings have been included. The Sen- ator from Massachusetts (Mr. LoncE] stated that 30 pages of testimony had been deleted. It may be that other por- tions of the testimony are not complete. The difficulty is that it would take a con- current resolution for Members of the Senate to have these copies made avail- able to them, unless the chairman of the committee cleared them. One or two Senators today were unable to get copies, but I think they said it was allright. In a way I think the committee should have jurisdiction, as they have had, over any printed copies. I wonder if there is any objection to unanimous consent to consider the reso- lution, which is self-explanatory, and provides exactly what the junior Sena- tor from Nebraska has requested. Mr. McFARLAND. Mr. President, I would have to object, inasmuch as Mem-~ bers of the Foreign Relations Commit- tee are not present. I object to the reso- lution being taken up at this time. I told Senators that there would not be any business transacted after we fin- ished with the appropriation bill, and I feel that I must keep faith. Mr. WHERRY. I will not press it fur- ther. I did not feel that it was such an issue that any other Senators would have to be here. In fact, it can be seen that so far as I am concerned, I merely wanted to clear the Recorn so that Sen- ators could get copies of the testimony. I should like to make a parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President, 10859 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator will state it. Mr. WHERRY. With the resolution as it has been presented, would it have to be considered before any other copies are printed? Iam told there are 40 or 50 pages of the record which do not appear in the copy of the hearings now avail- able. Furthermore, it is printed only for the use of the committee. Would any additional copies be printed until a reso- lution had been considered and adopted? The PRESIDING OFFICER. If any additional copies are printed, it would have to be by resolution. The Chair has been informed the reso- lution has been referred, Mr. WHERRY. That is what would be done, unless I withheld it. The PRESIDING OFFICER. It has been referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. Mr. WHERRY., I ask unanimous con- sent that the resolution le over and be taken up tomorrow at the beginning of the session, and not go to the committee, I do not think {t is necessary to send it to the committec and have hearings on The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair calls the attention of the Senator from Arizona to the request of the Sena- tor from Nebraska. Mr. WHERRY. I ask unanimous con- sent that instead of sending the resolu- tion to the committee, which would be a referral, it be held over until tomorrow, and that it be taken up tomorrow when the Senate reconvenes. Mr. McFARLAND. I think it should go to the committee. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Parliamentarian calls the attention of the Chair to the fact that the rule re- quires that it go to the committee. Mr. WHERRY. I understand that, but I ask unanimous consent that it be not referred tonight, and that the Senate take it up for consideration the first thing tomorrow, in order to expedite it. Mr. McFARLAND, I belfeve such mat- ters, which involve printing of records, should take the regular course. I want every Senator to have a copy of the rec- ord. I presume there will be a demand for a great many more copies than merely those necessary for Senators. I think the resolution should go to the Committee on Rules and Administra- tion, and that they should determine on the number, I think that is the proper place for it, because certainly the Com- mittee on Rujes and Administration is the committee to determine how much is to be spent. The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is the regular order. Mr. WHERRY. I recognize that unanimous consent can be requested, and blocked, but I think I am not asking for anything more than what the com- mittee itself would do. It would pre- vent further printing of any copies un- less the whole record was printed. If the distinguished acting majority leader feels that the resolution should not be acted upon tonight, then it will be referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration, or perhaps to the Committee on Foreign Relations. To what committee would it be referred?
10860 The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator could ask that the resolution lie on the table. Mr. WHERRY. I want to take it up tomorrow. To what committee would it be referred? The PRESIDING OFFICER. To the Committee on Rules and Administra- tion. Mr. WHERRY. I have no objection. Mr. McFARLAND. I would have no objection to the resolution lying on the table until tomorrow. Mr. WHERRY. That is exactly what I asked, that 1t lie on the table and be taken up tomorrow morning. Mr. McFARLAND. The Senator asked that it be taken up tomorrow. Mr. WHERRY. Certainly. Mr. McFARLAND. I am not going to agree that it be taken up, but I do not mind agreeing to its being in the same status tomorrow that it is in today. Mr. WHERRY. If the Senator re- fuses to give consent to have it lie on the table and have it taken up tomorrow, I would just as soon have it referred to a committee. Mr. McFARLAND subsequently said: My. President, in regard to the reference of the resolution, there was a misunder- standing between the minority leader and myself, I have no objection to its lying on the table, to be in the samc status tomorrow It is in today. I do not want to be committeed to agree that it be taken up, but I think we can work the situation out between now and some- time tomorrow. Mr. WHERRY. In view of that state- ment, I ask that the resolution lie on the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The resolution will lie on the table. CONDITIONS ON FORMOSA AND QUEMOY Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I wish to take just a couple of minutes of the Senate to call attention to a press dispatch which has just come in over the wires dated Taipei, Formosa. It reads: Tatrrr, Formosa.—The Chinese National ists reported tonight the Communists were bomburding the northeast corner of Que- moy Island and were sending Junks for what might be a long-anticipated assault. The Defense Ministry spokesman who made the report to newsmen said Nationalist ground troops on the 50-square-mile island opposite the Red mainland, 100 miles west of Formosa, were adequate to cope with the expected attack. He said they would be supported by locally assigned Nationalist air and naval units. Mr. President, I got out my notebooks, and I find that I was on Quemoy Island last November, an island otherwise known as Kinman Island. I flew there from Formosa. The commander of the island is Gen- eral Hu Lien, one of the ablest combat commanders in the forces of the Gov- ernment of the Republic of China. With a very small force of men he won a nota- ble victory last October 25, 26, and 27, when with limited equipment he beat off an amphibious assault of over 10,000 Communist troops, captured 6,000 of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE them with all their equipment, and drove back into the sea those who had not been killed by his troops. The Chinese soldiers on Kinman Island demonstrated great courage. They held their positions despite the fact that their lines had been infiltrated, and it seems to me that we have a con- siderable responsibility, because at the request of the President of the United States the Government of the Republic of China ceased its blockade of the Chinese coast, and ceased its assaults by air upon the concentration and mo- bilization points of the Chinese Commu- nist forces. If at this time we have tied the hands of the Republic of China in defending this island, which may well be the key to Formosa itself, we will be doing a great disservice to the free world, This is not a case of the Government of the Republic of China attacking the Chinese mainland, but on the contrary is an attempt by the Chinese Commu- nists to invade Kinman Island, other- wise known as Quemoy Island. The Government of the United States should make very clear immediately that the Government of the Republic of China is free to use its navy and its air force to the fullest extent to see that they do not lose the Island of Kinman. EXECUTIVE SESSION Mr. McFARLAND. Mr. President, I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business, EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr, Hogy in the chair) laid before the Sen- ate messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry nom- inations, which were referred to the ap- propriate committees. (For nominations this day received, see the end of Senate proceedings ) EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF COMMITTEES As in executive session, The following favorable reports of nominations were submitted: By Mr. McCARRAN, from the Committee on the Judiciary: Thomas P, O'Donovan, of Ilinols, to be United States maishal for the northern dis- trict of Ulinols, Eugene J. Smith, of New York, to be United States marshal for the eastern dis- trict of New York; John M. Comeford, of Wisconsin, to be United States marshal for the wectern dis- trict of Wisconsin; and Donald A. Draughon, of Puerto Rico, to be United States marshal for the district of Puerto Rico, By Mr. CONNALLY, from the Committee on Foreign Relations: C Tyler Wood, of the District of Colum- bia, to be deputy United States special rep- resentative in Europe, with the rank of Am= bassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary; John E. Peurifoy, of South Carolina, a For« elgn Service officer of class 1, now serving as an Assistant Secretary of State, for pro- motion in the Foreign Service to the class of career minister, and to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Greece, to seive JULY 24 concurrently and without additional com- pensation as Chief of the American Mission for Aid to Greece; Hooker A. Doolittle, of New York, @ Fore eign Service officer of class 2, to be the rep- resentative of the United States of America on the United Nations Commission for In- donesia; and Carlisle H Humelsine, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Secretary of State, vice John E. Peurifoy The PRESIDING OFFICER If there be no further reports of committees, the clerk will state the nomination in the new report on the Executive Calendar. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE The Chief Clerk read the nomination of Clarenre J. McCormick to be Under Secretary of Agriculture. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the nomination is confirmed, ane is the only new report on the cal- enaar. LEGISLATIVE SESSION—-PROGRESS ON APPROPRIATION BILL The Senate resumed the consideration of legislative business, Mr. McFARLAND. Mr. President, I wish to express my appreciation to the distinguished minority leader and the other Senators for cooperating and en- abling the Senate to devote 1 hour of work today to the important appropria- tion bill, which is the unfinished busi- ness I hope we can make further prog- ress tomorrow, and that Senators will bear in mind that it is important to the defense of the country that the appro- priation bill be passed immediately, for delay will jeopardize departments which are charged with the 1esponsibility for the defense activities. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, in com- mending the distinguished acting ma- jority leader for the work he has done today, I wish to say that 1t will be our position on this side to continue to co- opsrate and to get the bill passed. I wish to reiterate that there are two or three speeches which will be made to- morrcw, and when they are out of the way we no doubt can go right on with the other chapters of the appropriation bill. I think we have completed seven chapters. At least three chapters have not yet been considered. The minority will do everything it can to help expedite con- sideration of the bill. Mr. McFARLAND. f thank the dis- tinguished minority leader. I am hope- ful we may bo able to arrange a unani- mous-consent agreement tomorrow, sim- jlar to the agreement we worked out to- day, as soon as two speeches have been concluded. Mr. WHERRY. As I have said, the minority will cooperate. RECESS Mr. McFARLAND. I move that the Senate stand in recess until 11 o’clock a. m, tomorrow. The motion was agreed to: and (at 8 o’clock and 20 minutes p. m.) the Senate took a recess until tomorrow, Tuesday, July 25, 1950, at 11 o’clock a, m,
1950 NOMINATIONS Executive nominations received by the Senate July 24 (legislative day of July 20), 1950: DIPLOMATIC AND FoREIGN SERVICE The following nominations are made in accordance with the provisions of section 617 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946: Woodbury Willoughby, of Virginia, to be a Foreign Service officer of clasa 2, a consul, and a@ secretary in the diplomatic service of the United States of America. The following-named persons to be Foreign Servico officers of class 3, consuls, and secre- taries in the diplomatic service of the United States of America: Orville C. Anderson, of California, nest H, Fisk, of Ohio. Gardner E Palmer, of Michigan. The following-named persons to he Forelgn Service officers of class 4, consuls, and secre- tarics in the diplomatic service of the United States of America: Gene F. Caprio, of New Jersey, 4 Arthur A. Compton, of Missourt, J. Roftand Jacobs, of California. Roswell D. McClelland, of Connecticut, Natronan Lanor RELATIONS Boarp Paul M. Herzog, of New York, to be a mem- ber of the National Labor Relations Board for a term of 5 years, expiring August 27, 1935. (Reappointment.) POSTMASTLRS The following-named persons to be post- masters: ARIZONA John M. Thompson, Parker, Ariz., in place of A. L. Kent, retired. CALIFORNIA Emaline M. Korba, Apple Valley, Calif. Office established April 15, 1949. Frank A Salman, Colton, Calif., in place of F. M. Snider, resigned, GLORGIA Grady F. Medlock, Cave Spring, Ga., in place of P. C. Sewell, removed. Gordon C. Pearman, Chula, Ga., in place of A. E Whiddon, retired. Calvin W. Chester, Wrightsville, Ga., in place of R. B. Bryan, retired. HAWAIL Arthur C. Lum, Waimanalo, place of R. W. Morris, resigned. ILLINOIS Roy W. Adams, Argenta, Ill, in place of Melvin Manecke, retired. Eugene H. Brauer, Belleville, Ill., in place of H. G. Wangelin, resigned. Elmer A, Allan, Collinsville, Ill, in place of E. R. Luebbe, resigned. Harold J. McQueen, Hindsboro, IiJ., in place of Daisy Pedigo, retired. Robert B, Diegel, Hopedale, Ill., in place of R, F. Maurer, deceased, Max Edwin Conrad, Hutsonville, Til, in place of C. M. McCoy, retired. Earl T. Sutter, Lisle, Ill., in place of Nellie Butter, deceased. Melvin O, Hettenhausen, Milstadt, IIL, in place of F. D. Hatter, retired. Lanore E, Johnston, Sherrard, Ill., in place of Rudolph Mueller, retired. Paul R. Mongerson, Taylor Ridge, Ill, in place of Z. V. Blaser, resigned. INDIANA Vernice L, Larkin, Cloverdale, Ind., in place of A. M. Morrison, transferred. ichard C. Walker, Granger, Ind, in place of N. B. Kownover, retired. Charles Donald Manaugh, Hanover, Ind., in place of C. D. Manaugh, retired. XCVI-——€84 Hawall, in CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Kenneth E, Romine, Mentone, Ind., in place of L. A. Rickel, retired. Loulse W. Broyles, Pittsboro, Ind., in place of Mary Dugan, retired. IOWA Wocedrow J, Shearer, Columbus Junction, Iowa, in place of N. B. Lewis, retired. Leroy W. Threde, Lake Park, Iowa, August Sindt, deceased, KANSAS Edward R. Marshall, Olathe, Kans., in place of C. C, Pember, resigned. Guy Baker, Czawkie, Kans., in place of A. D. Quiett, resigned. KENTUCKY Austin V. Thompson, Moreland, Ky,, Office became Presidential July 1, 1944. William F. Gibson, Whitesburg, Ky., ‘n place of W. G. Holprook, resigned. LOUISIANA Harvey T. Best, Jr., Marlngouin, La., in place of C. J. Slack, retired. MAINE Irma J, Gott, Southwest Hardor, Maine, in place of E. W. Gott, deceased. MARYLAND Melvin H. Bowers, Lilypons, Md., in place of G. L, Thomas, Jr., resigned. MASSACHUSETTS Madeline F, McDonagh, Vlympton, Mass., in place of M. J. McDonagh, deceased. MICHIGAN Alwin L. Strevy, Ferrysburg, Mich., in place of Leonora Branak, resigned. Douglas J. Hill, Harbor Springs, Mich., in place of F, L. Friend, resigned. MINNESOTA Stanley W. Ostergaard, Arco, Minn, in place of V. C. Hansen, transferred. James D. Fehlhaber, Bird Island, Minn., in place of Timothy Hurley, retired. John A. Rolig, Center City, Minn, in place of H. H. Gunz, transferred. Francis H. Dumont, Freeport, Minn,, in place of H. J. Ricker, retired. Keenan R. Nelson, West Concord, Minn., in place of Minor Guckingham, transtcrred. MISSOURI Teddy Couch, Bosworth, Mc., in piace of R. R Breckenridge, transferred. James M. Tedlock, Jamesport, Mo., in place of Pat Mulone, retired. Tillie K Tyler, Mayview, Mo., in place of Mora Tracy, retired. MONTANA Howard HE. Wagner, Hardin, Mont., in place of J. M. Astle, retired. NEBRASKA Margaret M. Peters, Bellwocd, Nebr., in place of L FP. Kreizinger, retired. Harry M. Richardson, Broken Bow, Nebr., in place of C. L. Bennett, retired. Vilastimil K. Maule, Crofton, Nebr., in place of F, 8S. Bogner, transferred. Elton L, Pounds, Hastings, Nebr., in place of D. 8. Simms, resigned. Philip A. Randall, Long Pine, Nebr, in place of M. M. Kenroy, retired. Grant W. Hazlett, Loomis, Nebr., in place of R. H. Carlson, resigned. Lawrence J. Gaughen, North Bend, Nebr., in place of P. F. Tully, retired. Douglas F. Hammon, Valentine, Nebr., in place of M. C. Phelps, deceased, NEW HAMPSHIRE Linden E. Sheehan, Pittsfield, N. H., in place of D. F. Jackson, transferred. NEW MEXICO Morris L. Dickerson, Fairacres, N. Mex., in place of Etta Dickerson, retired, 10861 NEW YORK Henry P, Hallahan, Brasher Falls, N. Y. in place of H. F. Hallahan, retired. Frederick G. MacCollum, Elbridge, N. Y., in place of E. M. Wood, deceased. Lulu F. Moseley, Hauppauge, N. ¥, Office became Presidential July 1, 1948. OHIO Edmund H. Imber, Delphos, Ohio, in place of A. J. Shenk, retired. OXLAHOMA James W. Moorman, Fl Reno, Okla., in place of J. W. Haydon, retired. Anna B. Swan, Schulter, Okla. in place of Mary McCutcheon, resigned. OREGON Willis L. Gholston, Moster, Oreg., in place of Lenora Hunter, retired. Evelyn P, Waldron, Ovetech, Oreg, established March 16, 1049, PENNSYLVANIA John P. Rumancik, Crucihle, Pa., in place of W. D. Thompson, retired. Edward J. Clarke, Jr., Dalton, Pa., In place of B. E. Hayden, resigned. Foster H Coyle, Johnstown, Pa., in place of F. J. Studeny, retired. Robert Schneider, Scenery Hill, Pa., In place of G. C. Wonsettler, retired. Robert C. Powell, Swarthmore, Pa., in place of A. P. Smalley, retired. Samuel R. Klinger, Wiconisco, Pa., in place of C. E. Minnich, retired. SAMOA Edward Hunkin, Pago Pago, Samoa, in place of D. J. McMullin, retired, SOUTH CAROLINA Josoph E. Powell, Moncks Corner, 8. C., in place of W. E. Law, resigned. SOUTH DAKOTA Theodore C. Gutenkauf, Hoven, 8S. Dak., in place of H. B. Hoven, resigned. Bernard J. Post, Tyndall, S, Dak., in place of Matt McCormick, retired. TENNESSEE Zebulon V. Sherrill, Niota, Tenn., in place of G. L. Garrison, transferred. TEXAS Maynard C, Watkins, JarreJl, Tex, in place of W. E. Votaw, retired. Reuben S Morrow, Kaufman, Tex., in place of H. W. Hoffer, retired. St E'mo Murphy, Nixon, Tex., in place of W. W. Spear, retired. UTAH Amy H. Esplin, Orderville, Utah, in place of F. C. Hoyt, retired. VIRGINIA Richard D. Collison, Dayton, Va., in place of B. E Young, deceased. Samuel N. Thornhill, Gladstone, Va., in place of M. C. Harris, retired, Lloyd N. Doyle, Ridgeway, Va., in place of J. E. Pace, transferred. Carl L, Campbell, Winchester, Va., in place of W. N. Page, retired. WASHINGTON Charlotte E. Shaver, Lacrosse, Wash., in place of T. A. Myklebust, resigned. Joseph Krolczyk, Mineral, Wash., in place of Forde Phelps, resigned, WEST VIRGINIA Ivory N. Steele, Holden, W, Va., in place of J. B. Puryear, Jr., resigned. WISCONSIN John W. Grotkin, Benton, Wis. in place of W. H. McCrea, retired. Orville I. Anderson, Cameron, Wis, in place of H. J. Samson, deceased. Office
10862 George K. Sazama, Hatley, Wis., in place of J. W, Sazama, transferred. Henry A. Siewert, Jr.. Kingston, Wis. Of- fice became Presidential July 1, 1945. Robert E. Myers, North Freedom, Wis., in place of Frank Hanley, retired. Elmer H. Toepfer, Random Lake, Wis., in place of W. J. Hand, deceased. Alfred J. Perrault, Jr., Turtle Lake, Wis., in place L. H. Rivard, retired. WYOMING Roy Cecil Taylor, Mountainview, Wyo., in place of O. W. Dahlquist, resigned. CONFIRMATION Executive nomination confirmed by the Senate July 24 (legislative day of July 20), 1950: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Clarence J. McCormick, of Indiana, to be Under Secretary of Agriculture. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monpay, Juty 24, 1950 The House met at 12 o’clock noon. The Chaplain, Rev. Bernard Bras- kamp, D. D., offered the following prayer: O Thou infinite and eternal God, grant that in these days of world crisis we may have that courage of heart and that con- stancy of faith which will keep us from anxiety and fear, from discouragement and despair. Wilt Thou daily illumine with divine wisdom the minds of all who have been called to lead our beloved country in this time of trial and struggle. We thank Thee for our fellow citizens who are out on the fields of battle giving themselves so bravely and sacrificially for the preservation of those blessings of freedom and democracy which our forefathers found hard to win and which we now are finding hard to hold. May we be faithful and worthy part- ners with all who are the loyal cham- pions of the rights of man and who are Seeking to bring in that better day when the kingdom of peace and good will shall be established everywhere. In Christ’s name we pray. Amen. The Journal of the proceedings of Thursday, July 20, 1950, was read and approved. MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate, by Mr. Carrell, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate had passed bilis of the following titles, in which the concur- rence of the House is requested: 8.3859. An act to authorize the President to control the anchorage and movement of foreign-flag vessels in waters of the United State; when the national security of the United States {s endangered, and for other purposes; and 8.3937. An act to authorize the President to extend enlistments in the Armed Forces of the United States. The message also announced that the Senate recedes from its amendment to the bill (H, R. 3506) entitled “An act for the relief of Louis P. Murphy, United CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE States immigrant inspector, El Paso, Tex.” The message also announced that the Senate agrees to the amendments of the House to bills and concurrent resolutions of the Senate of the following titles: 8.1027. An act for the relief of the Merit Co.; S. 1049. An act for the relief of Amy Alex- androvna Taylor and Myrna Taylor; S 1702. An act for the relief of Thomas Nicholas Epiphaniades and Wanda Julia Epiphaniades; §.2243. An act for the relief of Tevfik Kamil Kutay; 6. 2864. An act to authorize certain admin- istrative expenses for the Department of Jus- tice, and for other purposes; 8. Con. Res. 91, Concurrent resolution {fa- voring the suspension of deportation of cer- tain aliens; and 8. Con. Res. 95. Concurrent resolution fa- voring the suspension of deportation of cer- tain allens. The message also announced that the Senate disagrees to the amendments of the House to the bill (8. 2160) entitled “An act to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize annual and sick leave with pay for commissioned officers of the Public Health Service, to authorize the payment of accumulated and ac- crued annual leave in excess of 60 days, and for other purposes”; requests a con- ference with the House on the disagree- ing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. Murray, Mr. Peprer, Mr. NEELY, Mr, Tart, and Mr. SmitH of New Jersey to be the conferees on the part of the Senate. The message also announced that the Senate disagrees to the amendments of the House to the bill (S. 2822) entitled “An act to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (U. S. C., title 12, sec. 264)”; requests a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. May- BANK, Mr. ROBERTSON, Mr, Dovuc.as, Mr. ‘Tosey, and Mr. Fianpers to be the con- ferees on the part of the Senate. The message also announced that the Vice President has appointed Mr. Joun- sTON of South Carolina and Mr. LANGER members of the Joint Select Committee on the part of the Senate, as provided for in the act of August 5, 1939, entitled “An act to provide for the disposition of cer- tain records of the United States Gov- ernment,” for the disposition of execu- tive papers referred to in the report of the Archivist of the United States num- bered 51-2. COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking and Currency may sit this afternoon during general debate in the House. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ken- tucky? There was no objection. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT Mr. SPENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker’s table the bill (8. 2822) to amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (U. 8S. C., title 12, sec. 264) with JULY 24 House amendments thereto, insist’ on the amendments of the House and ask for a conference with the Senate. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ken- tucky? [After a pause.} The Chair hears none, and appoints the following conferees: Messrs. SPENCE, Brown of Georgia, ParmMan, MONRONEY, WOLCOTT, GaMBLE, and KunxKEL, PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mis- sissippi? There was no objection. {Mr. Ranxin addressed the House. His remarks appear in the Appendix.] Mr, JONAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- imous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks and include an editorial. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illi- nois? There was no objection. [Mr. Jonas addressed the House. His remarks appear in the Appendix.] TAKING THE COMMUNIST PARTY OFF THE AMERICAN BALLOT Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mich- igan? There was no objection. Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Speaker, I am introducing a bill today to take the Com- munist Party off the American ballot. Their presence on the ballot of this country gives them prestige and recog- nition to which I do not believe the Com- munist Party is entitled. The Commu- nist Party is not a political party: it is a revolutionary party which seeks to de- stroy every other political party by force, violence, and bloodshed, if necessary, Does anybody in this House believe that if the Communist Party won an election in the United States there ever would be another election? Every Communist takes orders from Moscow. His party is the fifth column here and in every freedom-loving coun- try. It is hostile to freedom an” Chris- tian civilization the world over. Every informed American knows that under our system of government the defeat of any political party in a free election does not mean the end of that party or its political faith. It will have another chance or chances in the future. Should the Communist Party win a national election, all political faiths would end, their leaders shot or exiled, their property seized, and their organi- zation destroyed. Freedom and free government—the Republic of the United States—would “perish from the earth.” SPECIAL ORDER GRANTED Mr. FORD asked and was given per- mission to address the House for 15 minutes on Tucsday, July 25, following
1950 the legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered. PERSONAL ANNOUNCEMENT Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts? There was no objection. Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Speaker, during roll call No. 211, I was called from the Chamber on official business. If I had been present and voting, I would have voted “no.” PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE Mrs. BOLTON of Ohio. Mr Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 mirute, and revise and ex- tend my remarks, The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentlewoman from Ohio? There was no objection. (Mrs, Botton of Ohio addressed the House Her remarks appear in the Ap- pendix 1 A NEW VIEW ON SURPLUS FOODS Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and revis? and extend my remarks. The SPEAKER Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? —~ There was no objection Mr HESELTON. Mr Speaker, Secre- tary Brannan has surrendered. For al- most 6 months he was perfectly happy about the mounting scandal of Federal Government hearding of wholesome food commodities. The fact that 1t was cost- ing the American taxpayers scores of thousands of dollars each day did not interest him in the least. The possi- bility and probability that a lot of this food would spoil gave him no concern whatever. But now when hoarding food is un- patriotic and when he and his Depart- ment is issuing warnings against it dally he is suddenly awakened. This morn- ing he appeared before the House Com- mittee on Agriculture. He described the eritical nature of the problem of dis- posing of these foods He offered a solu- tion. This solution is exactly what was contained in four bills filed by the gen- tleman from New York [Mr. Kratine], the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. CorsctTl, the gentleman from Pennsyl- vania [Mr. Hucu D. Scort, Jr.J, and my- self on February 2. Twenty additional Members of this body endorsed these bills. But, Mr. Brannan would have no part of them. His conversion is welcome but de- cidedly belated. As I listened to him I felt certain that the statement war- ranted a further study in the light of the facts as to this program and I shall make that study with the hope that Ican report further to you this afternoon dur- ing a special order. In any event, Mr. Brannan now urges emphatically immediate action. I hope our committee will give us that oppor- tunity at once. If the situation is as CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE serious as Mr. Brannan describes it, and TI suspect it is worse, surely all the Mem- bers of this body have the right to pass upon this, In view of the opposition by Mr. Brannan and the President to any action in this field during these months, some Members may claim no action by Congress was necessary. Now Mr. Bran- nan makes action imperative. No one can doubt who will be blamed by the pxpcutive department if action is not aken. SPECIAL ORDER GRANTED Mr. JACKSON of Washington asked and was given permission to address the House for 10 minutes today, following the legislative program and any special orders heretofore entered. ADDITIONAL FEDERAL EMPLOYEES Mr SIKES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- imous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida? There was no objection. Mr SIKES. Mr. Speaker, it has been staicd by Government sources that an additional 250,000 Federal employees will be hired as a result of the Korean prob- lem This morning’s news reports estimated 12,000 Government jobs now available in the District of Columbia, compared with 2,000 at the time of the last announce- ment. Apparently wholesale hirings are in process of being undertaken by the Gov- ernment agencies. Yet, there is to this moment no break- down of the expenditures requested by the President. The Government agen- cies themselves do not know how the money is to be spent. They cannot pos- sibly know how many new employees, if any, are required for the successful pros- ecution of the war in Korea. To the profits-as-usual, politics-as-us- ual, hoard-as-usual crowd it appears that we can add Government as usual, There is as little patriotism in hoarding Government workers as there is in hoarding food. ANNUAL AND SICK LEAVE [OR COMMIS- SIONED OFFICERS OF THE PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE Mr BIEMILLER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker’s table the bill S 2160, an act to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize annual and sick leave with pay for commissioned officers of the Public Health Service, insist on the amendments of the House, and agree to the conference asked by the Senate. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Wis- consin? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none and appoluts the following conferees: Mr. Priest, Mr. BIEMILLER, Mr. Wiison of Oklahoma, Mr. WOLVER- ron, and Mr. Hucw D. Scorrt, Jr. EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. LANE asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the 10863 Recorp in three instances and include extraneous matter. Mr. MILLER of California (at the re- quest of Mr. Hotrrre.p) was given per- mission to extend his remarks and in- clude extraneous matter. Mr. HOLIFIELD asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in four instances. Mr. WILSON of Oklahoma asked and was given permission to extend his re- marks in two instances. Mr BARTLETT asked und was given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorial. Mr. HEDRICK asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include a statement by Frank Pace, Sec- retary of the Army. Mr. PRICE asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in four instances and include extianeous matter in each. Mr SMITH of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to extend his re- marks in three instances and include excerpts Mr. MASON asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks and in- clude an article by Robert B. Dresser on the need for limiting the spending power of Congress. Mr. POTTER asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in two instances; in each to include an editorial. Mr. KEATING asked as was given permission to extend his remarks in two instances; in two to include editorials, and in one a radio address, Mr. GOLDEN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks. Mrs. ST. GEORGE asked and was given permission to extend her remarks in two instances, in each to include news- paper articles. Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to extend his re- marks in three instances and include newspaper material in each instance. Mr. COLE of New York asked and was given permission to extend his remarks, Mr. RICH asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks and in- clude extraneous matter. Mr. MAGEE asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks and in- clude a short editorial. Mr. JONES of North Carolina asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorial from the Charlotte (N. C.) News of July 19, 1950, on the proposed Lodge-Gossett amendment to the present electoral col- lege system and in another instance to extend his personal remarks with refer- ence to the voluntary retirement of the Hon J. Harptn Pererson from the Con- gress after the present session. Mr. JACKSON of Washington asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an article appear- ing in the Harvard Law Review, written by Prof. Zecharia Chafee, Jr. Mr. CROOK asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include an article by Clarke Beach appearing in the South Bend Tribune of July 20. Mr. BOYKIN asked and was given pere misston to extend his remarks and ine clude a siatement by Lous Johnson,
10864 Mr. ROGERS of Florida asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorial. Mr. MADDEN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks and include an editorial. CALL OF THE HOUSE Mr. PHILLIPS of California. Mr. Speaker, a point of order. My observa- tion does not indicate the presence of a quorum, I make the point of order that there is no quorum present. The SPEAKER. Evidently there is no quorum present. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Speak- er, I move a call of the House. A call of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the fol- lowing Members failed to answer to their names: [Roll No, 213] Abbitt Gore Murray, Wis. Addonizlo Gwinn Nixon Allen, Tl. Hall, Norton Alien, La, Edwin Arthur O'Brien, Mich. Anderson, Calif. Hall, O'Neill Aspinall Leonard W. Passman Barden Hand Patman Barrett, Pa. Hare Patterson Barrett, Wyo. Harris Pfeifer, Bates, Mass, Hart Joseph L, Bentsen Hébert Pfeiffer, Boggs, La, Heffernan William L. Bosone Heller Phillips, Tenn, Breen Hill Pickett Brehm Hinshaw Powell Brooks Hoffman, Ti. = Priest Buckley, N. ¥. Irving Quinn Bulwinkle Jackson, Calif, Rains Burton Javits Ramsay Carlyle Jenison Redden Carroll Jennings Regan Cavalcante Johnson Richards Celler Karst, Robeson Chatham Kean Rodino Chesney Kearney Rogers, Mass. Christopher Kearns Roosevelt Combs Keefe Sabath Cooper Kelley, Pa. Sadlak Coudert Kennedy Sadowski Cox Keogh Banborn Davies,N.Y. Kilday Scott, Hardie Davis, Tenn. Kunkel Shelley Dawson Larcade Sims Dingell Lichtenwalter Smith, Ohio Dollinger Linchan Sutton Doughton Lodge Taylor Douglas Lucas Teague Eaton Lyle Thompson Eberharter McCarthy Trimble Elisworth McGrath Vursell Engel, Mich. McGutre Wagner Evins McMillen, 11. Welch Fallon Mack, Il. White, Idaho Fernandez Marcantonio Wier Fogarty Marsalis Wigglesworth Frazier Martin, Mass. Willis Gary Morgan Winstead Gavin Morrison Wood Gillette Morton Yates Gilmer Murphy Zablocki Gordon Murray, Tenn. The SPEAKER. On this roll call 278 Members have answered to their names, @ quorum. By unanimous consent further pro- ceedings under the call were dispensed with. : EXTENDING ENLISTMENTS IN THE ARMED FORCES Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that on tomorrow it may be in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 8. 3937; that general debate shall continue not to exceed 2 hours, with the time being equally divided and controlled by the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE distinguished gentleman from Missouri [Mr. SHort) and myself. Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, reserv- - ing the right to object, and from what I know about this I do not think I shall object, I think it would be well for the gentleman from Georgia to tell us what the measure is which he proposes to call up tomorrow and give us something of the reasons or necessity for it. Mr. VINSON. The bill deals with freezing enlistments in the Army, Navy, and Air Force. The enlistment of some 135,000 men will expire within 1 year, and they will expire at the rate of 4,000 a month in General MacArthur's forces in the Pacific. This measure proposes to extend those enlistments for 1 year until we can get Reservists, National Guard men, and draftees to take their places, It was unanimously passed by the other body and unanimously recom- mended by the Committee on Armed Services, It is one of the things the President is urging the Congress to do immediately. Mr. HALLECK. As I understand it, the gentleman’s request provides for de- bate and consideration of the measure on the floor of the House.’ Mr. VINSON. Yes; exactly. It will be open to amendment. I do not have time to bring it before the Committee on Rules, otherwise I would be before the Committee on Rules asking for a rule. Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Speaker, I with- draw my reservation of objection. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, re- serving the right to object, is this the bill H. R. 9177? Mr, VINSON. Yes. The House bill, H. R. 9177, is the same as Senate bill 3937, Mr. McCORMACK. What about the House bill, H. R. 9178, suspending the authorized personnel strength of the Armed Forces? Mr. VINSON. I intend to make the same request with reference to that bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Georgia? There was no objection. SUSPENDING AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL STRENGTH OF ARMED FORCES Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker, I make the same unanimous-consent request on H.R. 9178. Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, will the gentleman from Georgia explain the bill? Mr. VINSON. This bill removes the statutory ceiling on the composition of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. At present the Army is fixed by law at 837,000. This bill removes that limita- tion, It leaves it entirely up to the Con- gress as to what the strength of the Armed Forces shall be through the appropriations of the Congress. Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection, Mr. HALLECK, Mr. Speaker, re- serving the right to object, can the gentleman tell us anything about any other messages which may be necessary JULY 24 to give immediate consideration to, which may be reported by his committee? Mr, VINSON. The Armed Services Committee started today having hear- ings with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, each one separately. Admiral Sherman ad- vised the committee that for the time being this is the only legislation that he is. particularly interested in. There probably will be some other legislation, but it is not as urgent as this. I do not think there is any important legis- lation except making the money avail- able. Mr. McCORMACK. Willi the gentle- man yield? Mr. HALLECK. I yield. Mr. McCORMACK. The leadership on both sides is much interested in the gentleman’s statement. The gentle- man said, “For the time being.” Did Admiral Sherman give any statement as to what he meant by “for the time being’? Mr. VINSON. Of course, we have not finished with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but as to anything that has been sent to my office, these are the only two bills that are necessary for the House to con- sider immediately. Mr. McCORMACK. being” and “immediately.” does that mean? Mr. VINSON. I would say that as far as this week is concerned and next week is concerned, we do not have any leg- islation in the mill that the Department has sent up, Mr. McCORMACK. Well, the gentle- man had better tell the Department that if they have anything in the mill this week or next week, they had better get it up as quickly as possible. Mr. VINSON. I appreciate that. I am just as anxious that the House take a recess as the gentleman from Massa- chusetts. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Vinson]? There was no objection. APPOINTMENT OF TWO ADDITIONAL DIS8- TRICT JUDGES FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Speak- er, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the con- sideration of the bill (H. R. 6454) to au- thorize the appointment of two addi- tional district judges for the northern district of Tlinois. The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the con- sideration of the bill H. R. 6454, with Mr. THORNBERRY in the chair. The Clerk read the title of the bill. By unanimous consent, the first read- ing of the bill was dispensed with. The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the gentleman from New York [Mr, Byrnr] is entitled to 30 minutes and the gen- tleman from Michigan (Mr, MicHEnER] is entitled to 39 minutes. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- run, I yield myself 8 minutes, “For the time Just what
1950 Mr. Chairman, I am going to quote from a letter by Peyton Ford, the as- sistant to the Attorney General, to the chairman of ovr committee |[Mr. CrL- LER], what I consider to be salient fea- tures of this particular proposal, and which undoubtedly will be interesting and also valuable to the members of the committee: In considering the merits of this measure, it may be of some agsistance to compare the court business in the northern district of Illinois with that in the northern district of California and the castern district of Penneylvania, which are two districts having comparable work loads. For the fiscal year 1947 the average number of cases adjudi- catcd and terminated per judge was 415 in the northern district of Illinois, 473 in the northern district of California, and 393 in the eastern district of Pennsylvania. The fgures for the year 1948 in thore districts were 359,443, and 326, respectively, and for the year 1949, 454, 417, and 3651, respectively. It is to be noted that the court for the northern district of Tllinols adjudicated and terminated more cases in the fiscal year 1949 than were so disposed of in either of the other districts. Yet, instead of being able to reduce the backlog, it has increased {rom 849 cases per judge in 1947 to 429 cases in 1949 It is also noted that it takes approxi- mately # year on the average to file and dis~- pose of civil cascs and many cases may not be disposed of for 2 years because of Jack of judicial manpower. During the first session of the Elghty-first Congress, Public Law 205 was enacted (ap- proved August 3, 1949) providing two addi- tional judgeships for both the northern dis- trict of Calitornia and the eastern district of Pennsylvania. In view of the above com- parative statistics there appears to be equal or greater justification for providing similar Judicial assistance for the northern district of Illinois, The Judicial Conference of the United Siates, at its meeting last September, rec- ommended the creation of the two addl- tional judgeships which would be provided for in this measure. In view of the foregoing considerations, the Department of Justice favors the en- actment of the bill, and the Bureau of the Budget has advised it is in accord with the program of the President. Yours sincerely, . PEYTON Forp, The Assistant to the Attorncy General, 4 consider that to be very important by way of comparison with the judges that were put into office a year ago in California and in Pennsylvania, indicat- ing that the greater need for these judges is found in the State of Illmois than in either of those two States. Mr. Chairman, I am going to quote a litle from a statement of the chief judge, John P. Barnes, of the district court for the northern district of Tlli- nois, testimony that he gave before our subcommittee when we were having hearings upon these particular bills. I am now quoting: It was not until about a year ago that I looked over our calendars and observed that the accumulation of cases was getting to the point where we must have help. I knew we were getting behind but did not know that the sttuation was as serious as it {s; where- upon I assembled statistics in the Director’s office and we called r mesting of the judges and then decided to atk for help. We ad- arcssed our communication to the confer- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE ence of the sevetth circult. At that meet- ing cur recommendation for additional help was approved, and at that conference were precent all the judges of the circuit with one exception, and that request was unanimously approved. Thereupon our request went before the na- tlonal conterence and was carried there by Chief Judge Major, and that conference ap- proved our request for two additional judges. It was not until after that was done that any of these bills for creating additional judge- ships were presented. So I call your attention, Mr. Chairman, to the fact that these bills are not what we would call fly-by-night bills; these are not just accommodation bills; these are not just friendship bills as was indi- cated here last Thursday as the manner in which bills of this character come up and are disposed of by the House, These are bills that are well documented, most esseniial, and necessary, and carry what we call the highest degree of probity and necessity. Quoting further: There are in our district a number of long coses— cases that will take a long time to try. After I was designated to uppear betore you I asked them to write me letters regard- lng the matters which should be called to your attention, I will Just tell ycu of one of them. Judge Sullivan wrote me a letter calling altention to four cases on his calendar. One of these is an antitrust case which will take a year to try. Another of these cases 1s an antitrust case which will take 5 months to try Four of them will take 6 to 7 months, and a fitth 4 to 6 weeks on the calendar of one judge. The CHAIRMAN. The time cf the gentleman from New York hus expired. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield myseli two additional min- utes. Quoting further from Judge Barnes: You will observe that on July 1, 1944, there were 1,105 civil cases pending in the District. On Apiil 1, 1950, there were 2,428 civil cases pending—an increase of 1,323 cases. During the came time, the number of criminal cases pending in our court has increased by 176. So you can readily see that there is great necessity for these judgeships, a good reason, a good foundation, and a direct cause for the introduction of this bill by the gentleman from Illinois {Mr. SaBATH!], May I say in this connection that the gentleman from Illinois |My. YATES] also introduced an identical bill with that of Mr. SasatH. The bill of Mr. Sapatu is the one we are discussing, the one introduced by Mr. YaTEs having been set aside. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr, Jonas], Mr. JONAS. Mr. Chairman, I am vitally interested in this bill and I am not going to take time discussing cer- tain phases of the bill that were dis- cussed here the other day. As was done in the case of the bill dealing with an additional judge for Texas, J am going to start off on the same premise as that of the distinguished gentleman from that State, and particularly those who are familiar with the district. In my opinion, the soundest argument and the best evidence you can get whether a 10865 judge is necessary or not necessary is from those who have to practice their profession in the particular district in- volved. Since I left the bench in the Superior Court of Cook County I venture to say that I have been in the Federal courts of the northern district of Illinois at least once a week during court hours, There is no question about the fact that the court calendar is exactly as has been detailed here, only we get it statistically and in figures. If you would approach the situation from a professional or prac- tical standpoint you would not hesitate one moment to give this district or add to the district two additional judges. The congestion is almost beyond de- scription. Where we formerly tried cases Wihin 3 months, we now have to wait 12 to 15 months. This has made the cost of litigation almost prohibitive in that district. Where a witness ob- tains only about $3 a day for witness fecs, and he is a craftsman or trades- man of some kind, and he comes to court and the case is continued time and gain he finally refuses to he coopera- tive. The litigant under the circum- siances then has to pay him a salary which in some instances amounts to $15 a day or more. The jurors also become uncooperative because they do not get an opportunity to sit in judgment on cases and they persist in importuning and harassing the judee to be excused. All of which resulis in turmoil and con- fusion. Unfortunately we just lost a district judge the other day; Judge Shaw, died suddenly, s0 we are already one judge short. You have no idea of the condi- tion of the calendar in the District Court of the Northern District of Illinois, especially during vacation period, with one or two judges sitting and trying to dispose of all the litigation. The scene represents a town meeting much more than a courtroom because of the con- gested condition that prevails every morning. Scores of witnesses, litigants, lawyers, and all those who are a con- stituent part of our jurisprudence that deals with expediting justice, are there, There is just one request I make, Mr. Chairman. I am not interested in this situation from a political standpoint. I think the last place in the world where partisanship should play a part is in the selection of who is eligible to sit in judg- ment of his fellow man. The selection should be on the basis of whether he meets the necessary qualifications, rather than whether he is a good Demo- crat or a good Republican, or what- ever he may be. The question, first of all, is this: Is he capable, is he a well trained and an experienced lawyer, who possesses integrity and proper judicial temperament and a good moral char- acter. In Illinois I am a member of the Cook County Central Committee that has to do under our laws with the selecting of candidates for Cook County judgeships, and those who are to go on the ticket as nominees. We have an agreement among both parties that no man is ell- gible or is considered for a position on
10866 that ticket unless he 1s first thoroughly sereened through the Chicago Bar Asso- ciation or the Illinois State Bar Asso- ciation, and if they do not approve of his qualifications, then he does not get con- sideration for the position that he is seeking. By reason of that fact we have left off a number of the sitting judges time and time again, and we have re- fused to nominate men who have not made a good record in the courts while acting as judges, and who do not possess the necessary requisites to make a com- petent, fair, and impartial judge. So I ask you to consider this bill first, because of the pressing need that we should have two judges in our district and, sec- ond, I hope some consideration will be given by the proper body, when the bill is finally passed, that we nominate for those positions men of the highest cali- ber, outstanding, distinguished lawyers, who can do the job and do it right, to re- lieve the congestion in the courts that hav- this tremendous amount of work to do, and finally that such nominees are approved by the local or State bar asso- ciations. The CHAIRMAN, The time of the gentleman from Illinois has expired. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr Chair- man, I yield the gentleman three addi- tional minutes. Mr. Chairman, yield? Mr. JONAS. I yield to the gentleman from New York. Mr BYRNE of New York. I have here a letter dated February 17 from the Chi- cago Bar Association, signed by the ex- ecutive secretary, Mr. Denning, who states. I am directed to advise you that the board acting for the association favors the legis- lation which will provide two additional Judges for the northern district of UHnols. That is the Chicago Bar Association. Mr. JONAS, I am glad to learn that they favor the legislation. They said nothing about the selection, did they? Mr. BYRNE of New York. And I have here a letter from the Illinois State Bar Association This is the office of the president, Albert E. Jenner, written un- der date of March 1, 1950: I am pleased to advise you that the board of governors of the Djlinols State Bar Asso- ciation has unanimously approved H. R. 6255. Mr. JONAS. Iam sure they would, be- cause they know better than anybody else the necessity for having those two additional judges. Mr. BYRNE of New York. I have here also a letter from the American Bar As- sociation, signed by Howard F. Burns, dated March 6, 1950, in which he states: A meeting of our committee was held in Chicago on February 26, 1950, tn connection with the winter meeting of the house of del- egates of the bar Association, and at that meeting of the committee, at which a quo- rum was present, we voted unanimously to recommend the passage of H., R. 6255. ideo those agree with the gentleman's ea? Mr. JONAS. I thank the gentleman for the information. I take it the gen. tleman is aware of the fact that one of will the gentleman CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE the justices died, and we have a tempo- rary vacancy. The pressure is all the greater because of that situation. Mr. BYRNE of New York. The judge passed away a few days ago? Mr. JONAS. That is right; Judge Shaw, Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 10 minutes to the gentle- man from Massachusetts [Mr. Lang], Mr LANE. Mr. Chairman, there were two bills filed to take care of this situa- tion in the northern district of Tlinois, which of course takes in the Chicago district. One of the bills was filed by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Sapaty] and the other by his colleague (Mr. Yates]. Both of these bills call for two additional district Judges in the northern district of Illinois, but under the provi- sions of those bills both of the judges were to be permanent, Your committee after a lengthy hear- ing on this bill felt that the proponents of this measure had made out a good case. They had proven to the subcom- mittee that there was a substantial workload in that area and that two ad- ditional judges were necessary. But your subcommittee felt that they would make these two positions of a temporary na- ture For that reason there is a commit- tee amendment to this bill. The chairman of the subcommittee has already stated to the House some of those who appeared before the committee and who corresponded with the committee with reference to the passage of one of these bills. I felt I should like to bring to the attention of the Committee a letter that I think is of much impor- tance, because it comes from the office that knows all about the workload in the various districts throughout the United States I refer to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Last year we corresponded with Mr Chandler, who is the Director of the Ad- ministrative Office of the United States Courts, in reference to the situation in this district He wrote back to us that the matter was being handled by his assistant, Mr. Elmore Whitehurst, the Assistant Director, and he in turn cor- responded with our committee as fol- lows, in connection with the bill author- izing the appointment of two additional district judges for the northern district of Mlinois: This proposed legislation conforms with a recommendation which was made by the Judicial Conference of the United States at its recent meeting held in September. There are now six judges in the northern district of Illinois and the addition of two more would make a total of eight judges for that district. I am enclosing a compilation of statistics prepared for me by the Chief of the Division of Procedural Studies and Statistics of this Office showing the flow of judicial business through the northern district of Tinols These statistics in my judgment amply justify the recommendation of the confer- ence. They disclose particularly @ large in- crease in the number of private civil cases commenced and pending. After all, Mr. Chairman, it is our ex- perience on the Subcommittee on the Judiciary that the time of the judges is consumed more on civil cases than on the criminal side of the court. JULY 24 He says further: The number of private civil cases com- menced tncreased from 882 in 1940 to 1,545 in 1949, while the number pending increased from 802 in 1940 to 1,705 in 1949. This type of case in general requires a substantially greater proportion of time of the judges to dispose of than other types of cases generally require. Mr. Chairman, your subcommittee felt that this bill was meritorious and for that reason has so reported t. the full committee, who in turn are placing it before the Members of the House for their consideration today. But, Mr. Chairman, at this time I want to speak of another matter which I think is of importance to the House. FIRST UNITED STATES VICTORY IN KOREA WON BY NEGRO GI's For day after day, a gallant band of American kids had been falling back under the hammer blows of Korean Reds who were superior in numbers, guns, and armor—superior in almost every element of ground fighting except raw courage. Their families and neighbors back home were becoming restless and wor- ried, fearing another disaster like Bataan When would this one-sided battle turn for the better? People were switching their radio dials right past high-class entertainment, try- ing to catch the latest war bulletins. Newspapers were being bought, not daily, but by editions, searching for the first ray of hope, no matter how slim it might be, that would pierce the gloom of stra- tegic withdrawals. It came on July 20, when the Army’s oldest Negro infantry regiment, spear- heading the Twenty-fifth Division which had just come into the line, counter- attacked and drove the Reds out of Yechon. It was the Twenty-fourth Infantry Regiment that did the trick and braced morale where it was needed most, back in the United States of America where hoarding and profiteering reflected un- certainty over the immediate situation. And you have heard something about that as the first order of business today, Mr. Chairman, Mr. GROSS. Mr, Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. LANE. I yield. Mr. GROSS. The gentleman recog- nizes that we are still withdrawing, does he not? Mr. LANE. I certainly do. Mr. Chairman, all of us should offer a prayer of thanks to the regulars of this Negro regiment for shaming us out of our fears. They demonstrated, the hard way, their faith in a common cause that has no room for the ignorance and selfishness of racism and bigotry. Communist propaganda took it on the chin at Yechon when the Korean Reds were blasted by American Negro troops who believed not only in the United States as it is, but in the better Nation that it will become when intolerance is also defeated. They fought and won for all of us. Segregation is on the way out in this world, and we are in this fight, among other things, to hasten its departure.
1950 Our Army Js becoming truly demo- cratic, and in this respect is far ahead of our social and economic organization. If the present crisis should spread, young draftees would become better soldiers if they had some veterans of the Twenty-fourth at their side to steady them in their baptism under fire. Let us pay tribute, then, to the men of the Twenty-fourth, who have added battle honors to those they first started winning against the Comanche Indians over 70 years ago, This old-line outfit, stems from the two Negro companies that were organ- ized in 1866, et Jefferson Barracks, Mo. It is the oldest and perhaps the last Negro infantry regiment in view of the tact that trom now on all our soldiers will be Americans, without any stigma of segregation . But give credit where credit is due, and the Twenty-fourth has earned it by being the first to push the enemy back, It may be temporary and only local, but it is a morale builder that should stir every one of us to give his best. Take heart. We are in this thing to- gether, as equals, and we will win as equals, with such men as those of the fighting Twenty-fourth to show us the way. Mr. MICHENER Mr. Chaiiman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman fiom Michigan | Mr. Horrman]. A DICTATOR NOT NECESSARY Mr HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order. The CHAIRMAN Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan? There was no objection. Mr HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, in his message, the President told the people and the Congress that, at the request of the Security Council of the United Nations, he had ordered our armed forces to fight in Korea to pro- tect the Republic of South Korea. If, as the President insists, Stalin is behind the North Koreans, it is logical to assume that he will shortly instigate attacks against other governments, in Indo-China, Iran, Yugoslavia, Turkey, Greece, and west Germany. Then United Nations will call upon us to meet those attacks with armed forces. The President said we were committed to do so. Then we shall find ourselves involved in war in Asia, Europe, possibly in Africa—each of our fighting forces thousands of miles from its base of sup- ply. Will we not then have fallen into the trap set by Stalin? Is the prophecy of Nikolai Lenin, who wrote in 1924, “Some day we shall force the United States to spend itself into destruction,” about to come true? Will not someone in authority tell us, if anyone knows, approximately the number of dollars, the amount of ma- terial, and, of vital importance, the number of men, it will take to fight and win these wars? With such information we may the better direct our efforts. To date, Congress has not declared war. That issue was decided by the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE United Nations. Up to this date, not one of the other 58 United Nations has sent a single foot soldier to fight in the war declared by United Nations. Our soldiers are slugging it out alone against overwhelming odds. Inasmuch as we seem committed to fight a dictatorship abroad, 1s it not well that we retain here at home the con- Stitutional processes of government which have made us what we are, en- abled us so far to retain a large degree of our individual freedom, the security of our Nation? H R. 9176, up for consideration this weck, is based upon the false premise that the American people have so little faith in constitutional government, so hittle confidence in the loyalty, the cour- age, the cndurancc of our people, that, to carry on this war, the Congress must abdicate, grant to Mr. Truman the pow- ers of a dictator. With Mr. Truman surrounded as he is by graduate politicans from corrupt po- htical machines, individuals of doubtful loyalty, an Acheson who apparently thinks first of the British Empire, and others who would haul down our flag, surrender our independence and make us a member of a world organization, Congressmen who believe in this coun- try, who are concerned about its future, should consider well the implications carried in this and other proposed leg- islation. Behind Mr. Truman stands a group whose thinking, from the evidence at hand, is not concerned first with the wel- fare of the average American citizen, with the problem of maintaining our national independence and security, but of how we can best lend ourselves to aid an international group which is ap- parently depending upon America to fight and win the wars 1n which they involve us, Support to the fullest extent those now fighting the war in which the in- ternational organization, United Na- tions, has now involved us, we will. But that war should not be made an excuse for granting to Mr. Truman the powers of a dictator, for a cowardly surrender of congressional power, for a failure to protect the freedom of our citizens, the security of our Republic. Let Mr. Truman and those at the head of the Armed Services tell us what is needed; then let Congress legislate toward that end; then let labor and management produce the things that are needed. That is the way to avoid disaster; that is the way to avoid defeat by an enemy, while at the same time protecting our future. We need no dictator to either fight or win a war. To win any war in which we may be- come involved, to establish after that war has been won an American policy which will protect our national security, we should, in November, elect a Con- gress, and in 1952 a President, both of whom will place the interest, the welfare of our country and its people above every other consideration. If civilization, the welfare of other nations, rests upon us, then it is impera- 10867, tive that we follow a policy which will insure our survival. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the re- mainder of my time. Mr MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from New York LMr, Keatinel. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, on Thursday we adopted a bill for an extra judge for Texas. Today we have two judges for Wlinois. And I believe com- ing up after that is one for Kansas City. In connection with the Texas bill I made certain general observations in opposing that measure, which apply, of course, to the bill before us now. One, that we should scrutinize very care7ully all of these additional expenditures on the home front before authorizing them. The Members, of course, should realize that when we authorize a judge it does not mean just the salary of that judge, but it means all of the attendant ex- penses that go with the creation of a new judgeship. There is the clerk and his criers, and all of the panoply which 1s connected with the creation of a judgeship Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr. Chair- man, will the gentleman yield? Mr KEATING. I yield. Mr H CARL ANDERSEN. Would the gentleman tell us approximately how much that would amount to in thousands of dollars? It would be about $50,000 for each judge, would it not? Mr. KEATING. I would think that is a fair figure. I think the judge's salary is $15,000. Then, all of these incidental expenses run it up. If the gentleman would take the provision in the appropriation bill for the courts and divide that by the number of Judges, he would arrive at it. I do not have the exact figure, but I would think that altogether it would amount to at least $50,000 per judge. Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN  Espe- cially as we are placing on the pension list in the future an extra individual who draws full pay in the form of a pension after he retires. Mr. KEATING. That is correct. Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Can the gentleman tell us why we need two ad- ditional judges at this time for northern Illinois? Mr. KEATING. Well, I do not think we do, and I will come to that. Then, when I have finished, if I have not satis- fled the gentleman, or have not covered the point that he has in mind, I will be glad to elaborate on it. I do want to say one word about my general objec- tions to all of these bills. First, is the question of economy. Second, we have already created in this Congress, and I repeat it because some of the Members may not have been here, we have already created 27 judges by the bill which we passed last year, which is already the largest number of judges ever authorized in any Congress of the United States including the first, the Continental Congress. Now we are asked to provide for eight more. ‘When I take my little granddaughter on my knee and she says, “Grandpa, you served in the Eightieth and Eighty-first
10868 Congresses, didn't you?” I will stick out my chest and say, “Yes, I served in the Eightieth Congress.” Then I will quickly and with the hope that she may overlook it, add, “‘and also the Eighty- first.” Then, she will say, “What did you do in the Eighty-first Congress?” I hate to tell her that the principal thing we did was to create more Federal judges than any Coneress in the history of the United States. I just do not think that js anything to be particularly proud about. Mr. TABER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. KEATING. I shall be happy to yield to the gentleman from New York. Mr. TABER. Would the gentleman or anyone else be able to tell us how many district judges there are in the whole United States? Mr. STEFAN. I can tell you, I be- lieve: 296 judges, district and circuit. Mr. TABER. And how many are there in the northern district of Nlinois? Mr. KEATING. There are now in the northern district, six, and this bill would bring them up to eight. Mr. TABER. I notice by the schedule on page 7 of the report that there were an over-all total of cases terminated of 4,847. That would be on the basis of approximately 145 per judge. In nozth- ern Illinois with six judges they termi- nated 245 cases in the year 1949, or about 40 per judge. I do not know whether that has any significance or not, but to an ordinary fellow it does. Mr. KEATING. I think the gentleman has put his finger on a very important point. It must be appreciated, and I do appreciate the fact, that there are different kinds of cases. Mr. TABER. I appreciate that. Mr. KEATING. But that is taken across the board. Referring to table 2 on page 6, which is the case load per judge for both civil and criminal cases, you will note that they are given separately, they are in two separate tables; and I am gratified to note and to point out to my friends from Illinois that crime is apparently on the wane in Illinois, and there were fewer criminal cases there; they seem to be coming down a little. It is very interest- ing and I feel a very wholesome tendency. But if you add the cases in those two columns, both civil and criminal, over a period of the last 10 years you come out with figures showing that in 1940 the case load was 354 per judge. In 1945 and 1946 it went up to 484 and 568; and they handled those cases. Since then it has slumped off into the four hundreds, and in the last year it was 469 per judge. Mr. JONAS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. KEATING. In just 1 minute. Then on the first table on page 5 you will see the situation regarding the number of cases commenced and terminated, both civil and criminal. These are the fac- tors upon which decision must be reached. It will be noted that under the civil cases there were 2,230 started and 2,079 finished; but of those, as appears down at the bottom in the next table, 292 were OPA cases which are, of course, on the down grade; so they are practi- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE cally current with their cfvil cases and are completely current on their criminal cases. Now I shall be happy to yield to the gentleman from Illinois. Mr. JONAS. What I understood the distinguished gentleman from New York to point out was that in New York they have disposed of more cases in the Fed- eral district court. That may be true; you may have more diligent judges up there, or the cases may not have run as long. But to make an argument from the standpoint of statistics as to the dili- gence or ability of judges is fallacious and silly. Let me point out this and I will be through: The courts have their calls di- vided into calendars; one judge may dis- pose of 250 cases while another judge is trying 1 case which takes 3 or 4 months. So one cannot rate a judge sole- ly on the number of cases disposed of, nor can you rate a district by the same yard- stick, Mr. KEATING. We have not at- tempted to stigmatize any judge, or make comparison between judges. I appre- ciate the fact, as I said in my reply to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Ta- BER], that there is a difference in the length of cases. ‘The number of cases is not the entire criterion. But in com- paring this district with others through- out the country the same thing applies to the others. The gentleman from New York (Mr. Byrne], my distinguished and beloved chairman, used the words of Peyton Ford, for whom I have the high- est respect, in comparing this district with two other districts, the northern district of California and the eastern district of Pennsylvania. That made it look as if the northern district of Illinois needed more judges. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New York has expired. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman two additional min- utes, Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, if you compare this with a number of other districts throughout the country, it will look just as bad the other way. It means nothing simply to pick out a couple of other Federal districts and compare the need with them. One must view the over-all situation. At the conclusion of the debate I am going to offer a motion to recommit which will provide that the bill be re- ported back forthwith and authorize the appointment of one judge instead of two. This is the only bill of the eight that will come before us which calls for two additional judges. Normally when we authorize additional judges, we just authorize one. In view of the statistics that have been given here, it seems to me that to au- thorize one at this time ts certainly all we should do, particularly in view of the reiterated statements of our President since we were here Thursday when he said that the Congress and the people of the United States must cut down as far as possible the expenses of running our Government domestically when we have such tremendous burdens facing us JULY 24 in our overseas and miiltary commit- ments. I hope that the committee will go along with me. If the gentleman from Dlinois {Mr. SasarH) were present, I feel that he would agree that one judge would take care of the situation in which he is particularly interested, and which he had in mind in introducing this bill, If we increase the number of judges out there by one, it seems to me we are doing all that we should do, and I will therefore ask for support on the motion to recommit from my friends on the Democratic side, as well as on our side where, I am confident, such a move will have overwhelming support. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Mason]. Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order and to revise and extend my remarks. The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from THinois? There was no objection. Mr. MASON. Mr. Chairman, with the general objectives listed in the Presi- dent’s war message, I am in full accord in the face of the world situation today. However, the message brings home to us the terrible price we must pay for the mistakes our leaders made at Yalta and Potsdam. The situation in Korea today is the tragic result of following the Ache- son policy in Asia, and refusing to follow Gencral MacArthur's recommendations in regard to our military strength and responsibilities in Asia. After writing off China, Korea, and Formosa, follow- ing the advice of Acheson, we now re- verse ourselves and overnight attempt to recover what we have thoughtlessly thrown away. That is a very costly pro- gram. If we had followed the advice of MacArthur, given Jast year, we would have headed off the present trouble in Korea. MacArthur’s communications and recommendations, ignored and filed in the Pentagon secret files, should be made public. THE MESS MAC ARTHUR INHERITED Mr, Chairman, the American people have more faith, more confidence, and more trust in the ability, the knowledge, the integrity, and the judgment of Gen- eral MacArthur than they have in Sec- retary of State Acheson, Secretary of Defense Johnson, and President Truman, all three combined. General MacArthur is responsible for the only bright spot in our entire foreign program. Where Acheson, Johnson, and Truman can only show failure after failure in their for- eign-policy program, General MacArthur can point with pride to his particular sector of our foreign-policy line because it is the only bright spot in the entire line. For this reason the dastardly and unwarranted attack upon General Mac- Arthur by former Secretary of the In- terior Harold Ickes, placing the blame upon General MacArthur for the present situation in Korea, cannot go unchal- lenged and must be answered. General MacArthur recommended and urged that our military strength in Asia be built up to take care of the situation
1950 that was developing in Korea, Formosa, and Indo-China. He was the first man to propose that our seventh fleet be used to protect and guard Formosa, because Formosa was of the utmost importance in our Asiatic defense line. His recom. mendations went unheeded, and the Acheson policy in Asia was adopted. We now face the results of the Acheson policy and General MacArthur has been given the job of cleaning up the mess, The war in Korea is “The Acheson War.” SALOTAGE OF KOREAN AID Mr. Chairman, last year Congress voted money to bolster the miiltary strength of South Korea and to aid anti- Communist forces in Asia. One item of $75,000,000 was appropriated: another of $27,600,000; another of $10,300,000. The program of military aid to South Korea was sabotaged by the State Department to the extent that only $52,000 worth of barbed wire out of the millions appro- priated was sent to South Korea with which to stem the present onslaught of Communist tanks, planes, and ar- tillery. While the Russians were fur- nishing North Korean Communists heavy tanks, artillery, and planes, our State Department experts on the Far East, the pink trio in the State Department— Acheson, Lattimore, and Jessup—were sabotaging our program to give military aid to the Korean Republic and Secre- tary Acheson was announcing to the world that we would not aid South Korea even if it were invaded. The excuse offered by Acheson for sabotaging Korean military aid was that it might be used by the South Koreans to attack the Communist forces in North Korea, Of course this attitude on the part of our State Department gave en- couragement to the Communists in North Korea, and acted as a “Go sign” to them in their attack upon South Kerea. OUR SECRETARY OF DEFENSE Mr. Chairman, Louis Johnson, Secre- tary of Defense, talks too much. He blusters like a schoolboy about what we cun do with one hand tied behind our back. In 1939, at a meeting of the executive committee of the American Legion in Indianapolis, Louis Johnson was asked, “How long would it take us to clean up the Japs in the Pacific if war broke out?” His answer was, “It would take us 6 weeks.” Was that a good guess? Only a few months ago, when appear- ing before a congressional committee of the House, Secretary Johnson was asked, “Is it true that the Russians are using the major part of their steel production in the building of heavy war tanks?” Johnson's answer was: I don't know, but I hope so, because heavy war tanks are obsolete today and we can easily take care of them. In view of what is happening in Korea today, was that a good guess? Mr. Chairman, in Korea we need the type of fighting that the marines are noted for, but our marine force has been skeletonized and suppressed under John- gon. We need aircraft to support our ground troops in Korea, but our airs CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE craft replacements, personnel, and air- craft carriers have been slashed under Johnson. We need tanks and antitank weapons to block the offensive power of the heavy Russian tanks. We have no: such defensive weapons because tank modernization was one of the first items scrapped under Johnson. We have spent during the last 4 years $55,000,000,000 on national defense, but we are not pre- pared to fight even a “police war” in Korea, Where have the $55,000,000,000 been spent? Are we prepared for an outbreak in western Europe—Berlin, Yugoslavia, Greece? Are we prepared for an attack upon Iran and the oil flelds of the Mid- dle East? Why have not our Joint Chiefs of Staff during the past year heeded the pleas of General MacArthur for more troops and more weapons in Asia? These are questions being asked on every main street in America. Our Secretary of De- fense should answer them. Mr. Chairman, since President Truman has repudiated the Acheson policy in the Far East by his right-about-face con- cerning South Korea and Formosa, he should now repudiate the author of that policy by demanding the immediate resignation of his Secretary of State, Dean Acheson. This step should be taken by the President forthwith. Mr, MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska | Mr. STeran], Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield for a couple of questions I desired to ask the gentleman from New York? Mr, STEFAN, I yield to the gentle- man. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Is there anything in this bill that the gentleman thinks will result in winning this pres- ent war? In other words, will the pas- sage of this bill in any way contribute to the winning of the war? Mr. STEFAN. Ido not think there is anything presently in it that will. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan, The gentleman from New York |Mr. Keat- ING) spoke about his granddaughter. It seemed to me he was in some doubt as to the answer he would make if she asked him whether he is a Member of the Eighty-first Congress. In the gentle- man’s opinion, are the Republicans on this side of the aisle responsible for what the Eighty-first Congress does? Mr, STEFAN. Of course, we are in the minority. The majority has over 90 votes more than has the minority. Mr. Chairman, I rise at this time to give the membership some information about the Federal judiciary which we are discussing at this time in view of the fact that the legislation before us provides for the creation of additional judgeships. I hope this will answer some of the ques- tions that have been propounded. Only recently we passed a bill making appro- priations for the Federal judiciary which amounted to $23,560,000. When you pass legislation like this it means appro- priation of money. In that bill we in«~ cluded funds for 27 new Federal judges; 6 circuit and 21 district judges. We have presently employed 286 district and 10869 circuit Judges. We have on the roll 35 retired judges and 9 have resigned. The present salary of a circuit judge is $17,500, and that of a district judge $15,000. When you first glance at the salary you do not get the rest of the pic- ture, as my colleague, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Kratinc! endeav- ored to tell you. We have improved the conditions of the Federal court greatly in the last 10 years in that we have pro- vided additional services. I am glad we did that because it makes for efficiency. When you create a Federal judge, do not forget that you have to have a clerk of the district court to service that court Then there are probationary officers, the matter of criers, secretaries, stenogra- phers, reporters, law clerks, and travel ex- penses and per diem. In addition to that we will have to appropriate money for the Justice Department which, in- variably, when we create a new judge- ship, asks for additional marshals and United States attorneys. So, I ask that you give very serious consideration when you pass a piece of legislation creating a judgeship, that you take all of these things into considera- tion, because $23,000,000 servicing 286 district and circuit judges over the coun- try, is a tremendous increase over the appropriation which we have been mak- ing for the Federal judiciary not long ago. Although I am a very good friend of the Federal judiciary, and I want the best Federal judiciary in the world, I think in these times of stress we should give some attention to economy in Gov- ernment. Perhaps some of the judges are needed. Perhaps some of them can be held up. Mr. JONAS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. STEFAN. I yield to the gentle- man from Illinois. Mr. JONAS. The gentleman has stated that in addition to the $15,000 that a Federal district judge is paid, that there are other incidentals that run up to the stupendous figure that my dis- tinguished colleague, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Kratinc], mentioned. He said it might run up to $50,000. In what respect could it amount to $50,000? The judge gets a clerk at about $4,000; he gets a marshal at about $4,000, he gets one probationary officer at $3,500, and one secretary. Now that does not by any means amount to a stupendous figure. Mr. STEFAN, I think the gentleman had better revise his figures, because I think I can furnish information that the gentleman has not got the correct figures as to the addilional services that are required to service a district judge. Mr. JONAS. I think it would be well, when you talk about the sums we spend for the courts, to take into consideration the sums we voted for ECA. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Nebraska has expired. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. CeLier]. Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, these matters of judges were carefully scruti- nized and screened and discussed by the Committee on the Judiciary and the
10870 members came to the conclusion that the judges involved in the bills that come before you this afternoon are abso- lutely needed. Now, I heard tell of additional ex- pense. Where justice is involved, we must not be pinchpenny. There will be some additional administrative em- ployees required. That is always the case when you designate a new judge. But, justice delayed is justice denied. That is an old adage, and it is well to repeat it. Failure to puss these judge- ships will delay justice. The calendars of the courts are crowded with cases that cannot be reached and tried for months because of the paucity of judges, It is our duty to supply them. As to the necessity for these judges, certainly we cannot gainsay the approval of the Attorney General, the Admin- istrator of the Courts, the American Bar Association, the State Bar Association of Wlinois. There came before the sub- committee of the Committee on the Judiciary the Chief Justice Major of the circuit court of appeals and the chief judge of the district court, Judge Barnes, and they testified as to the absolute need of these two judges in the northern dis- trict of Illinois, and there was received a communication signed by all the dis- trict judges of that northern district of [llinois, Judges Barnes, Sullivan, Igo, LaBuy, and Shaw. I am going to read one or two paragraphs from that com- munication. By the way, the judges I have named are not all Democrats, The letter in part reads as follows: One of the judges of our court informs us that there are pending on his calendar four cases which must be tried and which will tuke, in the aggregate, not less than 1 year and 7 months for trial. The first of these cases, an antitrust case, will take not less than 1 year for trial. Another, an antitrust case, will take not less than 5 month for trial. A third, a mail-fraud case, will take 6 or 7 weeks for trial. And the fourth, a condemnation case, in which 139 parcels of property were involved, of which 115 have becn disposed of, wil) take 5 or 6 weeks for trial in respect of the remaining properties involved. The calendars of the rest of us &re not dissimilar. The clerk of our court informs us that on April 1, 1950, there were 44 antitrust cases pending in the court. Of these, 4 were criminal cases, 11 were civil Government cases, und 29 were civil private cases. Some of these cases will take months to try and most, if not all, of them will take several weeks. There seems to be a concentration of antitrust tigation in our court, The Attorney General maintains an office for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice in Chicago, separate and apart from the district attorney's office. This office looks after the territory embraced in several States. Apparently, counsel find it more convenient to institute antitrust prosecutions in Chicago than in other places, which perhaps accounts for the concentra- tion of that particular class of business In our court. Nearly every governmental prore- cution: under the antitrust laws which re« sults in a conviction brings in its train pri- vate antitrust actions for treble damages based on the governmental conviction, and a@ large percentage of these find their way into the court where the conviction was obtained. T could go on and read you much more from the very illuminating letter from CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE the justices of that court, but time will not permit. I do indeed hope that wis- dom will prompt an overwhelming vote in favor of this bill for the two additional judges for the northern district of Miinois. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yleld § minutes to the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. REED). Mr. REED of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I am heartily in favor of the enactment of this legislation. Let me say some- thing to you about the northern district of Illinois. I am sorry I do not have with me the figures according to the latest census but must refer to the census of 1940, which, of course, is much less than the one that has been taken this year. The northern district of Mlinois is composed of 18 counties with a popula- tion of 5,414,800, which is more than two-thirds of the State’s total popula- tion of 17,897,241. In addition to the northern district of Tlinois there are two others—the southern district and the eastern district. Together those two districts have a population of 2,482,441, with four district judges, two in each district. From 1940, the northern dis- trict of Iinois has had six judges. In that year it was deemed by the Congress advisable to give it an extra judge, and authorized such appointment but provided that the first vacancy that occurred in the district should not be filled. Unfortunately, after a little over 6 months, a vacancy did occur and so from that time on there have been but six judges. The two additional judges authorized by this legislation would bring the total up to eight in the north- ern district of Ilnois. There is dire need for eight judges in that district. Let me call your attention to these facts: In 1947 the cases adjudicated and determined in the district with 6 judges were 415 cases per judge. In 1943 it was 359 cases per judge, and in 1949 they jumped to 454 cases per judge. At the end of 1949 there were 429 cases pending per judge. No matter how much they have been able to expedite their work, they are still falling behind. I had intended to say something con- cerning the statement which was made by the gentleman from New York as to the increased cost of these judges. I think something like $50,000 for each judge was suggested. That is absurd. The salary of the judge himself is $17,500. He would be required to have a clerk, a bailiff, a secretary, and a probation Officer. The only additional cost would be that of the maintenance of the court- room which already exists and must be maintained now. In my opinion, the necessity for these judges is urgent in the northern district of Dlinois if we are to expect the court to adjudicate fairly and impartially. When judges are required to hurry through a congested docket, litigants are deprived of the careful and thought- ful consideration of their cases to which they are entitled and faulty and insuf- ficiently considered judgments mean more appeals and cause congestion in the dockets of the courts of appeal. All this causes delay and expense to liti- gants and to the Government. This bill JULY 24 not only has the approval of the pres- ent district judges, the judges of the court of appeals for the seventh circuit and the judicial council of senior circuit judges. It is also endorsed by the Chi- cago, Iilinois State, and American Bar Associations. I have talked with and received letters from scores of lawyers who have extensive practices in the Fed- eral courts and who urgently request this legislation in order that they may have assurance that their cases may be promptly tried. The case load per judge at the present time is much too high. Even with two additional judges, it will take years to bring it down to normal. Mr. Chairman, I urge favorable con- sideration of this measure, now. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, much stress has been placed on statistics as a basis for the necessity of this bill. Personally I do not place too much im- portance on the value of satistics in this instance. When I came to the Congress we did not have the Administrative Of- fice of the United States Courts. We did not have the Judicial Conference. Both of those agencies were created to help solve these problems on other than a political basis. However, the experiment has not been entirely a success, because we drift into these misleading statistics. Let me give you one illustration with which we are all familiar right here in the House of Representatives. So far as case loads are concerned, in the last Congress the Committee on the Judiciary had 52 percent of all the bills introduced in the House. Did the Committee on the Judiciary do 50 percent of all the work performed in the House? Certainly not. Number of bills is no criterion. Another illustration is the Consent Calendar and Private Calendar. On Unanimous Consent Calendar Day, or on Private Calendar Day the House will pass 50 to 100 bills whereas it would take a week or 2 weeks to pass a tax bill or a foreign-relations bill or a bill of another type. Could we base our work here at all on these statistics as far as case load is concerned? Well, the same thing happens with judges. Go to the city of Detroit, a great industrial center, and you will have patent cases. One of those cases will take days and weeks and months. Those judges will work for days and weeks and months on a single case. You might go out into the Mid- west somewhere, where they do not have that type of cases, and they can dispose of their cases just as we dispose of cases on the Consent Calendar. So to me these statistics cut very little figure. The type of case is which takes time. Iam a realist. On our own committee we have been holding hearings and making a study of newsprint. It was suggested, factually, that 200 newspapers had dis- continued business during the last year. Therefore, the implication was, without any proof, that they had gone out of business because of the lack of news- print. Now, that was an assumption. We want some proof here. That is just what the trouble is here. I think they probably need one additional judge in indiana, but I do not think they neea wo,
1950 The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired, Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair man, I have no further requests for time. I yield back the remainder of my time. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read. The Clerk read as follows: Be it enacted, ele., That the President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, two additional district judges for the northern district of IlMnoits. Accord- ingly, title 28, United Stuies Code, section 133, is amended to read as follows with respect to said district: “Districts Judges Tllinois * * * e ° Northern..-~----2-2 eee 8 s . * ° ” W.th the following committee amend- ment: Page 1, line 5, after the period, strike out the remainder of the bill and insert: “Vacan- cies occurring by reason of the death, retire- ment, resignation, or removal of either of the judges appointed pursuant to this act shall not be filled.” The CHAIRMAN. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendment. The committee amendment was agreed Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. Mr. Chairman, I want to direct the attention of the Committee to certain facts which pertain to the territory in and around Chicago. Lake County, Ind., is just across the Indiana-Illinois State line. I aim offi- cially advised that the welfare depart. ment of Lake County pays out almost $100,000 per year to supported descrtcd children whose parents have skipped across the State line. I was very in- terested in the statement of the gentle- man from New York |Mr. Keattne] in speaking about the fact that when he took his little granddaughter on his knee—— Mr. KEATING. Will the gentleman yicld there before he goes on with his discussion? Mr. JACOBS. Yes, I yield. Mr. EEATING. I would like to advise the gentleman that I have already stated Iam in favor of the “Pappy” bill. I think it is a fine piece of legislation, and I hope it is enacted. Mr. JACOBS. I thank the gentleman very much, It is before the Judiciary Committee, and we have had hearings on jt. I will appreciate anything that the gentleman from New York may do to as- sist in getting it out of the Judiciary Committee so that when the gentleman reluctantly admits that he was a member of the Elghty-first Congress and his granddaughter should happen to say: “Well, ncw, Grandpop, what did you do to get the runaway pappy bill out of the Judiciary Committee?” that the gentle- man will be able to say that he really made an effort in favor of it. Mr. KEATING. Mr, Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. JACOBS. I yield. Mr. KEATING. I shall be very well able to say that I did, becaus2 I have al- ready indicated my interest in the bill; in CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE fact, if the gentleman thinks it would be germane I would be very happy to have the gentleman move to substitute his bill for the bill now before us. Mr. JACOBS. Does the gentleman himself think it would be germane? Mr. KEATING. I fear it would not, but I would be very happy to support the gentleman’s bill. Mr, JACOBS. I am glad the gentle- man thinks well of it and thinks it is meritorious. There is more money spent in Lake County to support children whose parents have abandoned them and and taken refuge in other States than it would cost to support approximately three Federal judges in Chicago. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. JACOBS. I yield. Mr. KEATING. I think the gentle- man’s observation is probably correct and also I pointed out in the debate on Thursday the fact that if the bill that is before our committee to raise the juris- dictional hmit from $3,000 to $10,000 were passed it would get rid of a lot of the load that is now improperly in the Fed- eral courts, and in my judgment that is the constructive approach to the prob- lem of these judges having too much work to do, Mr. JACOBS. I am glad the genile- man mentioned that because I am heart- ily in favor of 1t. I think it is a bill that should be brought up. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time. The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises. Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the chair, Mr. Tyornberry, Chairman of the Com- mittee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that Com- mittee, having had under consideration the bill (H. R. 6454) to authorize the ap- pointment of two additional district judges for the northern district of Tlli- nois, pursuant to House Resolution 702, he reported the same back to the House with an amendment adopted 1n the Com- mittce of the Whole. The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered. The question is on the amendment, The amendment was agrced to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time. The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the bill. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speakcr, I offer a motion to recommit. The SPEAKER. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill? Mr. KEATING. Iam. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit. The Clerk read as follows: Mr. Keatinc moves to recommit the bill H. R. 6454 to the Committee on the Judi- ciary with instructions to report the same back forthwith with the following amend- ment: Strike out all after the enacting clause and substitute therefor the following: “That the President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, one additional district judge for the northern district of Illinois, Any vacancy occurring 10871 by reason of the death, retirement, resig- nation, or removal of the Judge appointed pursuant to this act shall not be Milled.” The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion to recommit. The question was taken; and on @& division (demanded by Mr. H. Carn ANDERSEN) there were—ayes 33, noes 50. Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order that a quorum is not present and object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present. matic. The roll call is auto- The Doorkcener will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. The Clerk called the roll and there were—yeas 116, nays 163, not voting 161, as follows: [Roll No. 214] YEAS—116 Allen, Calif. Graham Nolson Andersen, Gross Nicholson H. Carl Ilegen Noiblad Andreten, Hale O'Hara, Minn. August H. Hell, O'Konsekt Angell Leonard W. Phillips, Calif, Arends Halleck Poage Auchincloss Hurden Polk Beall Harvey Potter Benrett, Mich. Heselton Poulson Bilackney Hoeven Reed, N. ¥. Bolton, Ohio Hoffman, Mich. Rees Brambiett Holmes Rich Brown, Ohio Hope Riehlman Byrnes, Wis. Horan St George Canfield Huber Saylor Cannon Hull Seott, Case, N J. James Hugh D, Jr, Care,S Dak. Jenkins Scrivner Clevenger Jensen Scudder Co'e, Kans. Judd Secrest Cole,N Y. Kearney Shafer Corbett Kearns Short Cotton Keating Smith, Kans, Crawford Kilburn Smith, Wis. Cunningham Lanham Stefan Curtis LeCompte Stockman Dague LeFevre Taber Davis, Wis, Lovre Talle Ewart McConnell Tollefson Dolliver McCulloch ‘Towe Dondero McDonough Van Zandt Elston McGregor Vorys Feilows Mack, Wavh. Wadsworth Fenton Martin, Iowa Werdel Ford Mason Widnall Fulton Meriow Wilson, Ind, Gamble Michener Withrow Golden Miller, Md, Wolcott Goodwin Miller, Nebr, Wolverton NAYS—163 Abernethy Chudoff Granger Addonizio Clemente Grant Albert Colmer Green Andrews Cooley Gregory Eatley Crook Hardy Baring Crosser Harrison Bates, Ky. Davenport Havenner Battle Davis, Ga. Hays, Chio Beckworth Deane Redrick Bennett, Fla. DeGraffenried Herlong Biemilier Delaney Hobbs Bishop Denton Howell Blatnik Donchue Jackeon, Wash. Boggs, Del, Doughton Jacobs Bolling Doyle Jonas Bolton, Md. Durham Jones, Ala, Bonner Eberharter Jones, Mo, Bosone Elliott Jones, N. O. Brown, Ga. Engle, Calif. Karsten Bryson Feighan Kee Buchanan Fernandez Kelly, N. ¥. Buckley, 1. Fisher Kerr Burke Fiood King Burleson Forand Kirwan Burnside Fugate Kruse Byrne, N.Y, Furco:o Lane Camp Garmatzs Lind Carnahan, Gathings Lynch Celler Gorski McCormack Cheif Gocsett McKinnon Chiperfleld Granahan McMillan, 8. 0.
McSweeney Philbin Steed Macy Preston Stigler Madden Price Sullivan Magee Rabaut Tauriello Mahon Rankin Thomas Mansfield Redden Thornberry Marshall Reed, 1). Underwood Miller, Calif. Rhodes Velde Mills Ribicoff Walsh Mitchell Richards Walter Monroney Rivers Welchel Morris Robeson Wheeler Moulder Rogers, Fla. Whitaker Multer Rooney White, Calif. Murdock Snsscer Whitten Noland Shelley Whittington Norre}l Sheppard Wickersham O'Brien, IIL Stkes Willams O’Harer, Il, Simpson, Il. Wilson, Okla. O'Sullivan Smathers Wilson, Tex. O"loole Smith, Va. Woodhouse Patten Spence Young Perkins Staggers Peterron Stanley NOT VOTING—151 Abbitt Hand Norton Allen, Il. Hare O'Brien, Mich, Allen, La. Harris O'Netli Anderson, Calif Hart Pace Aspinall Hayo, Ark. Passman Barden Hebert Patman Burrett, Pa. Heffernan Patterson Barrett, Wyo. Heller Pfeifer Bates, Mass. Herter Joseph L. Bentsen Hil Pfeiffer, Boggs, La. Hinshaw William L. Boykin Hoffman, Il. Phillips, Tenn. Brren Holifield Pickett Brehm Irving Plumley Brooks Jackson, Calif. Powell Buckley, N Y. Javits Priest Bulwinkle Jenison Quinn Burdick Jennings Rains Burton Johnson Ramsay Carlyle Karst Regan Carroll Kean Rodino Cavalcante Keefe Rogers, Mass, Chatham Kelley, Pa. Roosevelt Chesney Kennedy Sabath Christopher Keogh Sadlak Combs Kilday Badowski Cooper Klein Sanborn Coudert Kunkel Scott, Hardie Cox Larcade Simpson, Pa, Davies, N. Y. Latham Sims Davis, Tenn. Lichtenwalter Smith, Ohio Dawson Linchan Sutton Dingell Lodge Tackett Dollinger Lucas Taylor Douglas Lyle Teague Eaton McCarthy Thompson El},sworth McGrath Trimble Engel, Mich. McGuire Vinson Evins McMilien, Ill. = Vursell Fallon Mack, Il. Wagner Fogarty Marcantonio Welch Frazier Marsalis White, Idaho Gary Martin, Mass. jer Gavin Meyer Wigglesworth Gillette Miles Willis Gilmer Morgan Winstead Gordon Morrison Wooa ye Gore Morton Woodruff = Ai} Gul Murphy Yates < Gwinn Murray, Tenn. Zablocki yy Hall, Edwin Arthur Murray, Wis. Nixon CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE So the motion to recommit was re- jected. The Clerk announced the following pairs: On this vote: Mr. William L, Pfelffer for, with Mr, Yates against. Mr. Sadlak for, with Mr. Linehan against. Mr. Smith of Ohio for, with Mr, Gordon against. Mr. Eaton for, with Mr. Babath against. Mr. Kean for, with Mr. Hoffman of Illinois against, Mr. Lichtenwalter for, with Mr. Dawson against. Mr. Coudert for, with Mr, Chesney against. Mr, Herter for, with Mr, Karst against. Mr, Gillette for, with Mr. Zablocki against, Mr. Simpson of Pennsylvania for, with Mr. Mack of Wiinols against. Mr. Taylor for, with Mr. Tackett against. Mr, Brehm for, with Mr. Trimble against. Mr. Hardie Scott for, with Mr. Hart against, Mr, Jackson of California for, with Mr. Hébert against. Mr. Bates of Massachusetts for, with Mr. Aspinall against. : Mr. Patterson for, with Mr. Breen against. Mrs. Rogers of Massachusetts for, with Mr, Dingell against. Mr. Kunkel for, with Mr. Morrison against, Mr. Latham for, with Mr. Carroll against. Mr. Gwinn for, with Mr. Welch against, Mr. Gavin for, with Mr, O'Brien of Michi- gan against. Mr. Plumley for, with Mr. O'Neill against. Mr. Wigglesworth for, with Mr. Gilmer against. Mr. Anderson of California for, with Mr. McGuire against. Mr. Morton for, with Mr. Hays of Arkan- eas against. Mr, Edwin Arthur Hall for, with Mr, Boggs of Louisiana against. Mr, Ellsworth for, against. General pairs until further notice: Mr. Roosevelt with Mr. Woodruff. Mr. Keogh with Mr. Hill. Mr, Heller with Mr, Guill. Mr. Heffernan with Mr. Hand. Mr. Powell with Mr. Sanborn. Mr. McGrath with Mr. Barrett of Wyo- ming. Mr. Buckley of New York with Mr, Martin of Massachusetts. Mr. Davies of New York with Mr. Meyer. Mr, Murphy with Mr. Nixon. Mr. Klein with Mr. Phillips of Tennessee. Mr Irving with Mr. Engel of Michigan, Mr. Winstead with Mr. Hinshaw. Mr. Dollinger with Mr. Jennings. Mr. Barrett of Pennsylvania with Mr. John- son. Mr. Gary with Mr. Murray of Wisconsin. Mr. Harris with Mr Keefe. Mr. Frazier with Mr. Burdick. Mr. ABERNETHY changed his vote from “vea” to “nay.” The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The doors were opened. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the bill. Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr. Speaker, on that I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were refused. The question was taken; and on a di- vision (demanded by Mr. H. Cari ANDER- SEN) there were—ayes 103, noes 60. Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that & quorum is not present and object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. The Chair does not see a quorum present. The roll call is automatic. The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will no- tify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. The Clerk called the roll and there were—yeas 163, nays 110, not voting 157, as follows: with Mr. Kennedy [Roll No, 215] YEAS—163 Abernethy Battle Bolling Addonizio Beckworth Bolton, Md. Albert Bennett, Pia. Bonner Allen, Calif, Bennett, Mich. Bosone Andrews Biemiller Brown, Ga. Bailey Bishop Bryson Baring Blatnik Buchanan Bates, Ky. Boggs, Del. Buckley, Ul, JULY 24 Burke Gregory Patten Burleson Hardy Perkins Burnside Harrison Peterson Byrne, N. ¥. Havenner Philbin Camp Hays, Ohio Lk Cannon Hedrick Preston Carnahan Herlong Price Case, N. J. Hobbs Rabaut Celter Howell Rankin Chelf Jackson, Wash. Reed, Ill. Chiperfield Jacobs Rhodes Chudoff Jonas Ribicoff Clemente Jones, Ala, Rivers Colmer Jones, Mo. Robeson Cooley Jones, N.C. Rogers, Fla. Crook Karsten Rooney Crosser Kee Sasscer Cunningham Kelly, N. Y. Bhelley Davenport King Sheppard Davis, Ga. Kruse Sikes Dawson Lane Simpeon, Ill, Deane Lanham Smathers DeGraffenried Lind Staggers Delancy Lynch Stanley Denton McCormack Bteed Dolliver McKinnon Stigler Donohue McMillan, 8.C, Sullivan Doughton Madden Tauriello Doyle Magee Thomas Durham Mahon Thornberry Eberharter Mansfield Underwood Elliott Marshall Velde Feighan Miller, Calif. Walsh Fellows Mills Walter Fernandez Mitchell Weichel Flood Monroney ‘Wheeler Forand Morris Whitaker Fugate Moulder White, Calif. Furcolo Multer Whitten Garmatz Murdock Whittington Gathings Noland Wickersham Gorski Norrell Willtams Gossett o'Brien, 111. Wilson, Okla. Granahan O'Hara, Il, Wilson, Tex. Granger O'Sullivan Woodhouse Grant O'Toole Green Pace NAYS—110 Andersen, Hall, Norblad H Carl Leonard W. O'Hara, Minn. Andresen, Halleck O'Konski August H, Harden Phillips, Calif. Angell Harvey Poage Arends Heselton Potter Auchincloss Hoeven Poulson Beall Hoffman, Mich. Reed, N. Y. Blackney Holmes Rees Bolton, Ohio Hope Rich Bramblett Huber Riehlman Brown, Ohio Hull St. George Byrnes, Wis. James Saylor Canfield Jenkins Scott, Case,S Dak. Judd Hugh D., Jr. Clevenger Kearney Scrivner Cole, Kans, Kearns Scudder Cole, N. ¥. Keating Secrest Corbett Kilburn Shafer Cotton Kirwan Short Crawford LeCompte Smith, Kans. Curtis LeFevre Smith, Wis. Dague Lovre Stefan Davis, Wis. McConnell Stockman D'Ewart McCulloch Taber Dondero McDonough Talle Elston McGregor Tollefson Fenton McSweeney Towe Fisher Mack, Wash. Van Zandt Ford Macy Vorys Fulton Martin, Iowa Wadsworth Gamble Mason Werdel Golden Merrow Widnall Goodwin Michener Wilson, Ind. Graham Miller, Md. Withrow Gross Miller, Nebr. Wolcott Hagen Nelson Wolverton Hale Nicholson Young NOT VOTING—157 Abbitt Bulwinkle Dollinger Allen, Ill, Burdick Douglas Allen, La. Burton Eaton Anderson, Calif. Carlyle Ellsworth Aspinall Carroll Engel, Mich. Barden Cavalcante Engle, Calif, Barrett, Pa. Chatham Evins Barrett, Wyo. Chesney Fallon Bates, Mass. Christopher Fogarty Bentsen Combs Frazier Boggs, La. Cooper Gary Boykin Coudert Gavin Breen Cox Gillette Brehm Davies N.Y. Gilmer Brooks Davis, Tenn, Go'don Buckley, N.Y. Dingell Gore
1950 Guill Linehan Gwinn Lodge Hall, . Lucas Edwin Arthur Lyle Hand McCarthy Hare McGrath Harris McGuire Hart McMillen, Tl, Hays, Ark, Mack, Ill. Hébert Marcantonio Heffernan Marsalis Heller Martin, Mass. Herter Meyer Hu Miles Hinshaw Morgan Hoffman, il. Morrison Holifield Morton Hoian Murphy Irving Murray, Tenn, Jackson, Calif. Murray, Wis. Javits Nixon Jenison Norton Jennings O'Brien, Mich. Jensen O'Neill Johnson Passman Karst Patman Kean Patterson Keefe Pfeifer, Kelley, Pa. Joseph L. Kennedy Pfeiffer, Keogh William L. Kerr Phillips, Tenn. Kilday Pickett Klein Plumley Kunkel Powell Larcade Priest Latham Quinn Lichtenwalter Rains So the bill was passed. The Clerk announced pairs: On this vote: Mr. Yates for, with Mr. William L. Pfeiffer against. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Ramsay Redden Regan Richards Rodino Rogers, Mass, Roosevelt Sabath Sadlak Sadowski Sanborn Scott, Hardie Simpson, Pa. Sims Smith, Ohio Smith, Va. Spence Sutton Tackett ‘Taylor Teague Thompson Trimble Vinson Vursell ‘Wagner Welch White, Idaho er Wigglesworth Willis Winstead Wood Woodruff Yates Zablocki the following Mr. Linehan for, with Mr. Sadlak against, Mr, Gordon for, with Mr. Smith of Ohio against. Mr, Zablocki for, with Mr. Eaton against. Mr. Sabath for, with Mr. Kean against. Mr. Hoffman of Ilinois for, with Mr. Lich- tenwalter against. Mr, Chesney for, with Mr. Coudert against, Mr. Hébert for, with Mr. Herter against. Mr. Mack of Illinois for, with Mr. Gillette against. Mr. Karst for, with Mr. Simpson of Penn- sylvania against. Mr. Tackett for, with Mr. Taylor against. Mr. ‘Tiimble for, with Mr. Brehm against. Mr. against. Hart for, with Mr. Hardie Scott Mr. Rodino for, with Mr. Jackson of Call- fornia against. Mr. Joseph L Pfeifer for, with Mr. Bates of Massachusetts against. Mr. Keogh for, with Mr. Patterson against. Mr. Murphy for, with Mrs. Rogers of Mas- sachusetts against. Mr. Heller for, with Mr. Kunkel against. Mr. K'ein for, with Mr. Latham against. Mr. McGrath for, with Mr. Gwinn against, Mr. against. Roosevelt for, with Mr, Plumley Mr. Dollinger for, with Mr. Wigglesworth against. Mr. Heffernan for, with Mr. Anderson of California against. Mr. Morrison for, with Mr. Gavin against, Mr. McGuire for, with Mr. Morton against, Mr. Wagner for, with Mr. Edwin Arthur Hall against. Mr. against. Aspinall for, with Mr. Ellsworth Additional general pairs: Mr. O'Brien of Michigan with Mr. Barrett 0: Wyoming. Mr, O'Neill with Mr. Keefe, Mr. Carroll with Mr. Martin of Massachu- setts. Mr. Dingell with Mr. Murray of Wissonsin, Mr. Kilday with Mr. Nixon, Mr. Harris with Mr. Hinshaw. Mr. Gary with Mr. Horan. Mr. Boggs of Louisiana with Mr. Johnson. Mr. Breen with Mr. Sanborn. ee Morgan with Mr. Phillips of Tennes- e. Mr. Irving with Mr. Burdick, Mr. Holifield with Mr. Jensen, Mrs. Douglas with Mr. Woodruff. Mr. Winstead with Mr. Engel of Michigan. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The doors were opened. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. APPOINTMENT OF A DISTRICT JUDGE FOR NORTHERN AND SOUTHERN DIS- TRICT OF INDIANA Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, by direc- tion of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 703 and ask for its im- mediate consideration. The Clerk read as follows: Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H. R. 6240) to authorize the ap- pointment of a district Judge for the north- ern and southern districts of Indiana. That after general debate which shall be confined to the bill and continue not to exceed 1 hour, to be equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary, the bill shall be read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. At the conclusion of the consideration of the bill for amendment, the Committee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amend- ments thereto to final passage without Inter- vening motion except one motion to re- commit. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, a par- liamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, this resolution makes in order the considcra- tion of the bill H, R. 6240. When the majority leader indicated the order in which these bills were to be considered he indicated that the next bill would be H. R. 7009, for the eastern and western districts of Missouri. Of course I am not raising any question about the Speaker changing that in any way that he feels should be done, but would the Speaker be able to indicate at this time whether, with this exception, the order which the majority leader indicated will be followed? The SPEAKER. The Chair will con- sult with the interested Members and at the proper time will recognize the Mem- ber to call up the rule making in order the bill to be considered at that time. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. _ Speaker, might I say to the gentleman from New York that there are special reasons why this bill has been taken up out of order. I can assure the gentleman it is the intention to follow the order I have here- tofore announced. But there are rea- sons why this bill is being taken up now. I conferred with the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HaLLrck], and it was agree- able to him. There are extenuating cir- cumstances. 10873 Mr. KEATING. But hereafter it is expected to follow the order as annouced by the majority leader? The SPEAKER. If that is possible, it will be done. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the distinguished majority leader how many of these bills the gen- weman contemplates will be taken up to- ay? Mr. McCORMACK. Of course I would like to get them all through today if there is no fight on them. But I try to be practical. I can assure the gentle- man from Michigan that the gentleman from Massachusetts always tries to have a reasonable regard for the feelings of the membership of the House. It is now almost 3 o'clock. If the gentleman will let us go along and dispose of this, and sce how far we get along, perhaps we can finish anothcr one. I am hopeful that we can get through with this one and another one. Mr. MICHENER. In other words, it all depends on which way the wind is blowing. Mr. McCORMACK. It all depends on how rapidly we get along. I would like to get them out of the way, because it is all a help to us in connection with pos- sible adjournment and getting home. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Indiana [Mr. MappEn] is recognized for 1 hour. Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Ohlo (Mr. Brown. I yield myself such time as I may require, Mr. Speaker, further with reference to the remarks of the distinguished major- ity leader in regard to whether or not there should be a contest on any of the remaining judgeship hills, speaking for Indiana, I do not think there has ever been a bill asking for an additional Fed- eral judgeship that has any more merit than this bill, which was introduced by my colleague from Indiana [Mr. Den- TON]. I notice that in the recent census In- diana has increased 500,000 in popula- tion. That will make Indiana the only State in the Union with over 4,000,000 people which has only two Federal judges. Ido not think there is any State in the Union where the Federal judiciary is clogged or stymied like it has been for the past 10 years in Indiana. Every member of the Judiciary Committee that I have talked with has stated that this bill asking for an additional judge in Indiana is one that should be granted without opposition. When you compare Indiana with other States of the Union, we should really have two additional judges instead of the one that we are asking for. The United States Judicial Council, after investigation, has recommended that this additional Federal judge for Indiana be granted. The Indiana Bar Association, the Hammond, Ind., Bar As- sociation, the Gary, Ind., Bar Associa- tion, practically every bar association in the State of Indiana has endorsed this bill, I do not know of any lawyer in the State of Indiana who would oppose an
10874 additional Federal judge for Indiana. Of course, I do not say that any other State that has three Federal judges is not entitled to three Federal judges, but when you consider that the State of In- diana has over 4,000,000 population and only two Federal judges, and we have States in this Union with only seven or eight hundred thousand population which have as high as three or four Fed- eral judges, I do not think there should be any opposition to Indiana having an additional Federal judge. Only once in its history has an additional judge been given Indiana, and that was 25 years ago. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MADDEN. I yield. Mr. MICHENER. Of course, the gen- tleman would not base his reason for an- other judge on population, would he? Mr. MADDEN. No. Mr. MICHENER. Because there are States with large populations which have little Federal court business. You would not give them judges just so they would have as mauy as New York. Mr. MADDEN. Of course the gentle- man knows that Indiana is not only a great agricultural but an industrial State as well. It is on a par with the State of Michigan, Mr. MICHENER. It is a very good State, but, like Michigan, our taxpayers do not want more judges than are neces- sary, regardless of population. Mr. MADDEN. I thank the gentle- men on the Judiciary Committee, who have investigated Indiana’s case and rec- ommend that Indiana should have an- other Federal judge. If you have gone over the testimony that was presented by Federal Judge Swygert from Indiana in testifying before the committee, you will remember that Federal Judge Swygert stated that last year he was unable to have a vacaticn, that he worked 6 days a week trying to carry out the heavy case load. Judge Swygert and the judge for the southern Indiana district have not been able even to make a dent in the heavy case load in the State of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, ur senior colleague from Indiana on the other side of the House (Mr. Hau.eck] is familar with the bill and i: net unposed to it. I do not know of any Member from Indiana who fs op- Posed to it, for they all know what the situation is in regard to the case load of the Federal judiciary in our State. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may use. Mr. Speaker, I have listened with a great deal of interest to the explanation of this rule by the able gentleman from Indiana {[Mr. Mappen]. I agree fully with him there is more justification for providing an additional Federal judge to be added to the number now serving in Indiana, or for increasing the number of judges from two to three, than there is for the establishment of a new Federal Sudgeship in many of the other States, bills for which will be considered as we go along. Indiana is a great State, which has something like 4,000,000 population with CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE only two Federal judges to take care of the Federal business within the confines of that Commonwealth at this time. I notice that Indiana has a lower number of criminal cases in the Federal courts than the national average. I do not know whether this is because the people of Indiana are more law-abiding or law-respecting than the average for this country, or that the Federal law-en- forcement officials of that great State are just a little more dilatory in their prosecution of cases. But, in any event, there is a great deal of legal business of a Federal nature within the State of Indiana, and there is a pretty good case made in behalf of this particular judge- ship. May I say in passing, however, that I doubt very much that the majority lead- er of the House is misleading anyone— no—I would not want to charge him with misleading anyone or even attempt- ing to do so—rather I should say the majority leader must have been en- gaging in a rather facetious remark when he said our adjournment would depend a great deal upon the rapidity with which we handled these judicial bills. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I certainly will yield to the distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts; for I was hoping I would get some reaction from him. Mr. McCORMACK. Well, the fish rises to the bait; I take the bait will- ingly. The gentleman, of course, does not want to misquote me. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Oh, no. I ex- pressed the hope that I had misunder- stood him. Mr. McCORMACK. I do not think I made that statement; if so, I would certainly want to correct it. Mr. 2ROWN of Ohio. I certainly would not want to misquote the gentle- man. Mr. McCORMACK. If no other Mem- ber of the House who was presen: at the time got such an impression of what I said——— Mr. BROWN of Ohio, I cannot see how either the gentleman from Massa- chusetts or myself can speak as to what impression any other Member of the House may have got. Mr. McCORMACK, Is the gentleman yielding to me? Mr. BROWN’of Ohio. I certainly am. Mr. McCORMACEK. If no other Mem- ber of the House got such an impression as that I would not want my distin- guished friend from Ohio to have such an erroneous impression, Mr, BROWN of Ohio. fine. Mr. McCORMACK. The sum and substance is that I am trying to evaluate and interpret the minds of the Members of the House, as well as my own, and to expedite, as much as possible, the con- sideration of legislation that must come before the House, all of which tends very prominently toward adjournment or a prolonged recess as quickly as possible. Now, after the program is completed in connection with the emergency and we have disposed of all business here, I am That is very JULY 24 sure the gentleman from Ohio would not want to hold the House in session if he could, would he? : Mr, BROWN of Ohio. No. I some~ times feel the longer a legislative body such as ours remains in session the worse off it is for the people. But that brings up @ question in the mind of the gentle- man from Ohio. Mr. McCORMACK. That is not my reason. The gentleman can make his reason. I do not think the gentleman means that upon reflection. When we have completed our business I think we should leave here. The people are very practical, they are usually far ahead of us, they know this is an election year, and we might just as well face it openly, frankly, and plainly. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. No one can question the gentleman’s frankness or open way in which he approaches these problems. He did mention, and I am sure I am not wrong in saying this, the word “adjournment” a while ago? Mr. McCORMACK. I hope an ad- journment. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. So I am won- dering if the gentleman can now give us any assurance as to when he plans or expects adjournment of the House? Mr. McCORMACK. Well, so far as the gentleman from Massachusetts 1s con- cerned, when the emergency legislation is out of the way. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. When will that be? Mr. McCORMACK. When the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency reports out a bill. If that committee reports it this week, the bill will come up next week, That is one of the major pieces of legislation. If anything is done on taxes and I hope if it is it will be done quickly, we will take that up. With those two matters out of the way, unless some further recommendations come that I am not aware of, that would prac- tically complete it. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I presume there will be some military legislation come to us from the Armed Services Com- mittee? Mr. McCORMACK. The gentleman from Indiana {Mr. Haturcx! and I tried to get that out of the gentleman from Georgia LMr. Vinson] today, but we were not quite successful. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. The gentleman feels there will be some legislation along that line? Mr. McCORMACK. I do not know. I cannot answer that or whether these two bills coming up tomorrow may be sufficient to meet the present immediate situation or not. I do not know. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Does the gen- tleman expect any legislation, for in- stance, out of the Veterans Committee to protect the rights of those who may be called into the armed services? Mr. McCORMACK. If any legislation comes out of the Armed Services Com- mittee, knowing the complexion of that committee on both sides, the members are very active, they are very energetic, we know it will come out quickly. I presume any kind of legislation relating to veterans, if any is needed, is some-
1950 thing that will be acted on quickly, So that Iam hopeful—I do not know about others—that we might clean up the sit- uation, clean up our legislation within the next 3 weeks. That 1s my hope. I trust I have satisfied the gentleman. I did not say that the passage of these eight judgeship bills were necessary for adjournment Mr. BROWN of Ohio. May I ask one other question? In contemplating ad- journment at the end of 3 weeks, or in expressing the hope, as the gentleman does, that we will be able to adjourn in about 3 weeks, does he take into consid- eration the possibility the administra- tion may ask for a greatly broadened and increased appropriation and authoriza-~ tion for military aid for other countries? Mr McCORMACK. Of course, I am basing any opinion I may express upon my knowledze as of now. The gentle- min from Ohio Knows that we are in a vely flexible situation and no one, if he 1s in position of leadership, is going to defintely close his mind, but in connec- tion with that my impression 1s as of now that any additional legislation, say in relation to the North Atlantic Pact, and this 1s my pe1sonal opinion—I want that undcistood—probably would come later on, because that is a matter of some negotiation with other nations But it is something that can be done very quickly. Mr BROWN of Ohio. May I ask the gentleman one other question? Does the gentleman feel that we could adjourn sine die or recess, or what action should be taken? I am asking these questions because I am seeking light, as one Mem- ber of the House, and I think the gentle- man knows more about this than anyone else. I know that the gentleman 1s in constant contact with the White House and knows what the true situation is. Mr. McCORMACK. I cannot plead guilty of giving more information than any other Member, except here is the Speaker. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. is presiding. Mr. McCORMACK. But I can plead guilty in trying to give all the informa- tion I possibly can under the circum- stances. So far as I am personally con- cerned, and I am talking about my own personal opinion-—— Mr. BROWN of Ohio. We are also interested in the gentleman’s opinion as majority leader. That is very important. Mr. McCORMACK. I cannot very well separate my personal opinion from that of majority leader. But I will say this, either personally or as majority leader, I hope that when we adjourn it will be sine die. Now if the gentleman asks me if I expect that, that is another ques- tion. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Well, I will ask that other question. Mr. McCORMACK. That is @ ques- tion that I cannot answer at this time, for that question is a matter of consul- tation. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. May I conclude by asking the gentleman one other question. Dees the gentleman favor the adoption of this rule for the considera- ticn of H. R. 6240? The Speaker CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Mr. McCORMACK. I join with my friend from Ohio in urging its adoption. Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Then, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my ime, The SPEAKER, The question is on the resolution. The resolution was agreed to. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Speak- er, I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the con- sideration of the bill (H. R. 6240) to authorize the appointment of a district judge for the northern and southern districts of Indiana. The motion was agreed to Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Umon for the con- sideration of the bill, H. R, 6240, with Mr. Carnanan in the chair, The Clerk read the title of the bill. By unanimous consent the first read- ing of the bill was dispensed with. Mr. BYRNE of New York Mr Chair- man, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this bill is to authorize the appointment of one additional district judge for the northern and southern districts of Indiana. Ac- cordingly, it amends section 133, title 28, United States Code. The State of Indiana which is a part of the Seventh Judicial Circuit is divided into two judicial districts, the no1thern and southern, At the present time there is one permanent district Judge serving each of the districts. These two judges hold court in seven different cities throughout the State. The need for this roving judge for the State of Indiana is clearly indicated in the memorandum and data submitted by the Admunistra- tive Office of the United States Courts. Moreover the bill has been recommended by the Judicial Conference of the United States at its annual meeting in 1949. An examination of the volume of liti- gation throughout the State of Indiana indicates a general trend of increase, both civil and criminal. Moreover an analysis of the judicial statistics for this State over & period of years indicates that the trend upward in the volume of litigation is permanent and that the same will continue to increase unless the number of judges is increased. This bill by providing for a roving judgeship will permit help in each of the two districts as the need for same arises. It is the opinion of the committee that the bill is a meritorious one and recom- mends its enactment. I am going to quote merely the last paragraph of the report of the adminis~ trative office on this subject at this point s0 that the Members of the House from Indiana may have a chance to discuss the matter for you. The facts above set forth and others ap- pearing in the tables show plainly that the remarkably small number of district judges, one each for the two districts of Indiana, is not commensurate with the business of the districts, On account of the high population and the concentration of industry and busi- ness in the State, there is every reason to expect that the disparity, unless the number of judges is increased, will continue and grow. The pending bill will give reinforce- 10875 ment in a way which will be helpful to both districts by providing that the new judge shall ke a judge for both. It is only a reason~ able response to the manifest demands of the judicial business and is requisite for proper service to litigants and the public. JI, there- fore, trust that it may be enacted. The letter is signed by Henry P, Chandler, who is the Director of the Ad- ministrative Office of the United States Courts. So, Mr. Chairman, there can be no question at all but that the necessity for the passage of this bill is manifest from every side. Our committee hearing in- dicated from the testimony of judges and others concerned that this is one of those cases 1n which there can be practi- cally no dissent whatsoever, insofar as we of the committee know about the facts. Mr. MICHENER Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana | Mr. HALLEcKI. Mr HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, in all my time and service in the House of Representatives, which is now approach- ing 16 years, 1 have always sought to give to the consideration of measures affect- ing my own area the same treatment I would accord to those of any other area, I recognize full well that many may as- sume that that just could not be done, but at any event I have sought to do that, and I believe I have done it. With respect to the matter of the addi- tional judgeship in Indiana, let me say first of all that I was strongly of the opinion that that should have been pro- vided for in the omnibus bill acted upon in the first session. For reasons which are of no moment at this time it was not so acted upon and was not included, However, the need remains. But I have not urged the reporting or the consid- eration of any of these bills at this time. However, since the bill is now before us, let me say that I have talked person- ally with the present president of the Indiana State Bar Association regarding this measure, and he tells me it is needed, that there is definite need for this addi- tional roving judgeship in Indiana. His name is Richard Tinkham, of Lake County, Ind. The president-elect of the State Bar Association is Roger Brannigan, of Lafayette, Ind. I have also talked with him, and he tells me there is very defi- nitely a real need for this additional judgeship to meet the requirements of justice in the State of Indiana. I have also talked with Mr. Kurt Pant- zer, of Indianapolis, an outstanding lawyer, who is chairman of the State bar’s committee on selection and tenure of judges, and he, too, tells me that this additional judgeship is very much needed. As to the facts: It is true that popula- tion is not an absolute criterion as to the necessity for courts or judges, But, as the report indicates, the work in the courts of the country comes from the people. So to my mind there is a defi- nite relationship between the number of people in a given area and the re- quirements and necessity for judges and courts available to meet the needs of the people to the end that justice may be
10876 done expeditiously, as justice must be done, if it is to be truly justice. It was suggested in connection with the bill which was just acted upon by which two, not one—two additional judges were created for the northern district of Illinois, that the population of that district is about 5,400,000. The population of Indiana, I think, computed as of 1947, was 3,800,000. It follows from that that the northern district of Mlinois with the legislation that has just been udopted will have eight judges and unless this legislation is adopted Indi- ana, with a population showing only the difference between 5.4 and 3.8, would have only two judges. In addition, the report which has been filed and which we have here before us shows not only in respect to population but also in respect to case loads, the number of civil and criminal cases filed, the number required to be disposed of and those that are disposed of are way above the national average. I think the report discloses that for the southern district of Indiana the number is twice above the nationa] average and for the northern district of Indiana it is one and a half times above the national average So I cannot help but believe on my responsibility as a Member of this body and charged certainly in times like these with the necessity of scrutinizing very carefully everything that comes before us, that this proposition is meritorious at this time. Had this proposal been in- cluded in the omnibus bill adopted in the last session certainly then it would have been meritorious. As the chairman of the committee has pointed out the sessions held by the Fed- eral district judges in Indiana are held in seven different municipalities. There are residents of certain other munici- palities in Indiana where the people be- lieve that sessions of the Federal court should likewise be held. However, that is not an issue in this measure. In connection with the cost which might be involved I take it that these seven cities now have available the courtrooms where the sessions would be held. They would be available for the third roving judge who would serve not only one of the districts in Indiana, but in both of the districts in Indiana in order to expedite the business of all of the courts. So I cannot see where in this particular instance there would be any substantial increase in cost to the Federal Government by virtue of pro- viding this additional judgeship. Mr. Chairman, I trust the measure will be adopted and certainly by what I have said here it is indicated that I ex- pect to vote for it. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 5 minutes to the author of the bill, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. DENTON]. Mr. DENTON. Mr. Chairman, the State of Indiana now has two Federal judges who sit in two districts, the north- ern and southern districts of Indiana, They hold court in seven different places. This bill provides for one roving judge who will hold court in both the northern and southern part of the State. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Indiana has a population, according to the 1940 census, of 3,800,000. We do not have the figures, of course, for the 1950 census, but we estimate Indiana will have a population, in round numbers, of 4,000,000. There is no other State in the Union that has a population as Jarge as Indi- ana that does noi have more than two judges. As a matter of fact, there is only one other State with a population over 2,600,000 that has two judges. Six States with populations smaller than In- diana have three judges. Seven States with a population smaller than Indiana have four judges and two with a popula- tion smaller than Indiana have five judges. I realize that population is not the only factor to be considered in determin- ing the need for a judge. However, it is a factor, and, naturally, with this large population and small number of judges, you would expect that those judges would have a much higher case load than the judges throughout the United States; and that is » fact. In the northern district of Indiana the judge has a case load 50 percent higher than the national average. In the southern district the judge has a 100 percent greater case load than the national average I am speaking about civil cases, and of course they take the most work. Naturally, you would find the court is getting behind with its docket. At the present time it is ap- proximately 1 year behind. The judge for the northern district stated it would take him at least a year to try the cases ready for trial, if no new cases were filed. This is not. because the judges have not worked. The senior judge of the Seventh Circuit stated that the judge in the northern district had not haa a vaca- tion since he had been appointed ap. proximately 6 years ago. He said he held court 6 days a week. He held court throughout the summer. As a maiter of fact, last year he held court throughout the entire Christmas holidays and also on New Year’s Day. The most disturbing fact is that the docket is getting further and further be- hind, and the congestion is getting worse. I think that Indiana has made out the strongest case for an additional judge of all the bills on that subject, both at this and last session. This leg-~ islation has been recommended by the Seventh Circuit Judicial Council, by the United States Judicial Council, and by the Department of Justice, and by the Indiana Bar Association and {nnumer- able other bar associations throughout the State. Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. DENTON. I yield. Mr. HALLECK. I intended to say in my remarks, and it skipped my mind, that I was talking also with Mr. Kurt Pantzer, of Indianapolis, who is a mem- ber of the Judicial Council. I was in- formed by him that the Council for the Seventh Circuit met recently in Chicago. As I understand it, that council is made up of judges of the circuit, and of law- yers representing the States of the cir. cuit, which, I believe, include Indiana, JULY 24 Illinois, and Wisconsin. He told me that the vote for this particular measure in- volving an additional judge for Indiana was supported unanimously by the mem- bers of that conference. Mr, DENTON. I thank the gentle- man for that statement. I might say that Roger Branigan, the president of the Indiana Bar Association, has spoken to me about this legislation. The outgo- ing president of this association, Tilford Orbison, also has spoken to me about it; as have numerous lawyers throughout the State of Indiana. As a matter of fact, the testimony before the commit- tee indicated there was need for two judges in Indiana, and that the work- load required it, but they are only ask- ing for the one judge. I surely hope that you will pass this legislation. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Indiana has expired. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Keatine]. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, it is a very unenviable position to be in to find myself differing in any degree from my very good friend from Indiana [Mr, HAauieck], although I can thoroughly appreciate his position, as I do that of the other Members from Indiana. I do say to him, as well as to any of the other Members from Indiana that I Gare say that if I were to call the presi- dent of the New York State bar, or my own law partner, who happens to he the president of the Rochester, N. Y., Bar Association, or others in the legal profession they would tell me that we needed about twelve or fourteen more judges in New York State. Therefore I have no doubt that the gentlemen to whom he has referred are estimable gentlemen and undoubtedly leading lawyers of Indiana, else they would not hold the positions they do; yet the views of the lawyers, of whom I am very proud to be one, on the subject of the need for judges, as the gentleman from Indiana will recognize, always have to be carefully scrutinized. And, then, a word in passing. about the judicial conference. It is made up of most amiable and estimable gentle- men, made up of the senior circuit judges of the country, several of them good friends of mine; I hope that after this debate they will continue to be good friends of mine. But they meet periodically and pass on the question of the need for judges throughout the country, and it is fairly rare—it has been my experience that it is relatively rare— that if real pressure is placed by one of the brethren upon the others, it is rather rare that they do not succumb and agree that there is need for another judge in his area. So I find myself in the position where I do not think we should accept with- out scrutiny, careful scrutiny, the rec- ommendations of the judicial confer- ence, important as they are and helpful as they are in assisting us in deter- mining what we should do. After all, the responsibility is ours and not that of the judicial conference. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. KEATING. I yield.
1950 My. MICHENER. The Judicial Con- ference meets in Washington in Septem- ber of each year. It ts composed of the presiding judge of each of the circuit courts of appeals of the country and it is presided over by the Chief Justice. If they take any action other than at the September meeting it is done by a letter vote, as was explained to our com- mittee not later than yesterday by a representative of the courts, So if they voted on all of these judges they must have voted by mail on some of them. Mr, KEATING. As a matter of fact, in this particular instance this is a case where last year the judicial conference, gcnerous as they are in the distribution of judges, did not approve this particu- lar judge. Of course, whenever a particular ju- dicial district is unable to establish the need for a judge, then they get together with an adjoining district and create this creature that we call the roving judge; in other words, if we cannot prove a case for an additional judge, perhaps we can prove a case for half a judge or a third of a judge; and that is what they are doing here in presenting this bill for a roving judge for the northern and south- ern districts of Indiana, Each district has a judge now but neither district could show the certain need for a full additional judge, so they create this roving judge. Mr. HALLECK, Is there anything wrong with that? Mr. KEATING. No; I think that is an admirable thing to do, to have a judge who can sit in both districts. Now, I must throw out a warning, however, that we have a bill coming along where there are two roving judges. The roving judges may get together and decide they are not going to rove as much as it was intended that they should rove when the original roving judge was created. This does not apply to the gentleman from Indiana’s rover, because he is the Single rover in the State; but we will come to a bill later on where there are two roving judges and they decide one of them will sit in St. Louis and the other one will sit in Kansas City and they will rove very little from one area to the other. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New York has expired. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman three additional minutes. Mr. KEATING. So there can be abuse of this roving judge proposition. But in this case I do not charge that. Mr, HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. KEATING. Not right at this mo- ment. I appreciate and admire the vigorous fight the gentleman is making for this bill. On page 3 of the report it is pointed out in the third from the last paragraph a‘matter which probably may not be known to all Members: The sharp rise in the number of pending civil cases in the southern district is at- tributable largely to the 11] health of the district Judge for that district who recently retired. XCVI——685 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE That would indicate it may be a tem- porary situation, and at the appropriate time I shall offer an amendment which we find in many of these bills providing that the vacancy occurring as a result of the creation of this additional judge- ship by retirement or otherwise shall be a temporary one so that it will not be a permanent appointment. I hope if the bill is adopted at all it will be adopted with that amendment. There are one or two other points I would like to cover. Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. KEATING, I yield to the gentle- man from Indiana, Mr, HALLECK. My intercession here is only for the purpose of trying to ob- tain information. The gentleman is a very able member of the committee and I respect his judgment. However, in re- spect to that amendment the judge in the southern district has retired. The present judge, I understand, is one of the youngest Federal judges in the United States. So we either need the addi- tional judge now or we do not. I do not know how young a man might be expected to be appointed to this third position if it is created, but the two who are presently serving in Indiana are young men who undoubtedly have a great expectancy. Mr. KEATING. What the gentleman says may very well turn out to be true. It has been our general practice here, in authorizing new judgeships, to pro- vide almost uniformly, that the vacancy later occurring shall not be filled; in other words, making it a temporary judgeship. Let me say that I am not suffering any illusions on that point that the tem. porary character of the judgeship is likely to continue, because several of the measures here before us today are to re- move that temporary provision, and it may very well be it should later be re- moved in this case. My point is if that amendment is adopted it would mean we would take another look at the situa- tion at the time a vacancy arose. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New York has again ex- pired. Mr, MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman three additional minutes. Mr. KEATING. If the situation then exists that the need is still present I have no doubt, from the experience I have had here today, that there will be no difficulty in continuing that judge- ship. I do think when we first author- ize the new judgeship we should follow the practice which we have followed in the past almost universally and provide that it shall be temporary, I am frank to say to the Members, and particularly to my friend from Indiana, that this is a stronger case than the Illinois case; but it still does not seem to me to indicate the need for a judge. As was pointed out by the gentleman from Ohio, Indiana is a particularly law- abiding State. The number of criminal eases brought in the Indiana districts is well under the average for the country at large. As appears on page 11, so far as 10877 criminal cases are concerned they are terminating and disposing of more crim- inal cases than are being started, which is an admirable position and somewhat different, I believe, from Kansas City which we will come to later. But, there is an improvement also as the gentleman will observe at the top of page 11 over the year before in the ter- mination of civil cases, and the court, with the two judges, is almost current at the present time, so I feel that the need is not sufficiently established, certainly, to provide for a permanent judge. I feel I shall have to oppose the bill and certainly oppose it unless such an amend- ment is adopted. I just received some interesting fig- ures which I will go into in more detail on the next judgeship bill, but they indi- cate this important fact: We are adding to the number of judgeships much faster than our population is increasing, so that the per capita number of person: served by a single judge is decreasing all the time; 1n other words, all of these average figures which we get, it must be remem- bercd, take account of many areas where there is not a need for the number of judges that are there now. The diffi- culty with passing all these judgeship bills is that. we never get a bill—at least, I have never seen a bill presented here— to eliminate or cut down the number of judges in an area. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? ° Mr. KEATING. I yield to the gentle- man from Iowa. Mr. GROSS. That is the point I wanted to make, when are you going to get that legislation? We had the gen- tleman from Indiana [Mr. Mappen] and the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. DEen- Ton] speaking here saying that in some seven or eight States they have three and four judges, States with much less pop- ulation than Indiana. When are we go- ing to get a bill in here to redistribute these judges or abandon some of them? Mr. KEATING. Well, I do not know. The only advice I can give the gentleman is to survey the situation in Iowa, and it micr+ be that the gentleman would con- clude that we ought to introduce a bill to cut down the number of judges in Iowa. I do not know what the result would be. I do nct want to do it for New York, if that is what the gentleman is asking for. Without a thorough survey, I would not be prepared to say New York has too many judges. Mr. GROSS. We have two judges for some 3,000,000 in the State of Iowa. Ido not think that is excessive. Mr. KEATING. I agree with the gen- tleman. That does not seem excessive, Mr. GROSS. But when you are deal- ing with three, four, and five judges in States with populations in the hundreds of thousands, that is a different propo- sition. Mr. KEATING. My judgment is that both Iowa and New York are probably comparatively understaffed so far as Judges are concerned today. Certainly that is true, iz you take the bills that we are passing today as a criterion. How- ever, I do not think you should take that as a basis for determination, because
10878 most of the bills now before us are, in my judgment, lacking in merit. Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, Indiana is expected to have about 4,000,000 popu- lation today. I think the over-all popu- lation for the Nation {is 150,000,000, so that if you take into account the average on the basis of two Federal judges, you would have about 75 United States dis- trict court judges in the United States, Does anyone know what the total over- all number is? Mr. KEATING. Yes, in that respect Indiana is much better than the average, because there are, I believe, about 250 judges in the country. Purely from the population standpoint, Indiana stacks up pretty well, Mr. GWALLECK. I take it that the gentleman would agree with me that as to these separate measures which come in, each stands on its own bottom. I supported the gentleman's motion to re- commit on the bill we just had here to reduce the number in the northern dis- trict of Illinois from two to one, because I felt that that was a reasonable increase at this time. Mr. KEATING. As I say, I think the case of the gentleman from Indiana has more merit taan the Illinois case. Mr. HALLECK. Iam sure the gentle- man did not seek to impute to any Mem- ber rrom Indiana any selfish purpose in the consideration of this bill. Rather we are engaged in a consideration of the report that was submitted by the gen- tleman's committee, which report clearly indicates, so far as I can discern, that a better case has been made for this situation than any other one; in fact, @ good case, a complete case. Mr. KEATING. Well, the gentleman’s interpretation of the report is not ex- actly the same as nine. But, I do not impute anything but the finest of mo- tives to the gentleman or any of the other Members from Indiana on either side of the aisle. We can have our dif- ferences of opinion without rancor or ill feeling, Iam sure. Mr. WILSON of Indiana. Mr. Chair- man, will the gentleman ‘yield? Mr. HALLECK. I yield to the gentle- man from Indiana. Mr. WILSON of Indiana. The gentle- man has stated that he would favor a temporary selection of this judge. Mr. KEATING. I would prefer that to permanent, although I question the need for either. Mr. WILSON of Indiana. The gentle- man also has implied that if he were to call the bar associations they would get together most anywhere and decide they needed another judge. Are we Members of the House sup- posed to draw the conclusion from what the gentleman has said that these judges, even though we add another one to Indiana, or perhaps two, would let the work pile up so that they would never get it cleaned up? We are a year behind, they say, in northern Indiana. Suppose we had an additional judge. Would they clean that work up or would that work lie there as a backlog so they could al- ways justify an additional judge? CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Mr. KEATING. There is always the danger of that, but I would not want to impute to any of our Federal judges an intention to do such a thing as that, Mr. WILSON of Indiana. Is that why we have so many judges in New York and why the work is so far behind, that they do not properly handle the workload? Mr. KEATING. In New York you have that condition primarily because you have the greatest workload of any State in the country, and the largest population. Mr. WILSON of Indiana. Why do you have that? Mr. KEATING. Because of the large number of cases of long duration, anti- trust cases and other long-drawn-out trials in New York City. That does not apply so much in the part of New York from which I come, but in New York City they have very long-drawn-out trials and complicated litigation, more so than any other city in the country. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. WaLsH!. Mr. NOLAND. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. WALSH. I yield to the gentleman from Indiana. Mr. NOLAND. I believe the statistics showing the case load in Indiana defi- nitely show that an additional judge is needed in Indiana. I think we should commend our colleague from Indiana [Mr. Denton], who has introduced this bill and has brought to the attention of the Congress the severe need for an ad- ditional judge in Indiana. He should be commended for his untiring efforts in bringing this bill before the House. Mr. WALSH. I thank the gentleman. Mr. Chairman, 16 years ago this month I was admitted to the bar of the State of Indiana, Iam not so much interested in the population argument in this dis- cussion regarding the creation of a rov- ing judgeship for the State of Indiana. I am going to speak very briefly. I do not want to be like some lawyers in a case, who after they have made their case continue to present their arguments and then lose it. We in Indiana need this judge as much as any other State in the Union. During the war I left my practice and before entering the armed service was con- nected with the United States Corps of Engineers in the fleld of condemnation of real estate. Immediately after my discharge from the service I went back to the United States Corps of Engineers, and found that many of the cases I had filed earlier were still pending in the Federal courts of Indiana. We are now facing the possibility of another world conflict, in which much of the real estate of our people will be seized by our Government because of the need for additional airports, Army and Navy camps and installations, and the building of war factories. Yam one of the many authors of bills to create an Air Force Academy, and I have proposed to place that Academy in my district. Of course, there is only perhaps a slight possibility that it will be placed there, However, I have re- JULY 24 ceived more criticism from the farmers of my district over this suggestion than anything else I have ever done. What arguments do they give? They say, Mr. Watsu, you took our land last time. We did not receive our money for 2 or 3 years. The value of the real estate in our communities skyrocketed and we were forced to buy real estate on con- tract and pay high interest, or we were forced to go out of the farming business for 2 or 3 years until we got our money.” As a lawyer of 16 years’ experience, one of the hardest arguments I had to refute to the average layman, and it is one you cannot refute, is: Why is there such delay in lawsuits? Why can we not get this case into court? That ap- plies in every court, whether it is in a justice of the peace court or the court of common pleas in the State of the Nation or in the Federal courts of the United States. A vear behind—a year behind in the northern district of In- diana. If I practiced in this Federal court, I would have a hard time explain- ing this to my clients. We are spending billions of dollars for defense. We are spending billions of dollars for social se- curity and so forth. One of the strong- est arms of democracy is the judicial system, and I can say to you honestly and sincerely this bill should pass. I am for every one of these bills that has been reported by the Committee on the Judiciary. One of the chief ways in which democracy speaks is through our court system. There should not be de- lay in the determination of the rights of men. We need these courts. The American people who are forced to go into our courts should be given the priv~ jlege of having their cases presented promptly. This bill is one of the most important bills that has been presented to the House, as far as the State of Indiana 1s concerned, during the Eighty-first Con- gress. I ask that the Congress give this bill its utmost consideration. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may require. Mr. Chairman, I have only a word to say. I shall support the amendment to be offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Keatine], which will make this judgeship a temporary judgeship. The only difference between the bill as now written and the bill as amended, if the amendment is adopted, will be that when a vacancy occurs the Congress will again have to reappraise the situation to see whether or not an additional judge is needed at that time. As far as the roving judge is con- cerned, I think the older members of the Committee on the Judiciary will bear me out when I say that I was one of the originators of the roving-judge theory. Of course we felt that one judge could serve a@ number of districts, and that therefore there would be sufficient and adequate judicial consideration given to the legal matters in a State. Let me say that the experience has been illuminat- ing. Mark well that the time will come when this judge, as suggested by one of
1950 the other gentlemen, will not like “to rove” anymore. He will pick himself out a@ particularly nice place in which to live. Then he will want the district boundaries changed and he will want to reside in this particular home. In addi- tion to that they will need a new post office in that town. When they are building the post office—a Federal build- ing, of course—it will cost very little to put on another story and have a Fedcral courtroom, In addition to the judge there will be the clerk and the staff, the United States marshal, and the library, and all the other things that go with the United States district court. Mr. Chairman, that is coming just as sure as this bill passes. I will not be here, but remember what I am saying. Mr. HALLECK. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. MICHENER I yield. Mr. HALLECK. I have no doubt but what there 1s much in what the gentle- man has said and probably in many States that situation has come to pass. However, I think it is only fair to point out that the two district judges in the State of Indiana who are serving there today are in truth and in fact roving judgcs. The judge in the southern dis- trict holds court in four different cities and the judge in the northern district holds court in three different cities. Now, that is a great accommodation to the citizens of our State who have liti- gation in the courts. It makes it pos- sible for them to be present in court at places less far removed from their homes. Probably it is a matter of some inconvenience to the judges, but as I sald, it can be pointed out fairly that we have had that system which has pre- vailed for a long time and still prevails, and I hope it continues to prevail. Mr. MICHENER. My good friend, the assistant minority leader, should be commended for his tenacity. When he wants anything he goes after it and he hangs onto it like a puppy to a root. He usually succeeds, I again commend him. If you will put on the amendment to be offered by the gentleman from New York {Mr. Keatinel, it will give you this “rover,” and it will give you time to consider the thing which I have called attention to, The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan LMr. Micu- ENER] has expired. Mr, BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Croox]. Mr. CROOK. Mr. Chairman, I sub- scribe wholeheartedly to this measure before the committee. I think we have absolutely passed through the tempo- rary stage and tryout for the need of such a judge. All the evidence points to the fact that we need this new judge and he will not differ so much from the ones that we have at the present time, They are roving, and why should we worry about whether they are going to be permanently established in one city? T have not seen any judge who is better than a Congressman, but we do not get to establish ourselves in any one point, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE This extra judge is necessary. It has been needed for several years, and I do not see any need to give this judge a try-out. It is necessary, and I trust this bill will be passed. The CHAIRMAN, The time of the gentleman from Indiana has expired. Mr. BYRNE of New York. Mr. Chair- man, I yield back the remainder of my time. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read, The Clerk read as follows: Be tt enacted, etc., That the President shall appoint, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, one district judge for the northern and southern districts of Indiana, Accordingly, title 28, United States Code, sec- tion 133, fs amended, to read as follows with respect to said districts: “Districts Judges Indiana * « e e e Northern and Southern.......-. 1 * * * e ww Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. Keatina: Page 1, line 12, at the end of the bill, insert: “Any vacancy occurring by reason of the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of the judge appointed pursuant to this act shall not be filled.” Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, this is the amendment to which I referred in general debate. It is in conformity with the practice which we have adhered to in the past, in general, in authorizing new judgeships. We have almost uniformly provided that when they are first au- thorized they shall be temporary. Of course, that means, as the distinguished ranking minority member |Mr. Micu- ENER | has said, that when a vacancy does come about, then we will take another look at this thine. Certainly, it seems to me that in this case, as in the olhers, we Should follow that practice If we are going to authorize an additional judge, we should do it in a conservative man- ner by doing it temporarily at this time, The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from New York has expired. Mr. sIOBBS. Myr. Chairman, I simply rise to say that I for one have never been in sympathy with this argument for temporary judgeships, although I yield to no one in my admiration for its ad- vocates. If the Judiciary Committee of the House has any doubt as to whcther or not this judgeship is needed, then under our oath we owe it to ourselves, our constituents and the judiciary, then we should never have reported the bill favorably. We have certified the facts upon which our judgment is predicated, and there is 1.0t another State in the Union which has made out any better case than Indiana both as to case load and population. We in our committee be- lieve sincerely that this should be a per- manent judge, which would give but one judge for every one and one-third mil- lion people in a State which has as many industries almost as it has farms—®e per- fect balance. It seems to us that this is abundantly justified and that we do 10879 not need to postpone the relief which Indiana is clearly entitled to under our report and under our fixed belief. Mr. JACOBS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOBBS. With pleasure. Mr. JACOBS. I should like to make this observation at this point: The gen- tleman from New York earlier referred to the increasing number of judges in ratio to population. The State of Indi- ana now has within 10,000 the same population as the Nation had when the first Federal judiciary was created. I understand, because I got the figures from the gentleman from New York [Mr. KEatinG], and I know they are cor- rect, that we had 24 Federal judges at that time in the first Federal judiciary which was created. I am quite sure that the population of Indiana will continue to increase as it has. I want to thank the gentleman for the comments that he has made in reference to my statement; they are absolutely ac-- curate. I have given this matter careful consideration myself, I have been a law- yer 23 years, Iam firmly convinced that the judgeship is needed, but I should like to make that comparison so that it would be in the REcorD. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman from Alabama yicld to me? Mr. HOBBS. I shall be so happy to yield to my distinguished colleague on the Judiciary Committee, and one of the most distinguished members of our com- mittee since the days of Daniel Webster. Mr. KEATING. I thank the gentle- man, and IT want to say in response that it is a great source of regret to me that the gentleman is not going to be here in the next Congress to serve on this com- mittee. However, it was the gentleman’s gracious gesture which caused me to get into that, and I asked the gcntleman to yield primarily for the purpose of saying to the gentleman from Indiana that when I gave the figure 24 it included the judges of the supreme court who were originally appointed, It seems to me, however, that it is scarcely a comparison which we can draw to take our Nation in its entirety when it was originally found- ed, when communications were quite different from what they are today, be- cause there is, of course, a minimum number of judges necessary due to geo- graphical considerations . Let me say to the gentleman from Alabama that I feel sure that he did not mean to leave any impression that the adoption of this amendment would delay anything to which Indiana would other- wise to entitled. I feel sure, on the other hand, that he would agree with me that the question of permanency could be de- cided later as well as ncw so that the adoption of this amendment does not de. lay the creation of this additional judge- ship any. Mr. HOBBS. Certainly not, sir. Mr. DENTON. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the last word. Mr, Chairman, I hope this amend- ment is defeated. Mr. Chairman, the purpose of these temporary judgeships as was understood
10880 in the hearings we have had before the Judiciary Commuttee was for cases like this. There was a judge who was old or who was sick who could not perform his duties. That was a temporary situa- tion, They then appointed a so-called temporary judge. You had the situa- tion in that particular court where the docket was crowded, not because of workload but because the judge could not perform his duties. They appointed these temporary judges solely for the purpose of clearing up the docket The unusual thing that happens in practi- cally every case where a temporary judge has been appointed 1s that as soon as the old or ailing judge dies or re- signs, the judgeship is made permanent. There is one of these cases where they had an old judge and they appointed a temporary judge and the temporary judge died before the old judge did That is not the situation we have here in Indiana. I might point out that this was considered by the Judiciary Com- mittee. In a number of these cases they made the judgeships temporary because they thought there were situations there which might warrant a temporary Judge. But that is not the situation in Indiana. The judge in the southern district of Indiana is approximately 36 or 37 years old, The judge in the northern district is in his forties They are judges who work hard and are able to perform their work, The situation in Indiana is that they need more than a temporary judge. In large cities you have more litiga- tion than in small communities, Let us look at the situation in Indiana The judge of the southern district holds court in Indianapolis with a population of over 500,000, he holds court in Terre Haute, a large city. At Terre Haute they have a Federal prison which calls for a good deal of work He also holds court in Evansville, a city with a popu- lation of over 100,000, and also in New Albany. The judge in the northern district holds court in Hammond, Ind, in Lake County. I do not know its population, but that county 1s large enough to have one Congressman He holds court in South Bend, a city of over 100,000, and in Fort Wayne, also a city of over 100,000. As I said, the Committee on the Judi- ciary considered this case and they thought it was a case for a permanent judge. Just as sure as two and two are four if you make this a temporary judge, and a vacancy occurs, we will have to make it permanent. This Indiana case is not one in which a temporary judge should be appointed. It should be a per- manent judge. Mr, LANE. Mr, Chairman, will the gentleman yield? . Mr. DENTON. I yield to the gentle- man from Massachusetts. Mr. LANE. The gentleman will recall at the time of the hearing on this bill when the chief judge of the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit was testi- fying, Hon. John Biggs, Jr., the gentle- man asked him: Let me ask you: You have probably had more experience on this than anybody. Do these temporary Judges ever turn out to be temporary? Do they not always become permanent? CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE This is the reply of Judge Biggs: I have never known of a case in which a temporary judge remains temporary In~ varlably the practice has been to make the temporary judge permanent, Mr. DENTON. That is right. In the omnibus bill creating additional judges which we considered last session a re- quest was made to create a temporary judgeship. That was done, but this year we will consider a bill to make that judgeship permanent ‘There 1s somuch work in Indiana this judgeship is bound to be permanent Mr. JACOBS Mr, Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. DENTON. I yield to the gentle- man from Indiana Mr. JACOBS. Is there any indication or evidence whatever that the population or the business of Indiana is Hable to recede? Mr. DENTON. Why certainly not. We have a great many large cities. The gentleman from Indiana |Mr. HaLLeck] pointed out where the court ought to be held in other large cities in Indiana. This is a case where it should be perma- nent You will be making twice as much work by accepting this amendment. Mr. KEATING Mr. Chairman, I rise fo: the purpose of propounding a unani- mous-consent request. The clerk of the committee advises me that if the amend- ment is adopted, the sentence in line 5 starting with the word “Accordingly” should be eliminated. I ask unanimous consent to substitute in place of the amendment at the desk an amendment which would strike out the sentence be- ginning in line 5 and insert in heu there- of the wording which has already been read. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman may ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment, then present his new amendment Mr KEATING. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimeus consent to withdraw the amendment and offer in lieu thereof an- other amendment, The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York? There was no objection. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re- port the amendment as modified. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr KEATING: Page 1, ne 5, after the period, strike out the re- mainder of the bill and insert. “Any vacan- cy occurring by reason of the death, retire-~ ment, resignation, or removal of the Judge appointed pursuant to this act shall not be filled.” The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentle- man from New York [Mr. KeatTina]. The question was taken; and on a di- vision (demanded by Mr. Keatina) there were—ayes 20, noes 40. So the amendment was rejected. The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the Committee rises. Accordingly the Committee rose; and the Speaker having resumed the Chair, Mr, CARNAHAN, Chairman of the Commit- tee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported that that Commit- tee, having had under consideration the JULY 24 bill (H. R. 6240) to authorize the ap- pointment of a district judge for the northern and southern districts of In- diana, pursuant to House Resolution 703, he reported the bill back to the House. The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered, The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time. Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to recommit. The SPEAKER, Is the gentleman op- posed to the bill? Mr. KEATING, I am, Mr. Speaker. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the motion to recommit, The Clerk read as follows: Mr KEATING moves to recommit the bill H R 6240 to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions to report the same back to the House forthwith with the following amendment. At the end of the bill add a new sentence as follows’ “Any vacancy oc- curring by reason of the death, retirement, resignation, or removal of the judge ap- ponies pursuant to this act shall not be 2 The SPEAKER Without objection, the previous question is ordered. There was no objection. The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion to recommit. The question was taken, and the Speaker announced that the noes ap- peared to have it. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum 1s not present and I make the point of order that a quorum is not present The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present. The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll, The question was taken; and there were—yeas 102, nays 171, not voting 157, as follows: [Roll No 216] YEAS—102 Andersen, Hale Norblad H Carl Hall, O'Hara, Minn, Andresen, Leonard W. O‘Konsk! August H. Heselton Phillips, Calif, Angell Hoeven Poage Arends Hoffman, Mich. Potter Beall Holmes Poulson Blackney Hope Reed, N. Y, Bolton, Ohio Huber Rees Bramblett Hull Rich Brown, Ohio Jackson, Calif Riehiman Byrnes, Wis. James 8t George Canfield Jenking Sasscer Case,N J Jensen Saylor Case,8 Dak. Judd Scott, Clevenger Kearney Hugh D., Jr, Cole, Kans. Kearns Scrivner Cole,N Y. Keating Scudder Cotton LeCompte Secrest Crawford LeFevre Smith, Kans, Cunningham Lovre Smith, Wis, Curtis McConnell Stefan Dague McCulloch Stockman Davis, Wis. McDonough Taber Dolliver McGregor Taille Dondero Mack, Wash. Tollefson Elston Macy Towe Fenton Martin, Iowa Van Zandt Pisher Mason Vorys Ford Merrow Wadsworth Gamble Meyer Withrow Golden Michener Wolcott Goodwin Millor, Md, Wolverton Graham Miller, Nebr, Woodruff Gross Nelson Guill Nicho'son