2456 _ The roll was called, and the following ,Senators answered to their names: ' Brewster Hoey Maybank ' Bricker Humphrey MiNKin Bridges Hunt Morse ' Butler Ives Mundt Byrd Jenner Murray Cain Johneon, Colo. Myers Chapman Johnson, Tex Neely Chavez Johnston, §.C. O'Conor Connully Kefauver Robertson Cordon Kerr Russell Donnell Kilgore Saltonstall Douglas Knowland Smith, Maine Dworshak Langer Smith, N J. Eastland Leahy Sparkman Ecton Lehman Stennis Ellender Lodge Taylor Ferguson Long Thomas, Okla. Flanders Lucas Thomas, Utah Frcar McCarran Tobey Fulbright McCarthy Tydings George McClellan Watkins Green McKellar Wherry Gurney McMahon Wiley Hayden Magnuson Williams Hendrickson Malone Withers it Martin Mr. MYERS. I announce that the Senator from New Mexico [Mr. ANDER- s0n], the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Grauam], the Senator from Arizona [Mr. McFarianp], the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. O’Manoney], and the Senator from Florida |Mr. Perper] are absent on public business. The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Benton] is necessarily absent. The Senator from California [Mr. Downey! is absent on official business. The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Gir- LETTE] and the Senator from Florida {Mr. HOLLAND] are absent by leave of the Senate on official business. Mr. SALTONSTALL. I announce that the Senator from Vermont |Mr. AIKEN], the Senator from Iowa [Mr. HICKENLOOPER], the Senator from Mis- sourt [Mr. Kem], the Senator from Kansas (Mr. ScHOEPPEL], the Senator from Minnesota (Mr. THye], and the Senator from North Dakota [Mr Younc! are absent by leave of the Senate. The Senator from Indiana [Mr. CaPE- HarT] is absent on official business. The Senator from Kansas [Mr. DarBy] is absent by leave of the Senate on official business. The Senator from Ohio [Mr. Tart] and the Senator from Michigan [Mr. VANDENBERG] are necessarily absent. The VICE PRESIDENT. A quorum is present. TRANSACTION OF ROUTINE BUSINESS Mr. McCARRAN obtained the floor. The VICE PRESIDENT. Will the Senator from Nevada yield so the Chair can, without objection, recognize Sena- tors who wish to submit petitions and memorials, introduce bills and joint res- olutions, and present routine matters for the Recorp, without debate? Mr. McCARRAN. I yield for that purpose. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, Senators will be recognized for the transaction of routine business. COMMUNISTS IN GOVERNMENT SERV- ICE—PERSONAL STATEMENT Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to take 1 min- ute at this time to make a short state- ment. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE The VICE PRESIDENT. Is _ there objection? The Chair hears none, and the Senator from Wisconsin may pro- ceed. Mr. McCARTHY. Yesterday the senior Senator from Idaho [Mr. Tay- Lor] placed in the CONGRESSIONAL REC- ORD an article entitled “McCarrnuy’s Creaking Limb.” It dealt in detail with one of the 81 cases which I discussed on the Senate floor the other night—No. 9. At that time I read from the State De- partment’s loyalty files, which showed that this young man did not get clear- ance from that Department but subse- quently ended up as a White House speech writer. I did not make his name public. Mr. Lloyd, however, recognized the case and stated that he was the young man described—which is true. It is interesting to note that neither Mr. Lloyd nor Mr. Edson, the writer of this article, in any way question the accuracy of the information which I quoted from the State Department files. I gather from the article that Mr. Lloyd’s defense is that he did not realize that the Communist-front organizations which he joined were actually Commu- nist controlled—which, of course, is en- tirely possible. I understand further from the article that Lloyd claims that in 1945 he went to Europe and his eyes were opened, and, as he says, “it became clear” to him what the Communists were aiming for. This article would indicate the wis- dom of my refusal to go along with the demand of the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Lucas] to make all names public before the committee had a chance to investigate each case, in that it does indicate the possibility of some of those persons having reformed or having been dupes of the Communist-controlled or- ganizations. I am inclined to question Mr, Lloyd's reformation, however, in view of his sub- sequent actions. For example, he pre- pared a document entitled ‘President Truman's Loyalty Program,” which was furnished to all the White House ghost writers as background material. In this article he very vigorously extolled the virtues of one of Russia’s top espionage agents, Alger Hiss. From this article, which was written after Hiss was ex- posed, it appears that if this young man had his way, Hiss would be back in the State Department, handling secret ma- terial and still helping to shape our for- eign policy. I cannot help being suspicious of a reform when the reformer still pleads the old cause. It is interesting to note, incidentally, that Mr. Lloyd wrote the President’s Oklahoma City speech in which he de- fended his stand insofar as Reds in gov- ernment are concerned. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate the following letters, which were referred as indicated: Avuvrr REPorT or Feprran Crop INSURANCE CoRPORATION A letter from the Comptroller General of the United States, transmitting, pursuant to law, an audit report of the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, for the fiscal year FreBruary 28 ended June 90, 1949 (with an accompany- ing report) to the Committee on Expendi- tures in the Executive Departments. Report or Pusiic HEALTH SERVICE A letter from the Administrator of the Federal Security Agency, transmitting, pur- suant to law, a report of the Public Health Service, for the fiscal year 1949 (with an ac- companying report); to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS Petitions, etc., were laid before the Senate, or presented, and referred as in- dicated : By the VICE PRESIDENT: Resolutions of the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, relating to the high cost of food; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. (See resolutions printed in full when pre- sented by Mr. Longe (for himself and Mr. SaLTONsTatL) on February 27, 1950, ConcRrEs- SIONAL Recorp, p. 2368.) Resolutions of the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, favoring the enactment of anti-poll-tax legislation; to the Committee on Rules and Administra- tion, (See resolutions printed in full when pre- sented by Mr. Lopce (for himself and Mr. SALTONSTALL) on February 27, 1950, p. 2368, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ) Resolutions of the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, favoring the enactment of antilynching legislation; ordered to lie on the table. (See resolutions printed in full when pre- sented by Mr. Lonce (for himself and Mr. SALTONSTALL) on February 27, 1950, Pp. 2368, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.) A letter in the nature of a petition, signed by Josephine Hudson, and sundry other citi- zens of Minneapolis, Minn., relating to the so-called Townsend plan, providing old-age assistance; to the Committee on Finance. A resolution adopted by the Washington Society of Professional Engineers, of Seattle, Wash , favoring an amendment to House bill 1188, defining and regulating the practice of the profession of engineering and creating a board of registration for professional engi- neers in the District of Columbia; to the Committee on the District of Columbia. A letter in the nature of a memorial from Worsham Post No. 40, American Legion of Kentucky, of Henderson, Ky, signed by Lucien M. Trimpe, post commander, relating to the Hoover Commission report advocating dismemberment of the Veterans’ Administra- tion; to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments. Letters in the nature of petitions from Lt, Clyde Doyle, Jr., Post No. 9499, of Bellflower, Calif; the Lower Yellowstone Auxiliary to Post No. 4099, of Sidney, Mont; the Ladies Auxiliary to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, De- partment of Montana, of Havre, Mont.; the Orange County Council of Veterans of For- eign Wars, of Garden Grove, Calif., and the Rayol A. Canfield Auxiliary to Post No. 1087, of Great Falls, Mont., all of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, praying for the enactment of House bill 4617, to liberalize the requirement for payment of pension in certain cases to veterans and their widows and children; to the Committee on Finance. A telegram signed by Louis B. Seltzer, chair- man, and John Kras, secretary, of Cleveland, Ohio, embodying a resolution adopted at a mass meeting of citizens of Cleveland, Ohio, protesting against the alleged abduction and forcible detention of certuin Greck children; to the Committee on Foreign Relations. A resolution adopted by the Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commission, of New Orleans, La., relating to submerged tidelands: to the Committee on Intertfor and Insular Affatrs. A letter in the nature of a petition from the Oneonta Park Ch: ptcr, Daughters of the
1950 American Revolution, of South Pasadena, Calif., signed by Mrs C W. Oneal, correspond- ing secretary, praying for the enactment of lepislation to more adequately protect the American flat (with an = eccomvanying paper), to the Commmittee on the Judiciary. A leiter in the navure of a petition from the Pennsylvenia Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police, of Harrisburg, Pa, signed by John D. Coleinan, recording secretary, relating to the jnternal security of the United Slates; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Resolutions adopted by Ray-Crider-Mc- Nubb Post 5595, Veterans of Foreign Wars, of Princeton, Ky, Presbyterian Woman's Asso- ciation, of Xenla, Ohio, Catharine Green Chapter, Daughters of the American Revolu- ticn, of Xenia, Ohio, and the New London Business end Professional Women's Club, of New London, Ohio, protesting against the enactment of legislation providing compul- sory health insurance; to the Committee on Labor end Public Welfare. A letter in the nature of a petition from the Legislotive Committee of the Phila- dolphia Joint Bonrd of Textile Workers Union of America, of Philadelphia, Pa, signed by Oscar Dewease, chairman, praying for the cnactment of the so-called labor cx- tension bill, ordered to lie on the table Resolutions adopted by the St Joseph County Industrial Union Council, of South Bend, Ind, and Local No. 231, United Auto- mobile, Alreraft and Agricultural Imple- ment Workors of America, of St Louis, Mo, favoring the enactment of Senate bill 110 and House ill 1380, the so-called labor extension bills, ordered to he on the table. By Mr. TYDINGS: Resolutions adopted by the Frederick Junicr Chamber of Commerce, Inc., and the Stucy Committee of the Maryland Commit- tee for Representative Government, of Baltimore, both in the State of Maryland, favoring the adoption of the recommenda- tions of the Hoover Commission on Reorgan- ination of the Executive Branch of the Gov- ernment, to the Committee on Expenditurcs in the Executive Departments A petition of sundry citizens of Takoma Park, Md, praying the enactment of Icfisla- tion to balance the budget and reduce the cost of government, to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments. Resclutions adopted by the Quecn Annc's County Petroleum Industries Committee, the Somerset County Petroleum Industries Com- mittee, and the Worcester County Petroleum Indvstries Committee, all in the State of Muyland, favoring the enactment of leeisla- tion to repeal the excise tux on gasoline, to the Cumnitee on Finance, A resoiuticn adopted by the Maryland, Virsinja, and District cf Columbia Council of Brewery, Yeast, and Soft Drink Workers, fevering the enactment of legislation to repeal Federal excise taxes; to the Committce on Finance A resolution adopted by John R Webb Post No $8265, Veterans of Foreign Wats, protesting against the adoption of Senate Concurrent Resolution 66, favoring the strengthening of the United Nations and its development into a world federation, to the Committee on Foreign Relations. A resolution adopted by the Council of Lithuanian Societies, of Baltamore, Md, fa- voring the ratifNcation of the genocide con- vention; to the Committee on Foreign Relas tious. A resolution adopted by the Woman's Auxiliary to the Bultimore City (Md) Medi- cal Scciety, protesting against the enact- ment of legislation providing compulsory health insurance; to the Committee on Labor and Tublic Welfare. INDEPENDENCE FOR LITHUANIA, LATVIA, AND ESTONIA—RESOLUTION Mr. LODGE. Mr. President, I presont for appropriate reference, and ask CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp, a resolution adopted by Americans of Lithuanian descent as- sembled on the 12th day of February 1950, in Greenfield, Mass., to commemo- rete the anniversary of the independence of the Lithuanian nation. There being no objection, the resolu- tion was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: RESOLUT:ON Americans of Lithuanian descent assem- bled this 12th day of Iebruary 1950, in Gicentield, Franklin County, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, to commemorate the ane niversary of the independence of the Lithua- nian nation, have unanimously declared that in view of— (a) The ethnic, cultural, and linguistic in- dividuality and the political traditions of the Lithuanian people; (b) The ancient Lithuanian statehood dat- ing back to the year 1200 A. D., Its splendid historical record of tolerance, of individual, racial, linguistic, and cultural liberty; (c) The long unceasing and determined struegle of the Lithuanian people against the foreign Muscovite domination and opprese sion; (d) The heroic sacrifices of each succeed- ing generation of the Lithuanian pcople in the preat mass msuriections of 1794-96, 1812, 1863-64, 1905, 1918-20, and the epic Lithua- nian fight for the basic human rights, for human dignity, for the freedom of the press and of the printed Lithuanian word during the 40-year suppression of all Lithuanian Ht- erary activities, 1864-1904; (c) The imposition by the Sovict Union, by threat of superior force and connivance with Nazi German war criminals, of a mutuale- assistance pact on Octobdor 10, 1939, whereby Lithuania granted and leased to the Soviet Union military bases in the strategic Centers of Lithuania in exchange for a solemn Rus- flan guaranty of the independence of Lithu- unla and of Russian noninterlerence in the domestic, political, social, and economic cr- der of the country; (f) The Soviet invasion of Lithuania June 15, 1940, violating all treatics—peace pact, the nonageression pact, and the mutual assist- ance pact with a guaranty of the political in- dependence and noninterference in the do- mestic affairs—then and now in force be- tween the Sovict Union and the sovereign Republic of Lithuanta, (g) The Atlantic Charter declaration hold- ing out a promise of the restoration of sov- eroignty to the peoples forcibly deprived of saine and the subsequent embodiment of the Atlantic Charter as a part of the declaration of the United Nations including the Sovict Unlon on January 1, 1942, (h) Tho effective Lithuanian underground liberation strvggle during 3 years of German occupation and continuing to this date, di- rected against Sovict attempts to annihilate Lithuauta us a sovereign nation Therefore, be it Resolved, To call on the Congress of the United States to create conditions enabling— The formation of broadly representative interim governments of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, The repatriation of Baltic deportees from Siberla and northern Russian exile, under the supervision of the United Nations; The evacuation of the Russian troops, po- lice, and Communist Party apparatus from the territories of the Republics of Lithuanta, Latvia, and Estonia helping the sovereign peoples of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonta to restore their democratic self-governments after the harrowing experiences of three suc~ cessive hostile occupations; and The initiation of a move for an immediate admission of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, 2457 still full-fledged members of the League of Nations, into the United Nations Crganiza- tion, ‘ ANDREW W. DEDINAS, ALEX STEFFINS. ALBERT F, TOMULIS. Lucy Yaxm GoKo.skKL ANTONINA STEFFINS, JOHN BUNEVICH, GENERAL PULASKI’S MEMORIAL DAY Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I present for appropriate reference, and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp, a resolution adopted by. Pulaski Post, No. 562, of the American Legion, Los Angeles, Calif., favoring the enactment of legislation designating Oc-, tober 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day. Tnere being no objection, the resolu- tion was referred to the Committee on’ the Judiciary, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE AMERICAN LEGION, PULASKI POST NO. 562, OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES, CALIF., ON JANUARY 20, 1950, ME= MORIALIZING THE CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES TO PASS, AND THE PRESIDENT OF TH& UNITED STATES TO APPROVE, IF PASSED, THE GENERAL PULASKI DAY RESOLUTION NOW PENDING IN CONGRESS Whereas a resolution providing for the President of the United States of Amcrica to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen, Casimir Pulaski is now pending in tho present session of the United States Con= egress; and Whereas the 11th day of October 1779 is the date in American histery of the heroic death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski, who died from wounds received on October 9, 1779, at the siege of Savannah, Ga; and Whereas the States of Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Declaware, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachue setts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebrase ka, New Jersey, New Hampshire, New York, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Wisconsin and other States of the Union, through legis= lative enactment designated October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day; and Whereas it is fitting that the recurring anniversary of this day be commemorated with sultable patriotic and public exercises in observing and commemorating the heroic deuth of this preat American hero of the Revolutionary War; and Whereas the Congress of the United States of America has by legislative cnactment dese ignated from October 11, 1929, to October 11, 1949, to be General Pulaski’s Memorial Day in the United States of America: Now, there- fore, be it Resolved by the American Legion, Pulaskt Post No 562, of the City of Los Angeles and State of California: Section 1. That we hereby memorialize and petition the Congress of the United States to pass, and the President cf the United States to approve, if passed, the Gen- eral Pulaski’s Memorial Day resolution now pending in the United States Congress. Src. 2. That certified copies of this resolu- tion, properly authenticated, be sent forthe with to the President of the Unitcd Stutes, the Vice President of the United States, and each of the United States Senators and Rep- resentatives from California. Puiu A. FINIF, Post Commander, FRANK A. HaRAsIckK, Americanism Chairman, JoHN KULCZyYK, Post Adjutant,
2458 BILLS INTRODUCED Bills were introduced, read the first time, and, by unanimous consent, the second time, and referred as follows: By Mr. MURRAY (for himself, Mr. THoMas Of Utah, Mr. Perrer, Mr, Green, Mr Ki.core, Mr. Tay1or, Mr. HUMPHREY, Mr. NEELY, and Mr, LEHMAN): § 3144 A bill to reestablish a Civilian Conservation Corps, to provide for the con- eervation of natural resources and the development of human resources through the employment of youthful citizens in the performance of useful work, including job training and instruction in good work habits, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. By Mr. MARTIN: 8 3145. A bill to amend the act of June 20, 1949, so as to extend retroactively benefits for members and dependents of members of the Reserve components of the armed forces who suffered disability or death from in- juries incurred while engaged in training, and S 3146 A bill to enable any commissioned Officer who was discharged, retired, or re- leased from active service without retire- ment pay for physical disability to obtain a review of his entitlement to retirement pay for physical disability; to the Committee on Armed Services (Mr. HUMPHREY (for himself, Mrs. SMrriz of Maine, Mr BENTON, Mr Sciiorprs., Mr. LeaHy, Mr. HENDRICKSON, Mr O'Conor, Mr. AIKEN, Mr. ANDERSON, Mr Brewster, Mr. Douetas, Mr. Buturr, Mr DowNeEy, Mr. Cain, Mr. Prear, Mr CaPEHART, Mr. GREEN, Mr, LANGER, Mr. JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. KILGORE, Mr. MARTIN, Mr LEHMAN, Mr. Morse, Mr. Macnuson, Mr. Munot, Mr. Murray, Mr. Sau= TONSTALL, Mr. TaYLor, Mr. SmMiruH of New Jer- ecy, Mr. THoMas of Utah, Mr. Tye, Mr. Tromas of Oklahoma, Mr. Topey, Mr. Tr- DINGS, Mr. HICKENLOoPEnR, Mr. Hory, Mr Prep- Per, Mr Witey, Mr Hunt, Mr. Grawam, Mr. Keravuver, and Mr. NEELY) introduced Senate bill 3147, to establish a temporary National Commission on Intergovernmental Relations, which was reterred to the Committee on Ex- penditures in the Executive Departments, and appeurs under a separate heading.) By Mr. KEFAUVER: 8 3148 A bill for the relief of Mrs. Chester B. Ingle, to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. FREAR (by request) : 8 3149 A bill for the relief of Irene Gar- land; to the Committee on the Judiciary. TEMPORARY NATIONAL COMMISSION ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, on behalf of myself, the junior Senator from Maine [Mrs. Smiru], the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BrnTon], the Senator from Kansas [Mr. ScHOEPPEL], the junior Senator from Rhode Island (Mr. LeauyJ, the junior Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Henprickson], the junior Senator from Maryland [Mr. O’Conor], the Senator from Vermont (Mr. AtKen], the Senator from New Mexico (Mr. ANpERSoNn], the senior Sen- ator from Maine [Mr. Brewster], the Senator f.om Illinois [Mr. Douctas], the Senator from Nebraska [Mr. Buter], the Senator from California [Mr. Dow- NEY], the junior Senator from Washing- ton [Mr. Carn], the Senator from Dela- ware [Mr. Frear], the Senator from In- diana [Mr. Carenart], the senior Sen- ator from Rhode Island [Mr. Green], the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Lan- GER], the Senator from Texas [Mr. Joun- son], the senior Senator from West Vir- ginia [Mr. Kiicore], the Scnator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Martin], the Senator CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE from New York [Mr, Lenman], the Sen- ator from Oregon [Mr. Morse], the senior Senator from Washington [Mr. Macnuson], the Senator from South Da- kota [Mr. Munopt], the Senator from Montana [Mr. Murray], the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. SALTONSTALL], the Senator from Idaho [Mr. Taytor], the senior Senator from New Jersey [Mr, SmitH], the Senator from Utah [Mr. Tuomas], the junior Senator from Min- nesota [Mr. Tuyr], the Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. Tomas], the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Tosry], the senior Senator from Maryland [Mr. Ty- pines], the Senator from Iowa [Mr. FIIcKENLOOPER], the senior Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Hoey], the Senator from Florida [Mr Perper], the Senator from Wisconsin |Mr. WiLev], the Sena- tor from Wyoming I Mr. Hunt], the jun- jor Scnator from North Carolina |Mr. Grauam], the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Kerauver], and the junior Senator from West Virginia |Mr. NEELY], I intro- qauce for appropriate reference a bill which is a revision of S. 1846, to estab- lish a National Commission on Inter- governmental Relations, now pending on the calendar. This revised bill, I believe, Satisfies all the objections raised to the original bill, namely, (1) that the Com- mission should be temporary in order that the Congress might have an oppor- tunity to review its activities before es- tablishing it as a permanent body; (2) that its membership should be reduced to facilitate prompt action; and (3) that the panel form of selection be eliminated to enable a wider selection of member- ship. I also point out that the creation of this Commission carries out the cardi- nal recommendation of the Hoover Com- mission in the fleld of Federal-State rela- tions. I may say that we should welcome the additional sponsorship of any and all Senators not already on the bill. The bill (S. 8147) to establish a tem- porary National Commission on Inter- governmental Relations, introduced by Mr. Humpurey (for himself and other Senators), was read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on Expendi- tures in the Executive Departments. INVESTIGATION OF MONOPOLISTIC PRAC- TICES BY BULLION BROKERS, ETC. Mr. McCARRAN submitted the fol- Jowing resolution (S. Res. 234), which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary: Resolved, That the Senate Committce on the Judiciary, or any duly authorized sub- committee thereof, is authorized to make a full and complete investigation of any and all monopolistic, collusive, coercive, fraudu- lent, or discriminatory practices or other practices in restraint of trade or tending to lessen competition which are or may be tn violation of the antitrust laws, engaged in by bullion brokers or fabricators of silver or manufacturers or distributors of silver compounds, alloys, or other silver products, including, but not limited to, (1) the degree of concentration of monopolistic power in the hands of a single bullion broker or fabri- cator or group of bullion brokers or group of fabricators or group of brokers and fabri- cators; (2) the extent of control exercised over wholesale and retail prices and over the spread of prices between or among such brokers, fabricators, manufacturers, and dis- tributors, and the way in which and means FEBRUARY 28 by which such control may be exercised, (3) price discrimination, and pricing policies or practices, trade practices or other practices resulting in discrimination in favor of or against certain buyers or classes or groups of buyers, or in favor of or against certain sellers or classes or groups of sellers; (4) control or attempted control or manipulation or attempted manipulation of the world price of silver, and the extent and effects thercof; (5) control or attempted control or manipu- lation or attempted manipulation of the domestic price of silver, and the extent and effects thereof; (6) agreements, combina- tions, or concerted or collusive action in- tended or tending to injure, restrain, or coerce, or to prevent or hinder the establish- ment or growth of, a competitor or com- petitors. Src. 2. The committee shall report its findings to the Senate at the earliest prac- ticable date, together with such recom- mendations for legislation and such other recommendations as it may deem advisable. Src. 3. For the purposes of this resolution, the committee or any duly authorized sub- committee thereof, is authorized to employ upon a tempcrary basis such technical, cler- ical, and other assistants as it deems ad- visable The expenses of the committce under this resolution, which shall not excecd , Shall be paid from the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers approved by the chairman of the committee CARE OF MEMORIAL OF REV PHINEAS D GURLEY, FORMER CHAPLAIN OF SENATE Mr. MARTIN. Mr, President, I have been requested by the jumor Senator from Nebraska [Mr. WHERRY!, who is temporarily out of the Chamber, to sub- mit a resolution in his behalf and to precede it with the statement prepared by him which I now read: Mr President, the grave of one of the most illustrious Chaplains of the United States Scnate, Rev Phineas D. Gurley, Presbyterian minister of the New York Avenue Church of this city during the Civil War period, is badly in need of repair and perpetual care Dr. Gurley was Chaplain of the Senate in 1858 and for some time thereafter. He was spiritual advisor to President Lincoln during the Civil War years. He died in 1868 and is burled in this city, at Glenwood Cemetery, where @ monument was erected to his memory by devoted parishioners In late years this monument and the grave have not been cared for. It will cost a sum of $425 to reset the stone and provide perpetual care for the grave. In respect for Chaplain Gurley’s service to the Senate and to President Lincoln, on be- half of the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. WHERRY], I submit for appropriate reference & resolution to provide for the care of his mMemortal, The resolution (S. Res. 235), submit- ted by Mr. Martin (for Mr. WHERRY), was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration, as follows: Resolved, That the Secretary of the Senate is authorized and directed to Pay, out of the contingent fund of the Senate, to Glen- wood Cemetery, Lincoln Road, northeast Washington, D. C., the sum of $425, upon receipt by him of such assurances as he may deem nocessary that such sum will be used for repairs to the monument erected at the grave of the Rev. Phineas D. Gurley, a former Chaplain of the Senate, and for per- petual care of such grave. AMENDMENT OF DISPLACED PERSONS ACT—AMENDMENTS Mr. O'CONOR submitted amendments intended to be proposed by him to the
1950 amendment in the nature of a substitute submitted by Mr. Kitcore (for himself and other Senators) to the bill (H. R. 4567) to amend the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, which were ordered to lie on the table and to be printed. URGENT DEFICIENCY APPROPRIATIONS— AMENDMENT Mr. LONG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill (H, R. 7207) making appropriations to supply urgent deficiencies in certain appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1950, and for other purposes, which was ordered to lie on the table and to be printed. ADDRESS BY SENATOR SALTONSTALL AT THE NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD WEEK OBSERVANCE [Mr. O’CONOR asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp the address deliv- ered by Senator SaLTONSTALL at tho National Brotherhocd Week observance held in Balti- more on February 22, 1950, which appears in the Appendix. ] HAPPENINGS IN WASHINGTON—ADDRESS BY SENATOR MARTIN {Mr MARTIN asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp a radio address entitled “Happenings tn Washington,” deliv- ered by him on February 27, 1950, which ap- pears in the Appendix ] STATEMENT BY SENATOR LEHMAN ON THE SIGNING OF THE NIAGARA DIVER- SION TREATY {Mr LEIIMAN asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp a statement issued by him on February 27, 1950, in connection with the signing of the Niagara Diversion Treaty between the Uniced Stutes and Can- ada, which appears In the Recorp | ADDRESSES AT TESTIMONIAL DINNER TO HON ALBERT W. HAWKES {Mr BRICKER asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Reconp addresses at a testimonial dinner given to Hon Albert W. Hawtos, former Senator from New Jersey, by the New Jerscy Chapter, Pro America, at Hotel Suburban, East Orange, N. J., October 27, 1949, which appear in the Appendix ] RELATIONS BETWEEN IRELAND AND THE UNITED STATES—ARTICLE BY ARTHUR KROCK {Mr LODGE asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Rrcorp an article by Arthur Krock, from the New York Times of February 28, 1950, commenting on a dinner in honor of Hon. Sean Nunan, retiring Min- ister of Eire, which appears in the Appendix J JAYCEE DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD TO ALFRED JAMES DICKINSON [Mr. BYRD asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp a citation award- ing the Jaycee Distinguished Service Award to Alfred James Dickinson, of Richmond, Va, which appears in the Appendix | JOINT COMMITTEE ON NONESSENTIAL FEDERAL EXPENDITURES~— EDITORIAL FROM THE EVENING STAR |M: STENNIS asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Rrcorp an editorial en- titled “A Valuable ‘Publicity Medium,’ ” from the Washington Evening Star of February 27, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] DISPLACED PERSONS LEGISLATION— ARTICLE FROM THE LABOR RECORD {Mr LUCAS asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an article regard- ing displaced persons legislation, from the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Labor Record of Joliet, Ill, for February 23, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] ORGANIZED GAMBLING — EDITORIAL FROM THE SAN ANGELO STANDARD- TIMES {Mr. JOHNSON of Texas asked and ob- tained leave to have printed in the Recorp an editorial entitled “Gambling Problem,” from the San Angelo Standard-Times of Feb- ruary 20, 1950, which appears in the Ap- pendix. ] PUBLIC INTEREST IN ORGANIZED CRIME—-ARTICLES BY BOB CONSIDINE [Mr. KEFAUVER asked and obtained leave to have printed 1n the Recorp six news arti- cles written by Bob Considine, of the Inter- national News Service, relating to alleged national syndicates of gamblers, which appears in the Appendix.] EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED As in executive session, The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate messages from the President of the United States submitting several nominations, which were referred to the appropriate committecs. (For nominations this day received, see the end of Senate proceedings.) EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF A COMMITTEE As in executive session, The following favorable reports of nominations were submitted: By Mr. NEELY, from the Committee on the Distiict of Columbia: Mary C. Barlow, o1 the District of Columbia, to be associate Judge of the municipal court for the District of Columbia to fill a new position, and Thomas C. Scalley, of the District of Co- lumbia, to be associute judge of the munici- pal court for the District of Columbia to fill & new position. TREATY OF FRIENDSHIP, COMMERCE AND NAVIGATION WITH IRELAND—REMOV- AL OF INJUNCTION OF SECRECY The VICE PRESIDENT. As in execu- tive session, the Chair lays before the Senate Executive H, Eighty-first Con- egress, second session, a treaty of fricnd- ship, commerce and navigation between the United States of America and Ire- land, together with a protocol relating thereto, signed at Dublin on January 21, 1950. Without objection, the injunciion of secrecy will be removed from the treaty, and the treaty, together with the President’s message, will be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the message from the President will be printed in the Reconp. The Chair hears no objection. The messuge from the President is as follows: To ihe Senate of the Uniled States: With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to ratification, I transmit herewith a treaty of friend- ship, commerce, and navigation between the United States of America and Ire- land, togcther with a protocol relating thereto, signed at Dublin on January 21, 1950. The enclosed treaty is a compre- hensive instrument which takes into ac- count the developments in international relationships during the past century and is intended to meet effectively the needs of the present day, I consider this treaty to be an important manifesta- tion of the fricndly relations between the 2459 United States of America and Ireland and commend it to the early considera- tion of the Senate. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, a copy of the minutes of in- terpretation, initialed on the same date the treaty and protocol were signed, and a report on the treaty made to me by the Secretary of State. Harry S. TRUMAN. THE WHITE Howse, February 28, 1950. (Enclosures: (1) Report of the Secre- tary of State; (2) treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation, with protocol, signed at Dublin January 21, 1950; (3) copy of minutes of interpretation, ini- tialed at Dublin January 21, 1950.) DISPLACED PERSONS The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. 4567) to amend the Displaced Persons Act of 1948. Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the body of the Recorp certain edi- torials, newspaper articles, communica- tions, and resolutions bearing on the sub- ject of displaced persons. There being no objection, the mat- ters referred to were ordered to be print- ed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Chicago Daily Tribune of Febru- ary 4, 1950] INTERVIEWER PROTESTS AND LOSES His JoB (By William Moore) WASHINGTON, February 3.—Tired of “white- washing” fake displaced persons for the Dis- placed Persons Commission, Edward M. Gla- zek told a Senate subcommittee today, he complained to Chairman Ugo Carusti of the DPC Cuarusi, Glazek said, fired him. Glazck was an assistant selector for the DPC in Germany until last summer. He ap- peared voluntarily today before a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, which is studying the new bill to raise the number of DP’s admitted to this country. CHARGES FRAUD, BRIBERY He told Senator Jenner (Republican, In- diana), Richard Arens, subcommittee staff director, and Frank Schroeder, investigator, that: 1. Fake DP’s are being admitted to this country through wholesale fraud and brib- ery. 2. Bona fide DP’s are being kept out in order that their places muy be given to for- eigners who never were DP's. 3. Many of those being cleared for immi- @ration to the United States were enemies of this country in the war, and these in- clude murdcrers and perpetrators of atroci- ties 4 DPC staffs are under orders not to in- terview suspected applicants, and to approve their applications as quickly as possible. 5. The United States is taking those who fre left after other nations have taken the “cream” of the refugees, ACTED UNDER ORDERS Glazek, who lives in Detroit, brought with him copies of the papers he fssued to refu- gers. He pointed out obvious fraudulent statements by the applicants and then told how he justified the frauds to make the ap- Plicants eligible to come to the United States. “This is how I whitewashed this one,” he would say, and then give his explanation. “Iam ashamed of this whitewashing, but I was ncting under orders.” “You finally ran out of whitewash and had to quit?” asked JENNER. “That's right,” replied Glazck,
2460 ORDERED TO £HUT EYES Glazek said the International Refuzee Or- ganization, which is the global DP unit, would not permit questioning of the papers it issues. The DPC, the American unit, he said, ordered him and the other workers net to investigate, and not tu interview sus- pected epplicants. Instructions were, he said, that adverse reports by the Army coun. terintellitenco on suspected subversives were to be given little credence. Applicants who inadvertently gave infor- metion that would have barred them, he seid, were told how to correct their state- ments, and the DPC employees frequently took bribes for this service. Sometimes, Glazek said, he violated orders and refused to admit a favored applicant. Glazek sald his superiors then sent the ap- Plicant to another selector and got the ap- Plicant approved. [From the Mobile Press Register of February 8, 1960] ViraL FOR AMERICA To GuaArRD AGAINST INFLUX oF DANGEROUS ALIEN ELEMENTS Unless the American people are willing to See their country become dangerously in- fested from abroad by a new motley horde of stinkers, they had better begin Mstening more carefully to the warnings of such men as United States Senator Pat McCarran of Nevada. Senator McCarran, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, is in excellent position to know the score on the alien menace to which a namby-pamby immuigra- tion policy would expose the Nation For one of the duties of his committee ts to han- dle immigration legislation. Thus when Senator McCaRran sounds an alarm, as he has done at the present scssion of Congress, his words cannot wisely be ignored or lightly dismissed. Every American citizen who is adequately interested in the future national well-being has cause to alert himself against imminent danger in the face of Senator McCanran’s statements about alien smuggling and pres- sure-group scheming to use the displaced- persons law as a gangplank for unloading a vast polyglot swarm of foreigners upon the United States. Senator McCarran declares that pressure groups are using a relatively few war-dis- placed persons, virtually all of whom are be- ing resettled or repatriated, for the purpose of destroying our immigration barriers, to the end that this country will be inundated with a flood of aliens. That statement of a United States Sena- tor is something for every American who loves his country to ponder—and ponder now, be- fore the damage emerges from a state of po- tentiality into a fait accompli. The United States of America is beset by enough problems and worries without falling hook, line, and sinker for a world-wide dis- placed-persons racket. Nobody who places a proper value on estab- MUshed American institutions and national security will ever consent to proclaiming the United States a wholesale dumping ground for all manner of foreign elements. But the American people need to do more than simply refrain from consent. They need to respond to Senator McCarran’s appeal for expressions to Congress—expressions of a character that will help hold the dikes of our protective immigration system. Senator McCCarRAN says facts developed through study and investigation point to the inescapable conclusion that the floodgates of this Nation are being pried open for the en- trance of millions of aliens, from the turbu- lent populations of the entire world, who are seeking admission into the United Btates under the guise of displaced persons. He emphasizes that by the time this coun- try’s present displaced-persons law expires there will be hardly any bone fide war-dis- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE placed persons in the whole of central Europe, “At the end of the war,” says the Nevadan, “the Allied armies in central Europe became the guardians of approximately 8,000,000 per- sons who had been displaced during the war. “Within a few months after the war, ap- proximately 7,000,000 of these persons were repatriated to their native countries, leaving about 1,600,000 persons who, because of fear of persecution, refused to return to their homelands. “By the expiration date of our present dis- placed-persons law (June 30, 1950), there will remain only a few thousand such war-dis- placed persons in central Europe, other than the so-called hard core who, because of social or physical disqualifications, are ineligible for resettlement.” Why, then, all the clamor to fix it so great droves of other foreigners can stream into the United States under the false pretense of being war-displaced persons? Why should this country throw open its immigration gates to everything alien fram rifiraff to unknown? If aliens fraudulently parading as war-dis- piaced persons are to be imported into the United States on reckless scale and turned loose to do whatever mischief they choose, from swindling to spying, how does it happen that American taxpayers have been sending billions of dollars abroad to help rebuild for- eign economies? Is the real idea of the generous gift giving by the United States simply to tide over countless thousands among alien popula- tions until they can be brought to the United States under a bogus label of having been dlsplaced by war? There is grave danger for the safety of this Nation in spurning caution to permit a harum-scarum alien infiltration, Senator McCarran sees unwise laxity tn administering the present displaced-persons law. Of this he says: ‘Inadequate screening of applicants, with little or no regard for back- ground, political beliefs, and predilections of applicants, has opened the gates to persons who will not become good citizens and who will become ready recruits in subversive or- ganizations to tear down the democracy of the United States.” That is a severe and shocking indictment of the administration of the law. Senator McCarran points out (and this is something else for all solid Americans to ponder) that “the Attorney General of the United States recently testified that an an- alysis of 4,984 of the more militant members of the Communist Party in the United States showed that 81.4 percent of the total were of foreign stock or were married to persons of foreign stock.” Americans afflicted with the kind of senti- mentality that makes them easy prey of op- ponents of cautious immigration policy should hurry to their doctor if unimpressed by this statement of the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. On top of the alien menace that can bore its way into the country through ordinary immigraticn channels unless due vigil is maintained, the smuggling of aliens is a source of danger. Senator McCarran Calls attention to this by reminding that during the last year 412 smugglers of aliens were arrested, but, of course, the number who were actually smug- gled into the United States is unknown. How many untrustworthy and dangerous foreigners have come into the United States within the last several years by hook or crook or other means? How many foreign-born and offspring of foreign-born have adopted criminal careers in the United States? ‘Whoever assumes the number is small or anything like %% does not keep up with the datly police news. Foreign names stand out FEBRUARY 28 conspicuously in the ranks of the Nation's underworld, among the racketeers, gangsters, and Killers. Remove the elements of alien stock, in- fluence, and trait, and major crime in the United States would by no means approach its present proportions. Instcad of weakening ita guard and re- laxing its watch, the United States should show more diligent concern about the alien situation. For this situation, if negiccted,’ threatens disastrous consequences for the United States. Senator McCarran has sounded warnings which ought to be sufficient for all genuine, thinking Americans, native and otherwice. Many high-caliber Americans have come from abroad and meant much to the ccuntry, of course. Others will come and receive a deserved welcome, The urgent immigration job confronting the Nation is torule cc! the foul and dangerous. VETERANS OF FOREIGN Wars OF THE UNITED STATES, DrPaRTMENT OF ARIONA, Globe, Ariz., February 7, 1950. Hon. Pat McCarran, United States Senator, Washington, D.C. Dear Senator McCarran: I received your booklet relative to displaced persons. This is to inform you that the Department of Arizona, Veterans of Foreign Wars, is wholly in sympathy with your viewpoint. In fact, at a council of administration meeting at which members of the VFW from all over the State gathered, it was unanimously voted on to be against, as you state, “opening the floodgates of this Nation for the entrance of millions of aliens from the turbulent pop- ulations of the entire world.” In fact, the council! was in favor of making the immigra- tion laws more stringent. I am sending a copy of this letter to each of our Congressmen and Senators from this State Very truly yours, Barry De Rose, Department Commander, Harpy, Ark., February 11, 1950, Hon Pat McCarran, United Statcs Senate, Washington, D C. Drar SENATOR McCarran: At a regular, scheduled meeting of this combined Veterans of Foreign Wars and American Lezion, Posts 4677, 92, I, as commander of the VFW, read your pamphlet on the evils of unrestrained immigration. I'd like to impress you with the fact that the ex-servicemon in this community take this matter very seriously. As a former en- forcement officer in the Immigration and Naturalization Service, I have been able to explain tho ramifications of immigration and naturalization to these men. I am aware of the fact that our immigration and nat- uralization is, and always has been, ham- pered by lack of funds and personnel. Almost every man in these two outfits has served overseas in War I or II. They have seen the evil of the radical groups and realize that there is small hope of assimila- tion of these pressure groups. All seem to fee] that our Government should coniine itself to the healthy admission of aliens on the quota and nonquota plans as heretofore worked out by Conegrcss, All feel that some small percentage of people should, in ccm- passion, be allowed to enter under the dis- Placed person plan. This after very careful mental, physical, and political scrutiny. In the matter of unrestrained admission of aliens to this country, the veterans who ha.e by thelr sacrifices preserved this country, are, in this locality, unanimous in their declara- tion that this should not be allowed. These combined veterans’ posts appeal to you to
1950 use every means in your power to put a stop to this condition once and for all. These posts apply to you for alleviation of the abysmal ignorance on immigration that seems to be prevalent in thie country and makes these abuses possible. In the hope that you will keep us informed and assuring you of our support in your campaign, I am Respectfully, Tomas E. Harpy. STaTE OF FLORIDA, BEVERAGE DEPARTMENT, Jacksonville, Fla., February 6, 1950. Hon. PAT McCarran, Senate Office Building, Washing.on, D. G. My Dear SENATOR: Permit me to acKnowl- edge aud to thank you for your statement on “Displaced Persons: Facts vs. Fiction" which you were kind enough to send me. After 34 years in the Government service, 12 of which were in the Federal Buresu of Investigation, Department of Justice, as spe- etal agent and special agent in charge, I am thoroughly convinced tiiat many of these 60- cated displaced persons are fictions and are rapidly taking jobe in our country that should go to American-born citizens, thus increasing, from year to year, our uncm- ployed situation. Also, permit me to state that I am in hearty accord with your reasoning on page 6 (top) in which you say: “T am confident, on the basis of my in- vestigation that there is a complete break- down in the administration of the law In- adequate screening of applicants, with little or no regard for background, political bellefs, and predilections of applicants, has opened the gates to persons who will not become good citizens and who will become ready re- crults in subversive organizations to tear down the democracy of the United States” Very truly yours, Howakgp P, WricuHrT, Special Investigator. | January 21, 1950 Whereas for the last 214 years a Senate committee has been investigating our entire immigration and naturalization system; and Whereas their report shows that the flood- gates of our Nation are opened for the en- trance of millions of aliens from all over the world who are coming in as displaced persons; and Whereas certain pressure groups have been lobbying in the Congress for the repeal of all our safeguards on immigration and are spending millions of dollars for the dissemi- nation of propaganda for that purpose; and Whereas our country operates under an im. migration-quota system, whereby approxi- mately 154,000 quota immigrants may be ad- mitted every year for permanent residence, also United States citizens may bring in their relatives on a nonimmigration quota; anc Whereas certain pressure groups are trying to drive the Celler bill (H. R. 4567) through the Senate, which provides the admission of some 15,000 persons from behind the tron curtain who have not yet been displaced; and Whereas an official of our princtpal intelli- gence agency (operating abroad), expressed his opinion that this provision of the Celler bill would constitute a dangerous threat to the security of the United States and would be another loophole for the infiltration of Communist agents; and Whereas upon uncontested evidence of a complete break-down in the administration of the immigration lew which has opened the gates to persons who will not become good citizens, but will become ready recruits in subversive organizations to tear down the democracy of the United States; and Whereas during the first 6 months of 1949, illegal entries over the Mexican border were XCVI 155 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE at a rate of 25,000 a month and a former American consul on the Canadian border estimated the number of Ulegal aliens in the United States to be from 3,000,000 to 5,000,000: Therefore be it Resolved by the Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic, Department of the Potomac, in regular convention assembled this 21st day of January 1950, That we will oppose with all our strength and will immediately inform our members of the United States Senate that they must protect our immigra- tion system and promptly provide funda for the detection and deportation of these thousands upon thousands of aliens who have illegally entered our borders; be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be transmitted to Senator Par McCarran, with the request that he place it in the ConcrEs- BIONAL RECORD. Maroaret Hopxins WorRELL, Chairman, Resolutions Committee, Ladies of the Grand Army of the Republic, WASHINGTON GROVE, MD., February 8, 1950 Hon. Par McCarran, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. Dear SENATOR: You may have seen the en- closed clipping in the Washington Post of February 8, 1950. If you have, or when you are through with it, will you please place it in the hands of one of your committee mem- bers, who may need it? The facts therein are not overdrawn. It does seem to me nothing less than criminal] for Congress to open our country to a horde of undesirables who are, in the main, coming here because Americans are suckers and just ripe to be exploited. Ob- viously many get here by fraud, bribes, per- jury, and other forms of crookedness, and they wil) continue, when here, to have the attitude that they can continue living here by fraud, crooKedness, bribes, and the like. Ten ycars from now, the American people will wake up to the fact that a lot of slick pressure groups not interested in the wel- fare of the United States, but for their own particular pals in Europe, have succeeded in saddiing our country with the most un- desirable of all of Europe’r riffraff. Respectfully, Oscar E. LANCASTER. P S—The hordes that poured out of Rus- sia and now are pressuring to get into the United States clearly did not leave Russia because they were opposed to communism, but because they knew they could not ex- ploit the Communists as readily as they could exploit us. OEL [From the Washington Post of February 8, 1950} DP ProGRAM IN MARYLAND UNDER ATTACK (By John W. Ball) Widespread dissatisfaction among farm- ers in the Washington area over the resettle- ment of displaced persons on nearby farms was given pointed expression in Anne Arun- del County, Md., yesterday. There the three-man committee, appoint- ed by Gov. William Preston Lane, Jr., to dt- rect the resettlement program, resigned. A stinging criticism of the conduct of the DP program, which the three called “slovenly” as well as “wholly inefficient and uncoordi- nated,” accompanied their resignation. “We have been bitterly disillusioned,” Benjamin Watkins 8d of Davidsonville, chairman; Charles B. Lynch, and J. Irving King wrote. “Our experiences force us to the conclusion that the program as now oper- ated is not in the best interests of the Mary- land farmer, not indeed in the best interests of the United States.” 2461 The DP situation in Maryland and Vir- ginta has been the subject of scores of com~ plaints. The Maryland Farm Bureau on January 11 registered bitter disappointment and asked for stiff laws governing DP’s now here. On December $1, a total of 402 families listing 196 persons had been brought into Maryland, records show. Anne Arundel got fewer than most coun- ties. The records a month earlier showed Queen Anne County with 41 families and 11 persons the largest. Howard had 36 fami- lies and 88 persons; Carroll 31 families and 78 persons; Charles County 15 families and 67 persons; Prince Georges 18 families and 46 persons, Anne Arundel 2 families and 36 persons; Montgomery 9 families and 30 per- tons; Calvert 8 families and 35 persons; and St. Mary's 2 families and 9 persons. In January State officials estimated that 40 percent of the DP’s had left their sponsor- ing farms, some within a week of their arrival. A recent congressional report showed Virginia, Maryland, and Mississippi! as the only three States dissatisfied with operation of the DP program. Maryland farmers, according to David L. B. Fringer, Maryland employment service di- rector said, suffer from chronic shortage of skilled farm labor. At the same time there is @ surplus of unskilled labor. When the DP program started, it was thought Maryland offered @ great opportunity to skilled farm hands. Instead, all types of workers, from dentists and doctors to butchers, shoemakeis, and even a 10-year professor of civil engineering in a Jarge European college, were imported as skilled farm hands. UKRAINIANS TOP LIST The majority in Maryland were Ukrainians, brought by the United Ukrainian-American Relief Association Other agencies bringing in DP's were the Nattonal Catholic Welfare Society, the Lutheran League, the Hebrew Immigrant Aid, Church World Service, Unit- ed Service for the New Americans, and the Friends Society “We fecl that in giving asylum to the op- pressed and needy refugees we would be giv- ing new hope to people desperately in need of assistance,” the Anne Arundel commit- teemen wrote. “We assumed that they would be carefully screened, and that we would be opening the door of opportunity to people who were qual- ified for the work that they had represented themselves competent to do * * * and who desired, above all things, to attain citi- zenship. “DEVOID OF GRATITUDE “It has been our experience that while some are giving a high degree of satisfaction, many who have had extraordinarily fine placements have not only been unqualified for the work they had represented themselves capable of doing, but have proved themselves devoid of gratitude or a sense of moral obli- gation. “It 1s an uncontestable fact that no agency of the Federal Government has any clear idea of the whereabouts of thousands of refu- pees who have recently entered the United States.” MILWAUKKE, W18., January 2¢, 1950. The Honorable Pat McCarran, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. Deam SenatToR McCagRnan: I wish to ac- knowledge receipt of a copy of your state- Ment entitled ‘‘Displaced Persons: Facts Ver- sus Fiction.” Personally I have not been in sympathy with opening the doors of ow: United States to foreigners simply because they have either moved from one place to anothcr, or, due to
2462 war were forced to vacate their homes, not due to causes created by our Government or its military forces. We have already seen some of this flock early in the late war sheltered at Fort Porter, or some post in that vicinity. We believe that they bring with them too much Euro- pean influence on our own foreign-born cit- izens and of the first American generation, and may influence legislation which is more European than American, with the conse- quent lowering of American standards which we, old Americans, have built up through the centurics, or at least since the signing of our Federal Constitution, It appears that those with a foreign accent, within our borders, are these who approve of what we commonly refer to us a “police state” or a “socialistic state’ merely due to the fact that they have not yet been ab- sorbed into our American ways of life We belleve thut our present administra- tion ts going too damn far in attempting to take care of the rest of the world, outside of our bharders, whereas our American Indians, right in Wisconsin, are again going hungry and co'd and must rely on local aid, even though the reservation law under Fedcral control exists We believe that immigration should be held to a mintmum That immigrants be thoroughly ccreencd by ecreened immigra- tion officials We kelieve that a more cf- fective border contrvul be established and that those foreigners entering have their move- ments checked. The foreign-born are the easiest meat for union oiganizers. They are used to taking orders. They ere ueed to letting others do their thinking for them, and in turn, they are used to violence tn our more or less fiee way of law enforcement. We believe that trom now on we should think and act for the guod ot the United Stet-s of America and let other nations fol- low our example if they so desne. Sincerely yours, REINHOLD C. Dept, Sr. New Yoru, January 25, 1950. United States Senators, GenTLEMcN: Please no more DP'’s. Let Americans catch up and live Let them stay right where they are. Three hundred and twenty thousand now on relief in New York City. Three hundred thousand men die in last war, s0 please do not knock down our immigration barr.ers, so, gentlemen, let us protect our citizens. Yours, WM, Jonis. BriDGEPorT, CONN., January 25, 1950. SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: In view of tho rising unem- ployment, continued housing shortage and the possibility of increasing the number of subversive persons in this wonderful coun- try, I request that you vote to prevent the entrance of displaced persons. Very truly yours, JACQUES H. SCHINDLER, UnrTep States SENATE, Washington, D. C., January 16, 1950. IMMIGRATION SUBCOMMITTEE, SENATE JupIctrary COMMITTEE, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dzar Sir: I am enclosing herewith a Ictter and a resolution addressed to this office by Mr. Robert Leiknu, Commander of American Legion Post No. 38 of Miller, 8. Dak., with regard to the entry of displaced persons into this country and which I hope you will add to your study of this subject. With best wishes, I am, Cordially yours, Kart E Monor, United States Senator, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE AMERICAN LEGION, Hanvp County Post, No. 38, Miller, S. Dak., January 13, 1950. The Honorable Kart MUNDT, United States Senator from South Dakota, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear Sm: Pursuant to a resolution passed by the Hand County Post No. 38, of the American Legion at Miller, 8S. Dak., a copy of which is enclosed, and pursuant to di- rections from the membership, we are writ- ing to you on behalf of the Hand County Post. It was called to the attention of the Legion membership at the rogular meeting that two ex-GI's and one other person probably have lost their employment because of the fact that their employers had applied for and obtained assurances that they would secure deposed persons from Europe to tuke their place, and that the regulations for the admission of displaced persons and the tak- ing of displaced persons require that such placement of such persons shall not take away the employment of any persons or shall not reduce the number of jobs avall- able That such employeis’ names and ad- dresses are as follows. Joe Roalstad, Miller, S Dak, Roy Allgair, Ree Heights, S. Dak; W.H Molesworth, Miller, 8S. Dak; and that the persons who were omployed by such em- ployers before and after the application of such employers for deposed persons were as follows: Wayne Edwards, Muller, S. Dak, Maurice Hartman, Miller, S, Dak, and A K, Burgher, Miller, S. Dak. It was further called to the aitention of the post from the floor that available opportunities for employment in this county are less than at any time since the war. On behalf of the post action to request that on investigation be made into the matier of handling displaced persons and that greater care be exercised in their place- ment to the end that employment of cx-GI's and others be not disrupted and jeopardized both locally and the country over. We urge that the unemployment situa- tion be reexamined and that additional safeguards be provided against any displace- ment of employed citizens, particularly for - mer GI's, by displaced persons before addi- tional numbers be permitied to come into this country and we hope that Congress will make a general investigation as to whether unemployment will increase as a result of further admissions of deposed persons be- fore providing further admission of addi- tional hundreds of thousands. The mem- bership of the post feels greatly concerned about this matter and urge that the matter be given much consideration before the vote on the new deposed-persons bill comes up. Very truly yours, Ropwert C LECKNLR, Commander, Hand County Poot, No 38. RESOLUTION ADCPTED BY THE HAND COUNTY POST, NO. 38, MILLER, S. DAK., AT A REGULAR MFETING HELD JANUARY 10, 1950 “Be it 1esolved by the membership of Hand County Post, No. 38, of the American Legion at Miller, S. Dak., That it appearing that pos- Bibly two ex-GI’s and one other resident of this county have lost their employment by reason of their employers applying for and receiving assurances that they would get de- posed persons from Europe to work for them, and that such actions are contrary to law and likely to cause unemployment of ex-GI's and others and that the same is unjust, that the commander of this post be authorized and directed to communicate and express our feelings to the Immigration and Naturaliza- tion Service and United States Senators and Representatives and the State and national Officers of the American Legion, asking that investigation be had and that corrective measures be taken, and that the entire em- ployment situation in this country be re- FEBRUARY 28 viewed before additional deposed persons be admitted to this country.” The above resolution was duly moved and seconded for adoption and by unanimous vote was adopted and made a part of the minutes of the meeting, certified to be a copy of the original resolution. Robert LECKNER, Commander, TRUMAN D. ELDER, Adjutant. UNUWERSITY OF PENNSYLVAN1}, Philadelphia, February 14, 1950. The Honorable Patrick McCarran, The United States Senate, Washington, D.C. Drar SENATOR MCCARRAN: I have just re- ceived the reprint of a statement by you con- cerning displaced persons. I am heartily in accord with your statement. Wo have had one esperience and that was in accord with your observation, namely, that the screening was very poor on the other side. I believe these individuals who came to our house were Communists, and finally, that the Church World Service is not doing a satisfac- tory job, in my opinion I think your statement is very timely. Very sincerely, EUGENE P. PENDERGRASS, M. D. DENVER, COLO, February 21, 1950. Hon Pat McCarran, United States Senate, Washington, D.C Drar Senator’ As a Catholic and member of the K of C I have yet to hear anyone speak in tavor of the DP bill Sincerely hope, through your efforts, this bill is defeated. Very truly yours, ELMER GOULD. Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, I move that the Senate proceed to the con- sideration of the commitiee amend- ments. The VICE PRESIDENT. It is not nec- essary that a motion to that effect be made. Committee amendments are first considered in the regular course. Mr. McCARRAN. I know it is the reg- ular procedure that committee amend- ments be first considered, but I simply wanted the Presiding Officer to indicate that that course would be followed. Mr. President, H. R. 4567, a bill to amend the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, is before the Senate, as amended by the Judiciary Committee. Much informa- tion and misinformation has been broad- cast throughout the country as to the operation of the displaced-persons law, and the effect of H. R. 4567, as passed by the House of Representatives. M s- statements and misrepresentations on this subject have received such wide pub- licity that scores of our citizens honestly believe that the present displaced-per- sons law discriminates against Catholics and Jews, and thai this alleged discrimi- nation would be eliminated by a series of amendments to the present law con- tained in House bill 4567. When the charge of discrimination was first made, I was naturally quite con- cerned because I was a member of the Committee on the Judiciary which drafted the Displaced Persons Act. I re- membered that one of the paramount objectives before us at all times was to write every section and subsection in such @ manner that the basic principles embodied therein would apply equitably
1950 to each individual who qualified as a displaced person, so that there would be no discrimination against any element, group, nationality, or religion. When the charge of discrimination was made more than a year ago, I determined that this charge, as well as others, which have been given wide publicity should be thoroughly investigated. After months of hearings, study, and investigation, I am satisfied that the charge of discrimi- nation is not founded on fact; that the Displaced Persons Act does not discrimi- nate against Catholics or Jews, as al- leged; and that this fact has been dem- onstrated by the record. It will be recalled that during the pres- ent Congress there have been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary some 20 bills involving many issues on the sub- ject of displaced persons. A Subcom- mittee on Immigration of that commit- tee, consisting of the Senator from Mary- land (Mr. O’Conor], the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. East.anp1], the Senator from Missour! {[Mr. DonnzLu], and the Senator from Indiana [Mr. Jenner], with myself ag chairman, has held hearings over the past year on the various issues presented in these many bills, culmi- nating in a series of recommendations which were presented as amendments to the so-called Celler bill, and adopted by the full Committee on the Judiciary. Because of the complexity and interre- lation of these many issues, the work of the Subcommittee on Immigration has necessarily been exacting and dctailed, resulting in voluminous hearings on the subject of displaced persons, as well as the effect of such legislation on the gen- eral immigration laws of the United States. We have been vigorously criti- cized by those who sponsor special-in- terest legislation for taking the time and patience to investigate the many rami- fications of amendments proposed to the present law. Many of us who are vitally interested in preserving our general im- migration laws have been held up to public ridicule in certain newspapers and special-interest publications, with arti- cles and cartoons depicting us as in- human ogres, but I am content to stand upon the record, Mr. President. The ultimate preservation of our quota immi- gration system more than justifies the work of this subcommittee, and I should like to take this opportunity to publicly thank the other members of the subcom- mittee for their diligence and hard work, and for their patience in sitting through the many hours of hearings required on this subject. It will also be recalled, Mr. President, that when it became apparent last fall to the members of the Judiciary Com- mittee that an investigation of the oper- ations and administration of the present law in Europe could not be made without an on-the-spot study, because of the un- availability of witnesses in this country, the Judiciary Committee authorized me, as chairman of the committee, to make such a study, so that any recommenda- tion of the committee with respect to amending the present law might be based upon a full knowledge of the administra- tion of the present law. The committee recognized that the law does not expire until June 30, 1950; that there was, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE therefore, no immediate necessity of passing additional displaced-persons leg- isiation during the last session; and that there was ample time to enact, during this session of Congress, such legislation as might be found to be necessary, after the committee had completed its investi- gation and study of the many bills pend- ing before it. Unfortunately, Mr. President, and not- withstanding that the Subcommittee on Immigration had not yet completed its study, during the closing hours of the last session of Congress, House bill 4567, the so-called Celler bill, was rushed to the floor of the Senate, without amend- ment and without recommendation. I do not question for a moment, Mr. Pres- ident, the good faith of Senators who sponsored that last-minute drive, nor do I question for a moment their right to do so. But I was then, and I am now, con- vinced that passage of the Celler bill in the form in which it came to the Senate from the House would have been a seri- ous and grievous mistake. I was not then, nor am I now, alone in that con- viction. During my investigation in Eu- rope, I was repeatedly told by officials of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, officials of the Consular Service, officials of the European command of the United States Army, and even officials of the Displaced Persons Commission, that the so-called Celler bill should be amended in numerous particulars, and that it would be a mistake to pass the bill as passed by the House of Representa- tives. I conveyed this information by cable to a number of Senators. A ma- Jority of the Senate evidently concurred in the view that hasty action might be a serious mistake, and voted to recommit the bill to the committee for further study and consideration, with instruc- tions to bring the bill back by January 25. In compliance with this instruction, it, therefore, became necessary to incor- porate the findings end recommenda- tions of our committee in House bill 4567 by way of amendments. This we have done; and the bill as amended is now before the Senate. I am confident that a comparative an- alysis of the law as enacted in 1948, with House bill 4567, as passed by the House of Representatives, and with the bill as amended and reported by the Judiciary Committee of the Senate, amply sup- ports the wise judgment of the Senators who voted at the close of the last session to recommit the bill for further study and consideration. With reference to pages 2 and 3 of the bill, as reported, Senators will note that the bill as passed by the other body changes the so-called cut-off date under section 2 (c) of the act from December 22, 1945, and January 1, 1948, respective- ly, to January 1, 1949, as to having en- tered into Germany, Austria, or Italy, and being in these areas for eligibility. That is the only proposed change in this section of the existing law; and Senators should note that eligibility is dependent upon the definition of a displaced per- son in subsection (b), which subsection by reference incorporates annex 1 of the constitution of the International Refu- gee Organization, and gives to that agency the right to determine who is a 2463 displaced person for eligibility under the act. The Judiciary Committee of the Benate has amended H. R. 4587 by strik- ing out the language appearing on pages 1 and 2 of the bill, as reported, and in- serting in lieu thereof an amendment to subsection (b) of the act specifically de- fining a displaced person. It should be noted that the so-called cut-off dates for eligibility are incorporated in the defi- nition. The cut-off date included in the definition is January 1, 1949. Because the cut-off date on eligibility is included in the definition of a displaced person, the committee amendment amends sub- section (c) of section 2 of the present act by deleting the cut-off dates set forth at the beginning of said subsection, and subsection (c) appearing on pages 4 and 5 of the bill, as reported, is what remains of subsection (c) of the act of 1948. It should also be noted that the defi- nition of a displaced person in subsec- tion (b), as amended by the committee, not only includes all persons eligible under annex 1 of the constitution of the International Refugee Organization, but also includes certain persons who are specifically excluded by the terms of said constitution, such as persons of German ethnic origin. The definition includes natives of Czechoslovakia, for which proe vision is made in subsection (d) of sec- tion 2 of the act; includes natives of Greece who are now ineligible because of the aforesaid constitution of the In- ternational Refugee Organization; and also includes certain members of the armed forces of the Republic of Poland who are now ineligible under the afore- said constitution, and for whom special provision was made in section 4 of the bill, as passed by the House of Repre- sentatives. The bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, amends subsection (d) of section 2 of the act of 1948 by omit- ting specific reference to natives of Czechoslovakia and including all coun- tries behind the so-called iron curtain so that not to excecd 15,000 persons from these countries who are either now in, or may come into, Italy or the Amer- ican, British, or French sectors of Ber- lin or Vienna, or the American, British, or French zones of either Germany or Austria, would be eligible displaced per- sons. Because of the amendment to sub- section (b) of the act defining displaced persons, the bill, as amended by the com- mittee and reported to the Senate, on pages 5 and 6 strikes out section 2 of the bill as passed by the House of Rep- resentatives. Section 2 of the bill, as re- ported, repeals subsection (d) of section 2 of the act of 1948, as natives of Czecho- slovakia are included in the definition amendment to subsection (b) of section 2 of the act of 1948. The bill as passed by the House of Representatives amends subseciion (e) of section 2 of the act of 1948 relative to displaced orphans by increasing the age limit from 16 years to 19 years of age, and by making provision for aban- doned or deserted children. The bill, as reported by the committee, reletters sub- section (e) as (d), restores the age limi- tation to 16 years as provided in the act of 1948, retains the provision for ahan- doned or deserted children; and, because
2464 of the expanded definition of displaced persons in subsection (b) aforesaid, the committee has deleted the limitation of physical presence with respect to sec- tors and zones in this subsection of the act of 1948. The bill, as reported, contains a new subsection (e), defining a “child” to in- clude a legally adopted child, so that legally adopted children wil] not be ex- cluded because of the general immigra- tion laws of the United States. Section 4 of the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, and found on pages 8 and 9 of the bill as reported to the Senate, amends section 3 of the act of 1848, increases the number of dis- placed persons who may be admitted under the act of 1948 from 205,000 to 339,C00 and provides for not to exceed 5,000 special nonquota immigration visas to eligible displaced orphans. Of the total numerical limitation of 339,000 quota visas, 4,000 would be issued to per- sons who resided in Shanghai, China, and 18,000 would be issued to certain members of the armed forces of the Republic of Poland. It should be pointed out here that section 2 of the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, also provided for the issuance of 15,000 of the foregoing total quota immigration visas to persons who have come or may hereafter come into Germany, Austria, or Italy from so-called iron curtain countries. The bill, as reported to the Senate, omits the aforesaid 4,000 visas to resi- dents of Shanghai, China, omits the aforesaid 15,000 visas to persons from countries behind the iron curtain, and in- creases the total number of quota visas authorized to be issued from 205,000, as provided in the act of 1948, to 320,000, instead of 339,000, as provided in the bill passed by the House of Representatives. Of the total numerical hmitations of 320,000 in the bill, as reported to the Senate, 290,000 visas are authorized to be issued to persons embraced in the gen- eral definition of displaced persons, 2,000 are authorized to be issued to displaced persons who are natives of Czechoslo- vakia, as provided in the act of 1948; 10,000 are authorized to be issued to per- sons who are natives of Greece, as de- fined in the definition in the bill as re- ported; 18,000 are authorized to be issued to members of the armed forces of the Republic of Poland, as defined in the definition in the bill, as reported, and as provided in section 4 of the bill as passed by the House of Representatives. In addition, the bill, as reported, au- thorizes the issuance of 5,000 special nonquota immigration visas to eligible displaced orphans, as provided 1n the bill passed by the House of Representatives, and furthcr provides that not more than 5,000 minors under the age of 16 years may be admitted if they are legally adopted in a court of competent juris- diction, prior to June 30, 1951, by a citi- zen of the United States who is a member of the armed forces of the United States stationed in Germany, Austria, or Italy, or who is a civilian em- ployee of the United States in Germany, Austria, or Italy. For the purposes of our general immigration laws, such per- sons shell) be deemed to be the natural CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE born alien children of such adoptive par- ent and entitled to be admitted without visa. Let me say at this point, Mr. President, the able senior Senator from Maryland [Mr. Typincs] was exceed- ingly instrumental in bringing about the amendments with reference to or- phans. This provision is found on pages 12 and 13 of the bill as reported to the Senate. Section 4 of the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, further amends section 3 of the act of 1948 by providing that not more than 25 percent of the quota visas issued under the act shall be charged to the immigration quotas of the displaced persons’ na- tionality in any fiscal year, instead of the limitation in the act of 1948 that not more than 50 percent of such quotas shall be so charged in any fiscal year. The bill, as reported to the Senate, restores the so-called 50 percent mortgaging of quotas as provided in the act of 1948. This section of the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, would add a new eligibility by setting aside not more than 60 percent of the nonpreference portion of the immigration quotas, as defined in the Immigration Act of 1924, for displaced persons who have emi- grated to other countries for resettle- ment-provided that they have not been firmly resettled in such country. The bill, as reported to the Senate, omits this provision with respect to displaced per- sons who have been resettled in other countries. Section 4 of the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, further amends section 3 of the act of 1948 by deleting the requirement that 40 percent of the visas issued pursuant to the act shall be available exclusively to persons whose place of origin or country of na- tionality has been de facto annexed by a foreign power. The bill, as reported to the Senate, restores this requirement. It may be said here that persons covered by this imitation are the least likely to be repatriated to thelr country of national- ity or origin. The bill as passed by the House of Representatives, and as reported to the Senate, adds a new subsection (d) to sec- tion 3 of the act of 1948 requiring admin- istration of the act without discrimina- tion. The bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, and as reported to the Senate, amends section 4 of the act of 1948 by advancing the date from April 1, 1948, to April 30, 1949, prior to which dis- placed persons residing in the United States temporarily may adjust their status to permanent residence. The bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, amends section 6 of the act of 1948 by omitting the preference which is given to displaced persons who have been engaged 1n aericultural pur- suits. The bill, as reported to the Sen- ate, restores this preference and provides that such persons must have been for at least 2 years at some previous time or times engaged principally in agricultural pursuits, and requires that such person will be employed in the United States principally in agricultural pursuits. Section 7 of the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, and as re- FEBRUARY 28 ported to the Senate, amends section 7 of the act of 1948 by eliminating the pri- ority given to displaced persons residing in displaced-persons camps and centers. Imight say at this point, Mr. President, as regards the provision in the Senate bill of 1948, and as regards the bill which is now before the Senate with reference to displaced persons coming into agri- cultural pursuits, that there is today a crying need throughout the length and breadth of the agricultural regions of America for farm workers. Farmers are looking for farm labor in all the great agricultural areas, They are unable to get farm labor to work on the farms. For the past several years hundreds of thousands of Mexican laborers have been brought into this country, across the Mexican line, on temporary status to work on seasonal crops. We have been bringing hundreds of thousands of per- sons from the Gulf islands, from the West Indies, to work on crops in the Southern States. They come in on tem- porary status. They are supposed to go back to their native countries. The de- mand for farm labor in the large agri- cultural States has been great. There was and is opportunity for honest farm labor to find occupation in America. When we were drafting the 1948 bill we had in mind, first of all, the fact that we were exceedingly short in housing. Second, the farm industry of America was crying for farm labor. So we set about to select, if possible, from the thou- sands of displaced persons in Europe those who had been accustomed to en- gaging in farm work, because, first of all, they would not displace anyone who then had a job, and, second, they would not displace anyone who then had housing, because a farmer who sought farm labor had housing for his farm labor. There- fore, those persons who would come into that line of occupation would neither displace anyone from housing nor dis- place anyone from a job. So we thought we could do a good turn by bringing to this country those persons who had an agrarian background and who wanted farm work to sustain themselves, and that they would, in turn, aid 1n sustain- ing the economy of America. Mr. President, it did not work out in that way, for many reasons. I shall state some of the reasons before I con- clude my remarks. I shall state some of them now, as a preliminary. Many have come to this country under fraud- ulent pretenses and fraudulent papers. Some of them never had hold of a plow, did not know which end of a horse should go toward a plow, and had no knowledge of farming whatever, but de- clared, under oath and otherwise, that they had an agrarian background, in order to go to America. After coming to America and being placed on a farm, they stayed overnight, or for a week or 10 days, or 4 month at the latest, and then drifted toward the hig centers. When they came to the farm they knew nothing about it and cared less. All they wanted to do was to get to America and then to some large center of population. So fraud has entered into that which we sought to establish as a way by which human beings with honesty in their hearts might find a way to sustain them-
1950 selves and to become useful citizens of America. Mr. President, we seek now to amend that provision because today there is a call for farm labor in the agricultural regions of America. Today there are farmers with housing already prepared for farm labor and with everything ready to put men to work, if they will go to work, if they want to work. There is a demand from the agricultural regions for labor. So, if an applicant for a displaced person’s opportunity can show that he has had 2 years of agrarian experience, he is eligible to come under the farm labor provision of the pending bill. There are many other phases of this matter which are worthy of considera- tion. Section 8 of the bill as passed by the House of Representatives and as reported to the Senate amends section 8 of the act of 1948 by extending the term of the Displaced Persons Commission from June 30, 1951, to June 30, 1952, and re- quiring that the regulations of the Com- mission for the purpose of obtaining the most general distribution and settle- ment of persons admitted under the act shall be ‘“‘consistent with housing and employment opportunties for resettle- ment” throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions. Section 9 of the bill as reported to the Senate amends section 10 of the act of 1948 continuing the requirement for a thorough investigation and written re- port on each displaced person by such agency of the Government as the Presi- dent may designate, providing, however, that the final determination of eligibil- ity of applicants under the act, as well as under the general immigration laws of the United States, shall b2 made ex- Clusively by the Immigration and Nat- uralization Service and the American Forcign Service, acting through persons who are citizens of the United States, and who have not less than 3 years’ experience in the Immigration and Nat- uralization Service or in the American Foreign Service. The bill as passed by the House contains no similar provision. Mr. President, there was a vital reason for those provisions going into the new bill, and I shall dwell on those reasons later on in my discussion of the bill. My investigation in Europe, extending all the way from the northern border of France to southern Italy and back through France to Paris, as I reported by cable to my colleagues in the Senate, some of whom are now listening to me, showed that fraud, deceit. perjury, mis- representation, and falsification of rec- ords have abounded in the Displaced Persons Administration. They have abounded to such an extent that print- ing presses, for the printing of fraudu- lent instruments, were found by author- ized representatives of the Army. Frauds of all kinds have crept into the Displaced Persons Administration. Not only have they crept in, but they have been tolerated in the administration of the Displaced Persons Act and eyes have been blinked at them by the Displaced Persons Administration. Mr. President, the bill, as passed by the House of Representatives, amends sec- tion 12 of the act of 1948 by advancing CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE from July 1, 1950, to July 1, 1952, the period during which 50 percent of the German quotas shall be available exclu- sively to persons of German ethnic ori- gin who were born in Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Po- land, Rumania, Russia, or Yugoslavia, The bill as reported to the Senate re- tains in substance the language passed by the House of Representatives, and di- rects the Secretary of State to immedi- ately resume general consular duties in Germany and Austria. The bill as passed by the House of Representatives and as reported to the Senate prohibits the issuance of visas to subversive displaced persons, and section 13 of the act of 1948 is amended to re- quire every displaced person of the age of 18 years or more to execute at the port of entry into the United States an oath or affirmation that he is not and has never been a member of any organiza- tion or movement named in this section. The bill as passed by the House of Representatives and as reported to the Senate adds a new section to the act of 1948 which authorizes a loan of not to exceed in the aggregate $5,000,000 to the Displaced Persons Commission to be used by them for loans to public or pri- vate agencies to finance the reccption and transportation of eligible displaced persons from ports of entry within the United States to places of final destina- tion. As reported to the Senate, a fur- ther proviso is added to this section re- quiring the payment of interest at the rate of 3 percent per annum on such loans as are not repaid on or before June 30, 1953: The bill as reported to the Senate adds e further new section to the act of 1948 requiring that all transportation of dis- placed persons to the United States shall be by ships or planes registered under the United States flag. if the cost of such transportation is defrayed in whole or in part by the Government of the United States. There is no comparable provi- sion in the bill as passed by the House of Representatives. Section 13 of the bill as reported to the Senate creates a joint congressional committee composed of three members of the Judiciary Committee of the Sen- ate and three members of the Judiciary Committee of the House, for the purpose of making a complete investigation of the problems of persons of German eth- nic origin who were expelled from the country of their residence into Germany and Austria. This joint committee is required to report its findings and rec- ommendations to the Congress not later than 1 year after the effective date of this section. Mr. President, it may be interesting to Senators to know the route I followed during my investigation in Europe. The investigation was made by the chairman of the Judiciary Committee at the sug- gestion, at the instance, and by the au- thority of the Judiciary Committee of the Senate. In every sector I obtained the written statements of witnesses with whom I conferred, and during the course of my remarks, I may from time to time refer to these written statements. I re- gret exceedingly that I shall be unable 2465 at this time to identify some individual witnesses other than by the titles of their offices or the employment in which they are engaged. I regret that I am forced to proceed in this manner because to identify with particularity the sources of much of my information would surely result in reprisals and disciplinary ac- tion against those persons who have courageously stated their experiences and observations of the operation of the present law. It had been my intention to publicize the testimony of every wit- ness who appeared before me, but Sena- tors will recall that some days ago, when I released the testimony of an employee of the Displaced Persons Commission, the Commission almost immediately an- nounced that disciplinary action would be taken against this employee. This is not an isolated instance. Indeed, many Senators will recall the prompt discipli- nary action taken against an official of the Visa Division of the State Depart- ment who testified before the Subcom- mittee on Immigration of the Judiciary Committee with respect to the entrance of hundreds of subversives into the United States. The facts have long ago vindicated this patriotic public servant, but that does not rescind the discipli- nary action taken against him, Mr. President, no one realizes better than I the criticism which will be leveled against me for referring to information without disclosing the identity of wit- nesscs, or the sources of my information. My colleagues may rest assured that I shall do so with extreme reluctance. However, it seems to me that I am con- fronted with three possible courses of action. First, to withhold the informa- tion entirely and thereby conceal the facts from the Congress and the Ameri- can people; second, to release the in- formation irrespective of its confiden- tial classification and irrespective of the consequences that may result to the wit- nesses. This I cannot and will not do; third, to release the information without disclosing the identity of the witnesses and to allude in general to the existence of classified information. Mr. President, I have in my possession, and have had in my possession almost since the time I returned from Europe, voluminous confidential reports pre- pared by the CIC, that branch of the Army having to do with counter-intelli- gence. Every page of them is marked “confidential.” The reports were pre- pared by trusted officers of the Counter- Intelligence Corps of the Army. I am advised that they were approved by Gen. Lucius Clay. I have no doubt that the advice given me in that respect is true. I wrote to the Counter-Intelligence Corps and to other officials asking for permission to use the reports which con- tained so much valuable information on this subject. I was denied the right to use them. I have them in my pos- session, and would be glad to read them to the Senate. The Senate would be startled if I were to read them. They contain many revolting facts. They disclose numerous cases of fraud, fraud of all kinds and descriptions, and dis- close also the character and type of some of the displaced persons who have obtained entry to the United States
2466 under the Displaced Persons Act. contain much other information. Mr. KILGORE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield at that point for a question? The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Wirners in the chair). Does the Sen- ator from Nevada yield to the Senator from West Virginia? Mr. McCARRAN., I yield. Mr. KILGORE. Most of the fraud disclosed in the reports had to do with documents issued by German officials. Is that correct? Mr. McCARRAN. That is not correct. Mr. KILGORE. What is the correct statement about that? Mr. McCARRAN. The Senator from West Virginia knows what the correct statement is, because he listened to the witnesses who came before the commit- tee and testified in detail. The fraud was not in the documents issued by Ger- man officials. The Senator was present when witnesses testified on that very subject. Mr. KILGORE. Mr. President, I may say to the distinguished Senator from Nevada—— Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, I do not yield for a statement. I yielded to the Senator for a question. Mr. KILGORE. I think the Senate is entitled to all the information on that subject. If there were many cases of fraud, I think the Senate shauld know about them. Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, I re- fuse to yield for a statement. I yielded only for a question. Mr. WATKINS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me for a question? Mr. McCARRAN, I yield for a ques- tion. Mr WATKINS. I noted that the Sen- ator from Nevada called attention to a specific report or reports he has in his possession. Mr. McCARRAN. Yes. Mr. WATKINS. Did the members of the committee see the reports 1n execu- tive session? Mr. McCARRAN. Some of the reports were made known to the committee in executive session. Mr. WATKINS. Will they be made available to the Members of the Senate, or must they be kept confidential? Mr. McCARRAN. I wish they could be made available to the Members of the Senate. I should be glad to be able to present them to the Senate. Mr WATKINS. I understand the Senator said he would like to read them to the Senate, so I wondered if they would be made available to the Members of the Senate. Mr. McCARRAN. I am sorry to say that I was denied permission to do so. I wanted to read them personally to the Senate, or have the clerk read them, but I was denied that privilege. Mr. President, I am advised by wit- nesses who came before the committee that those are not the only documents which bear on the subject of fraud in connection with the administration of the law. I am advised that there are volumes showing the same trend. Mr. President, the investigation which I made commenced in Paris, where I They CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE conferred with officials of the Interna- tional Refugee Organization who were in Paris for that purpose. Representa- tive Francis E. WALTER, chairman of the special subcommittee of the House Com- mittee on the Judiciary engaged in studying the subject, participated in this conference. From Paris I went to Frankfurt where I conferred with officials of a number of the so-called voluntary agencies operat- ing in the occupied zones of Germany, Austria, and Italy. I also conferred with Officials of the office of the high com- mission of Germany. In Frankfurt. I ascertained the location of the principal displaced-persons camps, as well as the principal resettlement centers in Ger- many, and, in the course of my investi- gation, I visited as many of these as possible. From Frankfurt I traveled south to Stuttgart where I confcrred with officials of the consular service, the United States Army, the Displaced Per- sons Commission, and the International Refugee Organization. From Stuttgart I journeyed a short distance to Ludwigs- burg. From Ludwigsburg I traveled south to Munich where I spent several days visiting displaced-persons camps and resettlement centers in that arca. Leaving Munich I journeyed back to Stuttgart, and from there returned to Frankfurt. In Frankfurt I conferred with the Europcan coordinator of the Displaced Persons Commission, as well as his assistant, and was shown the com- plete operation of this office. I also con- ferred with the respective heads of every major voluntary agency operating in Europe. Leaving Frankfurt, I proceeded to Geneva, Switzerland, where I con- ferred with the director general of the International Refugee Organization, and a number of his assistants, us well as with officials of the consular service. From Switzerland I went to Italy where I con- ferred with consular officials in Mulan, Florence, Rome, and Naples. From Rome I went south to Naples where most of the displaced persons are concen- trated, and went through a number of the camps and resettlement centers in and about the Naples area. I think it may be interesting to some Senators if I outline the steps which a displaced person must take in order to qualify as an immigrant to the United States under the act of 1948. Senators well know that the act contains a cut- off date of December 22, 1945. In other words, a displaced person, in order to qualify, must have been in one of the occupied zones of Germany, or in Austria, or in Italy, on or before December 22, 1945. This date, Senators will recall, js not an arbitrary date, but is the date fixed by the President of the United States in a Presidential directive relat- ing to displaced persons and pursuant to which approximately 44,000 displaced persons were admitted prior to the pas- sage of the act of 1948. It is important because of the fraudulent documenta- tion which I shall take up later in my remarks, Let us assume, therefore, that a dis- placed person finds himself in occupied Germany or Austria or Italy and wishes to be resettled in the United States. His first step is to contact a displaced-per- FEBRUARY 28 sons camp which is under the operation of the International Refugee Organiza- tion created by the United Nations in 1946. Such person is then questioned by employees of the International Refu- gee Organization who, in most instances, are displaced persons themselves and of the same nationality as such person, so that they may act as interpreters and assist him in filling out the necessary questionnaire to determine his status under annex I of the constitution of IRO. Thereafter, such person either contacts or is contacted by one of the American voluntary agencies operating in that area. In practice, the voluntary agency, which’ becomes interested in such person, is of his religious faith, so that if he is a Catholic, he will be con- tacted by an employee of the National Catholic Welfare Committee; if he is a Jew, it probably will be an employee of the American Joint Distribution Com- mittee or the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society; if a Protestant, it will be the Lutheran Church World Federation, or other Protestant voluntary agencies, and so on, depending upon rcligion. The voluntary agency assists our hy- pothetical displaced person in establish- ing his qualifications for immigration to the United States of America and these voluntary agencies are conversant with the specific provisions of our statute. Inasmuch as our act contains a limita- tion that one coming into Germany, Austria, or Italy from other areas must have done so prior to December 22, 1945, or, if forced to flee from Germany, Austria, or Italy by the dictator regimes, one must have returned prior to Janu- ary 1, 1948, documentary evidence to support the fact of entrance into these areas prior to December 22, 1945, or flee- ing from these areas with return prior to January 1, 1948, is submitted to the IRO when our hypothetical person registers as a displaced person, so that he can qualify for immigration to the United States. Thus, documentation is of two types: First, proof of residence prior to December 22, 1945, which is in the form of a certificate of residence executed by police officials of the area for which resi- dence is claimed, if such area is in the trizone of Germany, or in Austria, or Italy. If such residence is in the Russian zone of Germany, such a certificate can- not be obtained and, therefore, there is no documentation; second, proof of birth in Germany, Austria, or Italy; but, again, if the place of birth given is in the Russian zone of Germany, a birth certifi- cate cannot be obtained; and, therefore, there is no documentation. The International Refugee Organiza- tion then certifies the status of our hypo- thetical individual as a displaced person of the care and concern of the IRO, and certifies the date of entry into Germany, Austria, or Italy, or the place of birth, fact of fleeing, and date of reentry into Germany, Austria, or Italy. The IRO also certifies the family number, job ex- perience, place of birth, and other perti- nent information, which is gotten from the questioning previously mentioned. The next step takes our hypothetical displaced person to a resettlement center operated by the IRO, where he makes his election to immigrate to the United
1950 States, which is made known to the Dis- placed Persons Commission, and is sup- ported by the IRO certifications I have just outlined. The Commission then examines the dates appearing in the TRO certifications; and if they are within the limitations of the act, and if the ap- plicant is certified as being “of the con- cern of the International Refugee Or- ganization,” the applicant is certified by the Commission as eligible to immigrate to the United States; and if entitled to preference under the act, such preference is also certified. Next is a security screen check by the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army. I shall have more to say on this later in my remarks. If the Counter Intelligence Corps finds nothing of an adverse nature which would establish that the applicant is a security risk to the United States or a known criminal, its report to the com- mission is usually in the form of “no comment,” or “no adverse information.” If something adverse is disclosed by the CIC investigation, that information is included in the CIC report, and is evalu- ated by the commission. If the appli- cant is still found to be eligible, his file, including the CIC report and a certifica- tion by the commission that he is “eli- gible,” is transmitted to the consular service for issuance of a visa. The applicant then applies to the con- sular service for a visa. He is given a medical examination by the United States Public Health Service for diseases which might exclude him under the gen- eral immigration laws. If approved medically, his case is examined by a con- sular officer, who is bound by the eligi- bility certification of the Commission and cannot go behind the Commission’s certification unless there is an obvious error. He then is personally interviewed by a consular officer. In the vast ma- jority of cases, this is the first time the applicant has been personally inter- viewed by an official of the United States Government. Unless the consul discov- ers some reason why the applicant should be excluded under the general immigra- tion laws, his visa application is ap- proved, and he leaves the resettlement center for Bremen. Until February of this year, the appli- cant was personally interviewed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service at Bremen. However, under a recent plan of decentralization, immigration in- spectors are now in operation at each of the resettlement centers, where they in- terview the applicant. This agency is, by instructions, precluded from examin- ing his eligibility under the act; and unless information is developed which would exclude the applicant under the general immigration laws, he leaves for the embarkation center at Bremerhaven, where he will board ship, unless he is a hardship case, in which event he will be fiown to the United States. Briefly, Mr. President, that is the rou- tine which is followed by every displaced person coming to the United States. There are a number of aspects of this procedure which I shall describe in greater detail at a later point in my re- marks. For the present, however, I wish to call attention to the fact that four agencies of the United States Govern- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE ment are involved, namely, the Displaced Persons Commission, the United States Public Health Service, the Consular Service, and the Immigration and Nat- uralization Service. I also wish to em- phasize that the procedure includes one international agency, namely, the Inter- national Refugee Organization, and, in most cases, at least one voluntary agency. At the hazard of repetition, I say again, Mr. President, and wish to reemphasize the point, that the proce- dure includes one international agency, namely, the International Refugee Or- ganization. I wish emphatically to call attention to the last two agencies, the IRO and the voluntary agencies, because neither of these agencies is subject to Government regulation, control, or di- rection by the United States. I empha- size this fact because the most important steps in qualifying a displaced person for immigration to the United States are taken by these two agencies, and that comes about by reason of section 2 (b) of the present law. A brief ref- erence to the act will disclose that a dis- placed person is therein defined to be ®@ person as defined in annex I to the constitution of the International Ref- ugee Organization, and who is the con- cern of the International Refugee Or- ganization. I hope Senators will follow closely my remarks on this point. Without going into all the ramifica- tions of annex I, permit me to say that it is one of the most complex collec- tions of words that could be drafted. Every section is so interrelated with one or more other sections that it is impos- sible to state with certainty who will qualify as a displaced person. If Sena- tors will but glance at annex I, they will see constant reference to minutes of sundry meetings held by various com- mittees or subcommittees of the Inter- national Refugee Organization on vari- ous dates, the contents of which are un- known to officials of our Government ad- ministering the program in Europe. Therefore, under the administration of the present act, the most important de- termination to be made, namely, quali- fication of status as a displaced person is made by an international organization which is not responsible to the Govern- ment of the United States or to any of its officials. This organization employs a large staff of alien_personnel, who in most instances are themselves displaced persons. In as- sisting other displaced persons, they sometimes become so zealous that they certify to alleged facts which are so pat- ently false that the Displaced Persons Commission must return the file to IRO, even though the Commission instruc- tions require acceptance of IRO find- ings. For example, while I was inter- viewing an employee of the Commission, he happened to have on his desk two files which he was returning to IRO for a review of their findings. In both cases, the IRO had certified that the applicants had entered Germany prior to December 22, 1945, and were in the United States zone of Germany on Jan- uary 1, 1948. This fs the standard lan- guage used to qualify under our act. However, in one case, the applicant was an infant born in 1946, 2 years after it 2467 allegedly entered Germany; and in the other case, the applicant was an infant born in December 1948, 4 years after allegedly entering Germany. This Com- mission employee stated that in his ex- perience he had found that the IRO would certify to anything which would help a displaced person to qualify under our act. I was advised repeatedly by officials of the Consular Service, the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army, and by United States citizens in the employ of the International Refugee Organization, that section 2 (b) of the act should be repealed, substituting in lieu thereof & definition which did not depend upon the discretion of the IRO and which could be readily interpreted by United States officials without reference to an international organization. Mr. Presi- dent, the Congress is more than capable of defining displaced persons who will be made eligible for immigration to the United States, without resorting to dis- cretionary findings, constructions, and interpretations made by alien employees of an international organization. The Judiciary Committee, therefore, has rec- ommended in the present bill an amend- ment to section 2 (b) of the act specifi- cally defining displaced persons and ex- panding the definition contained in the present law, to which I shall refer later in my remarks. Responsible officials of our Government operating in Europe in every phase of our displaced-persons pro- gram stated again and again that if the 1948 act is to be amended at all, the determination of eligibilty of applicants should be centered in trained consular and immigration officers. This, of course, was the plain intent of Congress when it provided in section 10 of the act that— Except as otherwise expressly provided in this act, the administration of this act, un- der the provisions of this act and the regula- tions of the commission as herein provided, shall be by the officials who administer the other immigration laws of the United States. It is written indelibly into the law as it now stands. But how it has been flouted. How it has been sct aside. The intent of Congress is made crystal clear by the debates that took place in this Chamber when we passed the act of 1948. Senators will recall that at that time an amendment was offered to vest in the Displaced Persons Commission the general administration of the law, in- cluding the determination of eligibility of applicants. But the amendment, which had been offered by the Senator from Michigan [Mr. Fercuson], was de- feated. Instead, we provided in section 10 of the act that— No eligible displaced person shall be ad- mitted to the United States unless there shall have first been a thorough investigation and written report made and prepared by such agency of the Government of the United States as the President shall designate re- garding such person's character, history, and eligibility under the act. It was assumed by those of us who helped draft the present law, both in the conference committee and during the debate, that the President would
2468 designate an agency with trained per- sonnel skilled in immigration matters. It was, therefore, possible to circumvent the intent of Congress only after the President, on the fourth day of October 1948, designated the Displaced Persons Commission as the agency to select and screen displaced-person applicants. The bill, as amended by the committee, restores the congressional intent by pro- viding that the final determination of eligibility of applicants, both under the displaced-persons law and under the general immigration laws, shall be made exclusively by the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Ameri- can Foreign Service acting through cit- izens of the United States who have not less than 3 years’ experience in the Im- migration and Naturalization Service or the American Foreign Service; thereby insuring that this important determina- tion shall be made by United States cit- izens trained in immigration matters. Section 2 of the law provides for as- surances under the act and, among oth- er things, requires that every displaced person “shall have an assurance that such person, if admitted into the United States, will be suitably employed with- out displacing some other person from employment and that such person, and the members of such person’s family, who shall accompany such person and who propose to live with such person, shall not become public charges and will have safe and sanitary housing without displacing some other person from such housing.” Congress intended that such assur- ances must be bona fide and binding upon the sponsor of a displaced person. Mindful of the backlog of unemploy- ment and critical shortage of housing in this country, Congress intended that no person should be brought to the United States in this great humanitar- jan movement, unless there was on file with the Commission a valid assurance that such displaced person would not displace anyone in this country from a Job or from housing. The Commission was authorized to make rules and regu- lations to make this section effective, and to insure that only bona fide assurances would be approved. Instead of performing its functions of admunistration of the act in this coun- try, by issuing adequate rules and reg- ulations to make such assurances effec- tive, and by issuing adequate rules and regulations governing the whereabouts and conduct of displaced persons after they have been admitted to the United States, the Displaced Persons Commis- sion apparently assumed that its func- tions are to be exerciscd primarily abroad, and that the administration of the act in the United States is but in- cidental to a self-imposed duty to se- cure the admission of the total num- ber of displaced persons authorized in the law. In other words, Mr. President, what the Commission set about to do was to fill the quota, to get 205,000 per- sons ovcr here as quickly as possible, regardless of where they might be placed, of how they might be housed, or of whether they would be at all em- ployed. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Under its rules and regulations, the Displaced Persons Commission has clas- sifled the afore-mentioned assurances in two main categories; namely, assur- ances for “named” displaced persons, and assurances for “unnamed” dis- placed persons. In each of these cate- gories, the sponsor is required by the law to furnish evidence of having em- ployment and housing available which will not displace any person in this country. A “named” assurance may be used only for the person named there- in. An “unnamed” assurance may be used for any person who fulfills the qualifications of employment which are described in such assurance. Neither of the assurances requires the sponsor to put up any security or guaranty in any form whatsoever that either the employment or housing described there- in will be available for the displaced person when he reaches the United States. The European coordinator of the Dis- placed Persons Commission stated that assurances may be, and have been, with- drawn from the Commission prior to the time the displaced person reaches the United States and has an opportunity to accept the employment. In such in- stances, the displaced person is not pre- vented from coming to the United States but rather he embarks in any event on the assumption that there will be available in Washington a so-called surplus assurance; which, of course, as- sumes also that he will be qualified to perform the employment described in such assurance. In addition to individual sponsors who submit assurances to the Commission, the rules of the Commission permit voluntary agencies to file so-called “planket” assurances which contain only an estimate of the number of dis- placed persons that such voluntary agency believes it can place in suitable employment in the United States, to- gether with a general assurance of hous- ing accommodations. Mr. Carusi testi- fled that 85 percent of the assuranccs approved by the Commission are so- called “blanket” assurances of the major voluntary agencies. The so-called “blanket” assurances do not require a specific statement of the type of em- ployment available, nor a description of the skills required; nor do they require a specific statement of the housing which will be made available to such a dis- placed person. The most that may be said for them is that they indicate in a gcneral way the nature of the employ- ment in a given community, and, in a general way, they describe the commu- nity in which housing may be provided. According to statements issued by the Displaced Persons Commission, ‘they need not specify the particular job, nor the particular employcr, nor the specific housing to be provided.” The rules of the Commission also permit State com- missions or State committees concerned with the problem of displaced persons to file blanket assurances. With respect to the so-called blanket assurances by regularly constituted governmental au- thorities within the States, it is neces- sary to submit in detail a specific descrip- FEBRUARY 28 tion of the employment available, to- gether with a statement of the necessary skills and the employer's address. More- over, a specific description of the housing must be furnished, together with the address of the housing which will be pro- vided. And in addition, it is necessary to furnish an assurance that the dis- placed person will not become a public charge if he comes to the United States. Let us now refer back to the “named” assurances which are filed with the Com- mission. It is significant here to recall that 85 percent of the assurances are “blanket” assurances of voluntary agen- cies, and that 80 percent of all assurances are named assurances. The European co- ordinator of the Displaced Persons Com- mission testified that the voluntary agencies “have staffs over here who nom- inate individuals that they select on the basis of their interest in them, and they in turn nominate them to us, so that, from the standpoint of the Commission that again is a nominated case where we have no latitude but determining his eligibility.” Because these named as- surances specifically name or nominate a designated displaced person, they may be used only for the person named there- in. In the case of a named assurance, neither the Displaced Persons Commis- sion nor any other agency of the United States Government, makes any exami- nation of the applicant whatsoever to see if he can fulfill the employment as- surance sect forth in such assurance, The European coordinator of the Com- mission, Mr. Squadrilli, testified: Now, in the majority of these cases, there is no selective activities as such. * * * Our responsibility, our job, in order to ac- cede to the rights of the American sponsor who nominates an individual, 1s to deter- mine, docs this man qualify under the act? That is the fleld of selection. In other words, on a blanket assurance, which has been modified in Europe to a “named” assurance, by an employee of a voluntary agency, the Commission does no selection as to employment skills, or whether such person is one likely to be assimilated in America, or in any par- ticular whatsoever except to check the dates certified by the International Ref- ugee Organization. Such selection as there may be, if any at all, is by cm- ployees of voluntary agencies who are not responsible to this Government, and many of whom are alicns. It is auto- matically assumed by the Displaced Per- sons Commission that the individual in the United States or the voluntary agen- cy naming such displaced person will give him the employment described in the assurance notwithstanding that such displaced person may not have the skill requisite to perform such employment and notwithstanding that the sponsor may revoke the assurance at any time. It has been generally alleged, and I think it fair to state, that thousands of dis- placed persons have come to the United States on the representation that they were capable of performing certain skilled or semiskilled labors, or on the representation that they were agricul- tural employees when, in fact, they knew nothing about the work they were to pere form. Congress never intended that dis-
1950 placed persons should be admitted to perform specified work described in the employment assurance without an exain- ination to ascertain that they could in fact perform such work. Congress never intended that so-called blanket assur- ances should be accepted whether they be by voluntary agencies, or by State com- mission, or by State committees dealing with displaced persons. Congress never intended that the Commission should, by its rules and practice, divest itself of the power to determine if an applicant “will be suitably employed without dis- placing some other person from employ- ment,” or if he will have “safe and sani- tary housing without displacing some other person from such housing.” The act of 1948 does not admit of any such construction, and I am of the opinion that the Displaced Persons Commission has failed to carry out the intent of Con- gress on this matter of assurances In this connection, it may be interest- ing to Senators to know that in the city of New York two entire hotels are occu- pied solely by displaced persons awaiting assignment to some place in the United States after arrival in this country. I am reliably informed that the total ca- pacity of these hotels exceeds 2,000 per- sons and that they have a complete occu- pancy at all times. Iam also reliably in- formed that the reason for such a tre- mendous number of displaced pcrsons awaiting assignment to some locality in the United States is that they do not have a specified employer or a specified job to which they can go upon arrival. The effective administration of assur- ances as intended by Coneress is vitally important. On January 16 of this year, the president of the International Farm Labor Union, Mr. H. L. Mitchell, warned the closing session of that union’s con- vention that farm machines, Mexican na- tionals, and displaced persons threaten the welfare and jobs of 4,000,000 Ameri- can agricultural workers. What is more, he charged that displaced persons are being used to break down the agricul- tural wage structure. Yes, Mr. Fresi- dent, the assurances provided in the act are basic and of paramount {mportance. However, that fs not the view of the Dis- placed Persons Commission. To illustrate how lightly the Commis- sion regards these assurances, Senators may be surprised to learn that displaced persons who have been admitted to this country under the act are giving em- ployment and housing assurances for other displaced persons to come to the United States. I repeat that, because it is worthy of emphasis. Senators may be surprised to learn that displaced persons who have been ad- mitted to this country under the act are giving employment and housing assur- ances for other displaced persons to come to the United States. These assurances by displaced persons for other displaced persons are readily accepted and vali- dated by the Commission. This situa- tion is made significantly ridiculous by a comparison with our immigration laws. Under the general immigration laws, the sponsor of an immigrant must give a bona fide guaranty and pledge that the immigrant will not become a public CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE charge, and that the sponsor will in fact be responsible for the care, maintenance, and necessities of the immigrant while in the United States. In many instances the sponsor is required to furnish a bond, running to the Government to secure his guaranty and pledge. What is more, he must establish his financial ability to perform his guaranty beyond a doubt. When it is recalled that assurances vali- dated by the Displaced Persons Commis- sion are neither guaranties, nor are they binding and enforceable against the sponsor, and when it is recalled that they may be revoked by the sponsor at any time, and when it is recalled that the Commission does not investigate to as- certain if the sponsor is in fact capable of furnishing employment and housing as required by the act, it then becomes apparent how lightly the Commission re- gards these assurances. I can conceive of no greater violation of the spirit of the law and intent of the Congress than to permit displaced persons, who themselves are experimenting with resettlement in this country, to give assurances of em- ployment and housing for other dis- Placed persons. This brings up a consideration of per- sons likely to become a public charge. Inasmuch as the validity of the assur- ance is interpreted by the Displaced Per- sons Commission to be within their ex- clusive jurisdiction, neither the Consular Service nor the Immigration and Nat- uralization Service makes any investiga- tion into the reliability of assurances. - Therefore, the availability or unavail- ability of a particular job, or the skill or lack of skill of a particular displaced person in a given field, is not known to any official of the United States Govern- ment until after the displaced person has arrived in the United States and either has no job to which to go, or has no knowledge of the duties which he is to perform. Obviously a displaced person coming to the United States under a so-called blanket assurance will not be deported simply because there is no job available upon his arrival. It is equally obvious that onc whose assurance has been with- drawn will not be deported. However, he is subject to deportation under our general immigration laws if it is deter- mined by the Immigration and Natural- ization Service that he is a person who has become a public charge. The Dis- placed Persons Commission has, there- fore, included in its regulations a pro- viso that “an applicant admitted under the act shall not be deemed to have be- come a public charge under the act by reason of receiving public services, other than financial assistance, available to persons in the community in which he resides.” Therefore, such an applicant may be furnished emergency housing by relief agencies in the United States as well as food and subsistence for an in- definite period of time without being subject to deportation, if the Commission is allowed to interpret our general immi- gration laws by its regulations. Senators will recall that the question of whether or not an immigrant is one likely to become a public charge is a part of our general immigration laws, and that this question is determined by 2469 the Immigration and Naturalization Service. For many months there has been serious disagreement between the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Displaced Persons Commission representatives in Europe, as to which agency is to decide this question. The Displaced Persons Commission has con- tended that because there is an assur- ance on file in Washington, D. C., there is then no question of whether or not an applicant is likely to become a public charge. Therefore, it is their contention that the Immigration and Naturalization Service is precluded from examining into the financial responsibility, either of the applicant or of his sponsor in the United States, and that admittance to the United States cannot be withheld on the ground that such person is lHkely to become a public charge. Let us not forget that job and housing assurances by displaced persons for dis- placed persons are encouraged and ac- cepted by the Commission. It occurs to me that a displaced person who comes to this country on the employment and housing assurance of another displaced person is very likely to become a public charge. In any event, the Immigration and Naturalization Service must insist upon their right to reject an applicant if he is likely to become a public charge, because this duty is imposed by law, and cannot be abrogated or repealed by an interpretation of the Displaced Persons Commission. The conflict of jurisdiction in this mat- ter of public charge was finally made the subject of a series of conferences, in which the State Department partici- pated, culminating in an instruction by the Immigration and Naturalization Service that its employees would be bound by the findings of the Commission on the eligibility of an applicant. The language used is as follows: When during the course of examination for immigration purpose it comes to the atten- tion of an officer of this Service that an error may have been made in the finding that an applicant is a displaced person or an eligible displaced person the facts should be brought to the attention of the appro- priate representative of the Displaced Per- sons Commission. Also, if it appears during immigration inspection that an applicant has procured his eligible displaced person status through misrepresentation or fraud the facts should likewise be brought to the attention of the Displaced Persons Commis- sion. However, when the Commission rules or confirms its finding on the basis of such facts which have been brought to its atten- tion that an applicant is a bona fide eligible displaced person such ruling shall not be questioned by this Service, It should be noted that nowhere does this instruction refer to “public charge” which fs a ground for exclusion under our general immigration laws. Yet, the European coordinator of the Commission sent out a memo to all of his senior offi- cers, stating: The instructions are interpreted by this office as confirming the authority of the Commission in the question of “public charge,” since assurances in this connection are filed with the Commission, and it is the Commission which has jurisdiction in de- termining the validity and adequacy of such assurances
2470 This same memo of the Commission's European coordinator further instructed Commission officers to return to the Im- migration Service all cases previously re- jected by the Immigration Service on the ground of ineligibility. In view of the attitude of the Commission in this re- gard, the Senate might well devote a few minutes to the question of eligibility under the act of 1948. The Displaced Persons Commission has maintained that neither immigration nor consular officers have jurisdiction to ex- amine into the eligibility of applicants, even though there may be reason to be- lieve that the eligibility of such applicant is based upon fraudulent documents, or erjured statements. Think of that for a moment, Mr. Presi- dent. The Displaced Persons Commis- sion, an agency of the Government of the United States, sworn to uphold the Con- stiturion and the laws of the United States, appointed by the President of the United States, sends out the mandate that neither immigration nor consular officers have jurisdiction to examine into the eligibility of an applicant, even though there may be reason to believe that the eligibility of such applicant 1s based upon fraudulent documents or perjured statements Can It be possible that the administrators of the laws of America have lost all honor, all decency, all regard for an oath, all regard for the safety of the Government, so that they instruct those under them that one who has made a fraudulent document or resorted to perjury may nevertheless be rewarded for his fraud and perjury? What is more, Mr. President, the Dis- placed Persons Commission has taken the position that the Counter Intelli- gence Corns of the Army, the agency which investigates applicants from the standpoint of the security interests of the United States, has no jurisdiction to develop facts which might affect the eligibility of an applicant. Is that high- handed? Who will deny that that is a high-handed method, when the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army, an or- ganization trained for its work, recog- nized by the Army for its ability, is so re- pudiated that the Displaced Persons Commission states that the Counter In- telligence Corps of the Army has no jurisdiction to develop facts which might affect the eligibility of an applicant. If the Commission had said, ‘“‘has no juris- diction ot the case,” or “has no jurisdic- tion over the matter,” that might be something different. But they used the expression, “has no jurisdiction to de- velop facts,” the facts by which the mem- bers of the Displaced Persons Commis- sion, acting under the law and acting un- der their oaths, might be guided. They say the CIC have no jurisdiction to de- velop the facts, and it follows that they will not of course, recognize the facts the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army develops. So if the worst Com- munist in all the world, a fellow who was trained and reared and whose intent it was to tear down our Government, was brought to the attention of the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army and that Corps developed the facts and presented them to the Displaced Persons Commis- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE sion, that Commission would disregard those facts, because the CIC had no jurisdiction to develop facts which might affect the eligibility of an appli- cant. In all matters of eligibility, the Dis- placed Persons Commission claims to have exclusive jurisdiction. For exam- ple, the President’s directive of Decem- ber 22, 1945, relating to displaced per- sons, was administered by our immigra- tion and consular officials abroad. In February of 1946 at a meeting in Frank- furt, it was decided that security screen- ing of applicants should be done by the intelligence division of the Army. By directive, published March 13, 1946, the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army was given the responsibility of screening applicants with regard to the security of the United States, and such other infor- mation as might be helpful to the con- sulates in determining the eligibility of applicants, as well as whether they were or were not desirable prospective citi- zens of the United States. The in- spector feneral of the European com- mand of the United States Army stated to me that under the President’s direc- tive of December 22, 1945, the Counter Intelligence Corp's screening teams tried to get information on every applicant to as complete a degrce as possible; that their investigation was not merely con- fined to an examination of the Berlin documents center for registration of Nazis, or to military government records and Germen police records for disclosure of criminals or Known subversives. How- ever, even with as complcte an investiga- tion as possible, the inspector general stated: We felt unquestionably that undesirable people were getting through. This was the head of the Intelligence Corps of the Army speaking to a Mcm- ber of the United States Senate. He further stated: After the Displaced Persons Commission came into existence— And this will be of interest to those who read the REcorp— our sphere of activity was limited. Just a few days ago, a former official of Army Intelligence testified before the full Judiciary Committee as follows: We became convinced with adequate eyi- dence that deliberate attempts were belng made by the Soviet Government not only to infiltrate the military installations of Ber- lin and Germeny but to send people much farther, to the United States, to South Amer- ica, and to Canada, under the guise of being Qisplaced persons or being political refugees. That testimony was given by a trained man who has served in the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army. His re- marks are certainly worthy of our paus- ing to consider them. Though it be repetition, Mr. President, I read again his testimony given before the full Committee on the Judiciary only a few'days ago here in the Capital of the Nation. He said: We became convinced with adequate evi- dence that deliberate attempts were being made by the Soviet Government not only to infiltrate the military installations of Berlin and Germany but to send people much far- FEBRUARY 28 ther, to the United States, to South America and to Canada, under the guise of being displaced persons or being political refugees. When we pause to consider that state- ment we find it to be a startling one. Here is a great humanitarian movement into which we have poured millions of dollars, to which we have given the very best we have. That great humanitarian movement, which comes from the pulsing heart of American humanity, which seeks to relieve those who are honestly afflicted, is being used by the Soviet Gov- ernment as a method of infiltrating into this country those who would destroy the very government which affords them the opportunity to come here and obtain shelter after they do come here. Is it any wonder that some of us are given pause when we think of this? Is it any wonder that some of us are re- solved and determined that so long as we have breath in our body the law shall not again be so written that under the guise of being a humanitarian move- ment 1t can be used by those who would destroy our form of government? Mr. President, 1t 1s no casy matter to stand before the Senate under a condemnation that has been hurled upon us by columnists, by newspapers, by hirelings of all kinds. It has been no easy matter to stand, for months, the condemnation of creatures unfitted to be recognized as a part of the press of America, who have hurled condem- nations against the chaiman of the Ju- diciary Committee of the United States Senate. If there is any printable name which that rat has not called me I have not been able to find it. To my way of thinking, what the skunk is to the lower animals of life, Drew Pearson is to the press of Amcrica. And he can havo that from me just as long as he listens, Mr. President, it is unfortunate that we must sometimes depart from giving consideration to so serious a matter as the subject we are now discussing, but when one has been the subject of cal- umnation, of hes, of deceit, of every form of condemnation that human tongue can utter, one sometimes must voice his resentment, As a matter of fact, the inadequacy of screening during the period 1946-48 was the subject of a detailed report by the inspector general of the European command to the War Department in February 1948. I regret exceedingly that this report has been classified as confidential and that I am, therefore, precluded by law from disclosing its contents. I referred to that report, Mr. Presi- dent, in the early part of my remarks, I said then and I now repeat that I am precluded by law from disclosing its contents because it is marked “confiden- tial.” I wish the Senate of the United States could read that report. That re- port was compiled by the head of the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army under the direction and guidance of Gen. Lucius Clay, and was approved by him. It is now in my hands, but I do not dare disclose it to the Senate of the United States, although it is an en- lightening document which, if available
1950 to the Members of the Senate and the people of the United States would give them valuable information—informa- tion collected by the most reliable source. But it is marked “confidential,” and therefore I cannot disclose it or use it. However, I can state that a certain branch of the Army prepared and filed with the State Department a detailed report containing information as to the penetration of Soviet agents into the United States under the guise of dis- placed persons, and this report contains vast information respecting fraudulent practices in the admission of displaced persons. Notwithstanding that the in- adequacy of screening was documented and reported in 1948 when the Displaced Persons Commission assumed the func- tion of determining eligibility, it suc- ceeded in limiting investigations of the Counter Intelligence Corps to the se- curity aspect only. In other words, instead of expanding the investigation functions of the Coun- ter Intelligence Corps, which experience and sound administration of the act would require, the scope of these inves- tigations was actually curtailed, and the sphere of the Counter Intelligence Corps was limited so that the CIC now confines its investigation to an examination of official records for criminal convictions or Nazi Party affiliation, and a cursory in- terview of the applicant himself. The Displaced Persons Commission justified the limitation of the Counter Intelligence Corps investigation on the ground that the development of facts affecting eligi- bility under the act usurped the func- tions of the Displaced Persons Commis- sion; that the development of facts af- fecting the status of a displaced person usurped the functions of the Interna- tional Refugee Organization because the Displaced Persons Commission is, in any event, bound by the certification of the International Refugee Organization; that the development of other deroga- tory information affecting the desirabil- ity of a displaced person as an immigrant usurped the functions of the consular service and of the Immigration and Nat- uralization Service; and, finally, that such investigations took so long that it would be impossible to reach the goal of 205,000 immigrants by June 30, 1950. It might be said, Mr. President, that the personal interview by the CIC inves- tigator affords an opportunity to check the backeround of each applicant, so that subversives would be screened out. Such a statement would overlook the fact that, on an average, 12,000 displaced persons a month have come to the United States for the past year, reaching a peak of 16,000 for the month of November 1949. This necessarily means that the limited force of Counter Intelligence Corps investigators, which consists of five screening teams, has not only inter- viewed an average of 12,000 persons per month, but, in addition, has also checked the Berlin documents center, German police records, and military government records, making an average of 12,000 checks a month. What is more, the CIC is required to submit its report within 10 days after an applicant’s name is certi- fied to it. Consequently, it is little won- der that the vast majority of the Counter CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Intelligence Corps reports merely state “no comment” or “no adverse informa- tion.” It is also little wonder that offi- cials who are making CIC investigations believe that more time and more thor- ough field checks are required for ade- quate screening. It is only in instances where an applicant has confided his com- munistic and subversive beliefs to his fellow camp occupants that a CIC inves~ tigator has a reasonable opportunity to discover this fact by the aforesaid inter- view and questioning of camp occupants. Obviously, Mr. President, Communist agents who have been planted as dis- place i persons, and who are among the best trained in the world, will have given no reason to their camp associates to become suspicious of them. These are the ones who might be screened out, however, if an adequate opportunity for thorough investigation were given to the Counter Intelligence Corps, with a rea- sonable time allowed to complete such investigation. In this connection, a for- mer official of the Intelligence Division of the Army testified before the full Judi- ciary Committee that there are Commu- nists among the persons who have come over as displaced persons; that our screening of applicants is inadequate from a security standpoint, but that the intelligence agencies have adequate screening facilities, if permitted to use them; and that we could screen out all of the really dangerous subversives. As recently as February 15 of this year, Mr. Almanza Tripp, Chief Immigration Officer in Europe of the displaced-per- sons program, testified before the Immi- gration Subcommittee with respect to the laxity of thorough screening in the pro- gram. Mr. Tripp stated: There became available to me recently, copies of the results of a fingerprint check made by the provost marshal’s office in a number of cases The first group of cases in which the information became available to me related to 90-odd individuals. Im- mediately I checked the camp registration records, Camp Grohn in Bremen, to deter- mine if any of the persons named had pro- ceeded to the United States. I found that 83 of the people had already sailed to the United States. Question. Has it not been the policy of the Displaced Persons Commission to avoid Ber- lin document center checks or provost mar- shal checks in the processing of displaced persons on the basis of a calculated risk theory of the Displaced Persons Commission? Answer. I do not know whether I would say they did it to avoid, but what they have done is process practically all cases without receiving the returns from the Berlin docu- ment center or from the provost marshal. Question. Those are centers where there would be criminal records on individuals? Answer. The Berlin document center rec- ords would indicate Nazi affiliations and the provost marshal records would indicate ar- rest and convictions, possibly by the Amer- ican authorities, in criminal cases and in some cases convictions in German courts. Question. It was because of your check * © © that you found these 100-odd cases of criminal conviction, 833 of which had al- ready come to the United States, is that right? Answer. That is right. Question. As I understand it, The CIO (Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army) sends its report back to the Displaced Persons Commission before getting an answer from the Berlin document center? 2471 Answer. That isright. * * * the Come mission felt that they could take the cal- culated risk and it would not slow down the flow of displaced persons. Question. Well, how many cases have come to you from the Displaced Persons Com- mission since your convereation with Mr. Kaplan in which he told you of this determi- nation that they would accept the calculated risk? Answer. Around 125,000. Question. Now, do you not think, Mr. Tripp, from your Knowledge over this long period of years, that a calculated risk of that kind is a pretty serious thing for the secu- rity of our Nation? Answer. J think it is dangerous. How dangerous, Mr. President? How dangerous is it in this day and age when our country is passing through its most trying period; when our country is pass- ing through a period in which its ene- mies find a place of refuge within iis borders, as well as outside its borders; when today almost two-thirds of the population of the world is under the domination of an ideology that is the avowed enemy of the American form of government? How dangerous is it when, according to the testimony of Mr. J. Ed- gar Hoover, given before the Senate Ap- Ppropriations Committee only a few days ago, there are today within the United States 54,000 registered Communists and nearly 500,000 fellow travelers or sym- pathizers. Mr. President, that is why some of us have paused on this matter. It is why some of us are willing, if need be, to sac- rifice our political lives. It is why some of us are entirely content to battle this thing out, to the end that America may go on, and that our form of government may prevail against an enemy that is for- ever pitted against us from every angle. When today, we have a commission, sworn, holding office, which is willing to take the calculated risk of bringing people into this country who would de- stroy our form of government, I am not ready to sit down, nor am J ready to give up, nor am I ready to be smoked out by all the paid agencies in the world. A $1,000,000 lobby is recorded in the Con- gress of the United States, a lobby which has spent nearly $1,000,000 in lobbying. It is of record in the Congress of the United States. For what was the $1,- 000,000 spent? Someone, certainly not in this Chamber but somewhere else, could answer. A million dollars is not expended Hghtly; a million dollars is not collected lightly; a million-dollar lobby is not asmall thing. It is all pitted against the question of whether we shall protect the United States of America against those who the CIC say constitute an ave- nue for bringing to America enemics of our form of government. Others say they were brought in through this avenue. In other words, Mr. President, not only has the screening of applicants by the CIC been limited in scope, but the Com- mission doesnot even wait for a full :e- port before processing and approving applicants for immigration under the act. Mr. Donald W. Main, senior officer of the Displaced Persons Commission at Munich, the only senior officer with training and experience in immigration matters, a man who has served in the
2472 Immigration Service for years, who was lent by the Immigration Service to the Displaced Persons Commission, testified before the Immigration Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, as follows: Question What agency of the Government actually cors the investigating? Answer, The Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army does the investigation with refer- ence to the character and history and the security factor involved on each displaced person Quastion. Do you have any complaint about that organization, that it is not prop- erly performing ils functions as an investi- gative agency? Answer. In my opinion, the investigation that is conducted is not thorough enough. Question But whom could we trust more than the United States Army, which is occu- pying Germany, in relation to security questions? Answer. I do not think there is anyone whom you can trust more. However, in my opinion, the investigations should go further then they do at the present time. * * © The law requires a thorough investigation. In my opinion, the thorough investigation calied for in the law and regulations is not being conducted. Question. Do you know to what extent the CIc is under * * * pressure or per- suasion to expedite its cases? Answer. As the program was originally set up, I think the CIC was, as a pattern, sup- posed to complete thelr investigation in ap- proximately 20 days. Qvestion Is that, in your opinion, suffi- clent time? Answer. No, sir. Question Do you not think that it is re- markable that you have not run into cases of more egsravated offenses than those you have mentioned and observed? Answer. I think that if a more thorough investigation were made, without doubt more derogatory information would be developed. During my investigation 1n Europe, I was repeatedly told by United States of- ficials in every phase of the program that because of the tremendous emphasis on speed in processing applicants, the CIC check was of httle or no value except as to known subversives or criminals. In this connection, Senators will recall that epplicants are processed and certified by the Commission as being of good moral character, without having received the complete CIC report on criminality or Nazi affiliation. Yes, Mr. President, security screening of applicants is inadequate, with little or no investigation of the background or political beliefs of applicants, and this has opened our gates to persons who will not become good citizens, to persons who are potentially ready recruits for sub- versive organizations created in this country to tear down the democracy of the United States. The Judiciary Committee has amended H. R. 4567 to tighten up the protection and security of the United States by specifically defining displaced persons in- dependently of any international organ- ization; and by vesting the final determi- nation of the eligibility of applicants in trained immigration personnel of the United States, who are citizens of the United States and who have had not less than 3 years’ cxperience in the Immigra- tion and Naturalization Service, or in the American foreign service. I have stated, Mr. President, and I re- peat, that under the administration of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE the present act persons seeking the status of displaced persons have resorted to fraud, misrepresentation, fictitious docu- ments, and perjury in order to qualify for immigration to the United States. Iam well aware that those charged with the responsibility of administering the act would have us believe otherwise, and that weazcl-worded statements have been made to create the impression that no displaced person has immisrated to this country on fraudulent documents. The fact of the matter is that not only have displaced persons immigrated on fraudu- lent documents, but it is impossible to determine how many have come to this country on fraudulent documents. I was repeatedly told by consular officials that they had no way of furnishing the exact number, but that they did know appli- cants were coming through on fraudu- lent documents. As a typical example, a vice consul, who incidentally is a chief visa-issuing officer and a career Foreign Scrvice employee, advised me that a con- sul has no power to override the finding of eligibility of the Displaced Persons Commission, even though he has good reason to believe an applicant's docu- ments are fraudulent, unless such appli- cant had previously applied for emigra- tion as a displaced person under the President’s directive and had been re- fused hy the consulate because of fraudu- lent documents. If such a person at- tempts to go through again, he is refused a visa under our general immigration Jaws, not because of ineligibility as a dis- placed person, but because of attempted fraud in an earlier application for a visa. When asked if he had many cases like that, he replied: We have had a number I would say four or five a month. Think of that. Four or five a month in just one consular office—and these are only in cases where the applicant had previously made an application with the consulate so that there 1s a consular record of his fraudulent documentation. This consular officer further stated: If a case comes in to us 4s a new cuse 60 that we have no record of previously at- tempted traud, the person's status as a dis- placed person has been determined by the IRO and the Commission, and we have noth- ing to do with it. I asked him if he had any way of de- termining whether an applicant has previously submitted a different set of documents to the IRO and is now going through on 2. new set of documents which may be fraudulent, to which he replied: No, we have no way of knowing If he has submitted fraudulent documents to the IRO, unlees he had previously actually applied to the consulate for immigration on fraudu- lent documents. A responsible employee of the Dis- placed Fersons Commission stated to me that he believed approximately one-third of the displaced persons qualifying for immigration to the United States had qualified on the basis of false and fraud- ulent documents so as to come within the so-called cut-off date of December 22, 1945. I asked him if he could prove this statement, and if not, on what he based his opinion. His reply was that it would be impossible to prove how many FEBRUARY 28 persons had used fraudulent documents without a detailed examination of each case, but that his opinion was based on personal observation with more than a year of experience as an employee of the Displaced Persons Commission. The ex- perience of this employee was confirmed by three other employees of the Displaced Persons Commission in widely separated areas. All of whom stated it would be impossible to determine the exact num- ber of displaced persons using fraudulent documents, because where {fraudulent documents were used to qualify under the act, a residence address in the Russian zone of Germany is given with knowledge that it is impossible to check the truth or falsity of such statement. An official of the Immigration and Naturalization Service pointed out an instance where 94 displaced persons gave the same address in Weisbaden as their place of residence. This is in the bizone of Germany and could be checked. He stated that there- after displaced persons using fraudulent documents gave residences in the Russian zone of Germany and, that although an address of residence in the Russian zone of Germany is regarded with suspicion, there is little that can be done to check the fact of residence. This official be- hieves that the percentage of displaced persons moving on fraudulent documents is, in his words, ‘‘substantial,” but stated that he has no way of arriving at a per- centage figure, because the basic fraud is consummated with the International Refugee Organization. A former official of Army Intelligence in Germany testi- fied before the full committce that cer- tain voluntary agencies advise displaced persons on how they might best evade our immigration laws and the regula- tions which have becn set up for the handling of displaced persons, and he further stated: It is possible for any of you gentlemen today, speaking fluent German, to go into Beilin and buy yourself any kind of docu- ments you want. What is more, I was advised by a high official of the inspector general’s office of the European command that they had “positive evidence that two of the reli- gious voluntary agencies had been guilty of forgery of documents in their own offices and had admitted that they would do anything to get displaced persons and persecutees into the United States.” This official further stated: We have uncovered tn connection with the displaced-persons program at this time in a& number of places organized rings for the purpose of faking documents. He advised that anyone could get a fraudulent birth certificate or fraudu- lent police certificate of residence to file with the International Refugee Organi- zation and qualify under our law. One of our chief consular officia)s in Germany drew my attention to a pending prosccu- tion of a German police official for fur- nishing fraudulent documents to dis- placed persons and stated: This is a prevalent practice, but we haven't been able to prosecute many cases. This official further advised that a high percentage of displaced persons qualify- ing under our law were using fraudulent documents, but that it would be impos-
1950 sible to determine either the number or the percentage without a complete in- vestigation in each case. He further stated that because residence or birth in the Russian zone of Germany and areas behind the iron curtain are involved in most fraudulent documents cases, it would probably be impossible to make such an investigation. In his opinion, greater attention to the screening of ap- plicants, and expansion of the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army, would prevent many fraudulent document cases. Another consular official stated his be- lief that— A large percentage of the cases which have been processed, and are now being considered, are based upon fraudulent documents, but there is no way of determining what this percentage may be. He further stated that the only avail- able figures on cases involving fraudu- lent documents are those cases which have been caught by the CIC investiga- tion, or by the consular office upon per- sonal interview of the applicant, and that the vast majority are not caught. A representative of one of the volun- tary agencies stated that the Displaced Persons Commission had cooperated to a@ remarkable degree because their sole purpose seemed to be to approve 205,000 persons before the expiration of the law, without regard to the fitness or desirabil- ity of individual applicants. This repre- sentative further stated that the Dis- placed Persons Commission approved qualifying information submitted by the IRO even though the file disclosed con- tradictory documentation and the prob- ability of fraudulent documents, and he said: The responsible officials of the Displaced Persons Commission perform no useful func- tion for their high salaries. The way the law is being administered, our tax money would be better spent for clerks, bookkeep- ers, and IBM machines to process the paper work faster because selectors and analysts of the Displaced Persons Commission are only doing paper work and clerical checking of dates. With further reference to the fraudu- lent documents phase of this subject, Mr. President, several days ago the Displaced Persons Commission charged that state- ments made by me concerning the role of fraud in our program were either de- liberate untruths or based upon misin- formation. I said then, and I now re- peat, that fraud has entered into the program in every area of Europe. I now ask unanimous consent to insert in the Recorp, at this point in my remarks, a copy of a letter addressed to the Secre- tary of State by the consul general at Munich, setting out of a number of spe- cific cases involving fraudulent docu- ments in that one area. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: AMERICAN CONSULATE GENERAL, Munich, Germany, September 9, 1949. Subject: Possibility of fraud in connection with visas obtained by displaced persons in Amberg, Germany. The Honorable the SEcRETARY oF STATE, Washington. Sm: I have the honor to report that it has come to the attention of the Amberg sub- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE office of the consulate general that 10 visas were issued between December 29, 1948, and June 16, 1949, to displaced persons who are apparently tneligible under Public Law 774 for admission into the United States. It is understood that these persons are either now en route to or are already in the United States. These persons have all made state- ments under oath in their visa applications which subsequent documentary evidence had shown to be probably false, and in each case the ineligibility of the person concerned was dependent upon the truth of the statements. The specific point in question is the date upon which these applicants arrived in Ger- many. In order to be eligible under Public Law 774, these applicants must have arrived in Germany before December 22, 1945. The recently discovered documentation indicates that these applicants all arrived subsequent to this date. The matter was called to the attention of the consulate general by the military gov- ernment officer responsible for the town of Schwandorf, Bavaria, who 1s at present in- vestigating charges of bribery of a member of the city government of Schwandorf by a prospective visa applicant. The accused is said to have paid 50 marks through the wife of the president of the Jewish committee of the town, in an effort to have the city records which show residence in Schwandorf adjusted 80 as to make him eligible under Public Law 774 This investigation has shown that a number of displaced persons, who had al- ready departed for the United States, had previously caused their police records in Schwandorf to be changed, and further that upon their presentation for a visa, the state- ments which they made under oath did not correspond with records in Schwandorf. After examining the Schwandorf police rec- ords in these cases, the records of the Inter- national Refugee Organization in Amberg (IRO area IV headquarters) were also con- sulted. It was shown that these records agree with the Schwandorf records and do not support the statements made by the ap- Plicants in their application. The 10 cases in question are as follows: 1. Boltuch, Lea, was issued Polish quota visa 3227/50 on December 29, 1948. Miss Boltuch stated under oath that she had re- sided in Munich from November 1945 until 1946. The Schwandorf records in this case consisted of two documents, one a question- naire which Miss Boltuch prepared in ordor to obtain a German identification card. On the identification card questionnaire, she stated that she arrived directly in Schwan- dorf from Poland in the summer of 1946. On her police registration card, a notice as to her residence in Munich has been added, obviously subsequent to her original registra- tion. In the files of IRO in Amberg, two doc- uments were consulted in this case, the ques- tionnaire prepared by Miss Boltuch for the Army, which states that she arrived in Ger- many in July 1946 from Poland, and the IRO card and maintenance questionnaire (CM-1 form), which indicates that she resided in Munich during the time stated on her application. 2 and 3. The documents tn connection with Miss Boltuch's sister and brother-in- law, Simon and Taube Haber (Polish quota visas 6028/50 and 6029/50, issued February 83, 1949) also follow the same pattern of dis- crepancy, 1. e., the residence in Munich is added later on police registration card, the identification card questionnaire shows no residence in Munich, the Army questionnaire shows arrival in Germany in 1946, and the CM-1 form shows residence in Munich be- tween October 1945 and August 10946. It is noted that in both the Boltuch and Haber cases the CM-1 form was prepared on May 26, 1948, at which time it was generally known that in order to qualify under the President’s directive of December 22, 1945, concerning the immigration of displaced 2173 persons, the applicant must have been in Germany prior to the date of the Directive. 4 and 5. Brafman, Daniel and Anna were issued Potish quota visas 3593/50 and 3594/60 on February 2, 1949. Brafman stated in his application that he came to Germany in November 1945 and resided in the neigh- borhood of Schwandorf from that date on. On his Schwandorf identification card ques- tionnaire, he states that he arrived in Bchwandorf in July 1946. However, there is an entry in pencil (possibly in Brafman’s own handwriting) between his statements as to residence in Piotrkow, Poland, in 1945 and Lodz, Poland, in 1946, stating that he lived in Schwandorf between November and December 1945. Brafman’s CM-1 form shows residence in Lodz, Poland, uninter- ruptedly from June 1945 until June 10946, where he was employed as a tailor. 6, 7, and 8. Henryk, Mela, and Fedor Ba- drian were issued Germar quota visa 6945, Polish quota visa 5601/53 and German quota visa 6946, respectively, on April 21, 1949. Badrian based his eligibility on ariival in Schwandorf in September 1945 from Katto- wice, Poland. This statement is substan- tiated by the identification card question- naire in Schwandorf. However, the IRO CM-1 form shows Badrian to have been resid- ing uninterruptedly in Kattowice from Jan- uary 1945 until September 1946 and the IRO DP registration card (DP-2 card) shows the same information 9 and 10. Israel and Irena Dreier were is- sued Polish quota visas 5415/56 and 5416/56 on June 16, 1949. Dreier claims to have been in Schwandorf between September and De- cember 1945. There is no record in the Schwandorf police records of this trip to Schwandorf from Poland. Furthermore, there is attached to the police records a Po- lish certificate of residence showing Dreier to be living in Krakow from March 1945 un- til March 1946. The CM-1 form docs not show residence for Dreier in Schwandorf he- fore September 1946. The investigation of these cases and other similar cases in which visas have not yet been issued is being continued by the local Displaced Persons Commission Team, the International Refugee Organization, and Military Government, CIC, and this office, and if any other cases are discovered in which it 18 believed that visas have been issucd to persons not eligible under Public Law 774, the Department will be informed immedi- ately. Information in the records in question indicates that the following persons may have made false statements in their visa applica- tions believing that these statements were necessary in order to establish their eligibility under Public Law 774: Albert, Solomon (Polish Quota Visa 5453/56 issued June 30, 1949. Apfelbaum, Juda and Perla (Polish Quota Visas 5626/53 and 5627/53 issued April 22, 1949). Taffel, Leib and Estera (Polish Quota Visas 6202/52 and 6203/52 issued March 29, 1949). The information in the documents, how- ever, shows that these persons were already eligible from the point of view of entry into Germany prior to December 22, 1945. These persons had been in concentration camps in Germany during the war, then returned to Poland, and apparently falsified the dates of their re-entry into Germany. The Schwandorf documents disclosed above are in the archives of the burger- meister of Schwandorf, and the IRO CM-1 forms and DP-2 cards are in possession of the TRO Area IV Headquarters, Amberg, Germany Respectfully yours, Sam E. Woops, American Consul General. Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, sub- sequent to my investigation in Europe, the senior officer of the Displaced Per- sons Commission in Europe, Mr. Donald
2474 Main, caused the CIC to make an in- vestigation of qualifying documents issued out of the town of Schnaitsee in Bavaria, Germany. On February 14, 1950, Mr. Main testified as follows: As a result of our suspicions, we asked the Counter Intelligence Corps of the Army, in addition to their regular, routine Investiga- tion, to check into the authenticity of cer- tain documents which were presented to us to establish residence within the required period, end also to check the records upon which the certificates were based to deter- mine their authenticity. Question. Do you think there is much of this fraud? Answer I think it is extensive. Question. Can you give us an idea as to how many cases you think there have been an attempt at fraud? Answer. I would say that at least 500 in our particular area have been called to our attention by name. Question Are those persons all being held up so that they will not get visas until there can be an absolutely complete inves- tigation? Answer. Those that have not already de- parted are being held * * * records for 800 persons had been established at Schnait- see claiming residence prior to December 22, 1945, for individuals who had not lived there auring the period alleged. I do not know whether or not all of those have been used by the individuals to attempt illegal immi- gration to the United States. Some of them have. Question. How many of the 300 got into the United States? Answer. I would estimate that of those that were processed in our area about 100 have already come to the United States. Question. Approximately 100 of those 300 frauds were ultimately successful in enabl- ing the persons to gct into the United States? Answer. Thatisright. * “ * Question. When did you find out about these fhauds involving the 300 cases? Answer. It was some time in January that we received the complete report from the CIC with reference to the Schnaltsee doc- uments. * * * The finger was pointed at Schnuitsee by the CIC to us verbally by convereation with the officer in charge of the ecreening process. Question. Was that report made after Sen- ator McCarxan had been over in Ewope? Answer. Yes, it was. Mr. Main further testified that the CIC investigation now in proccss in the Mun- ich area has disclosed fraudulent docu- ments and fraudulent records issued in Munich, Kaufbeuren, Furstenfeldbruck, Traunstein, Schwandor{f, Weilheim, Ulm, Roding. As to the town of Roding, Mr. Main testified as follows: Question. Have you looked into the mat- ter of the 100 cases at Roding to determine whether the allegations of fraud are in fact correct? Answer. I am convinced, from the evidence we were furnished by the CIC, that they aie correct. We have a report from them containing the confession of the officers who established these records fraudulently. There are two of them, I should say, this individual and his assistant. The latest in- formation I received from the CIC was that they were in jail in Roding pending the completion of the CIC’s investigation and are awaiting prosecution by the military government, Mr. Main further testified with re- spect to approximately 1,700 cases which were presented in the Munich area by two voluntary agencies during a 3-week period in September after these agen- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE cies had indicated they were at the end of cases in which they were interested. Because of the suspicious circumstances surrounding the presentation of these cases, all were held in suspension by Mr. Main until after the CIC could complete an investigation as to fraudulent docu- mentation. Mr. Main indicated that the 1,700 cases related to heads of fam- ilies only, and that the total number of persons involved would be approximately 3,500. Of the 1,700 held in suspense, only 700 have been documented to the point where they might be referred to the CIC for investigation. Of the 700 referred to the CIC for investigation, approximately 100 have been referred for 2 months; approximately 300 to 400 have been in the hands of the CIC for 1 month; and approximately 200 to 300 have been referred to the CIC for less than 1 month. Of the first group sent over to the CIC, approximately 50 percent of the cases have been found conclusively to have been based on fraudulent documents. As to the remaining 50 percent, there may be some doubt about the fraud involved. That is not my statement; it is the testi- mony of a senior officer of the displaced persons commission in charge of the largest area in Germany. Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. McCARRAN. I yield. Mr. RUSSELL. What was the nature of the papers in the cases which involved fraudulent documents? Were they birth certificates, or visas; or what Kind of documents were they? Mr. McCARRAN. They were birth certificates and residence certificates. Printing presses were found in the region of some of the displaced persons camps, on which birth certificates and residence certificates were being printed. Possibly the Senator was not in the Chamber at the time, but I have previously recited statements which were made to us to the effect that anyone speaking fluent Ger- man could go into Berlin and buy almost any kind of certificate he wanted. Mr. RUSSELL. They were forged German certificates, were they not, which would indicate that the persons forging them were German nationals? Mr. McCARRAN, Not necessarily, They might be nationals of any country. They were birth certificates and as a rule they were forged as to date. There were also some residence certificates which were forged as to the date when a person was alleged to have come into the area in which he was supposed to be on the cut-off date, which was December 22, 1945. Mr. RUSSELL. Did the Senator gath- er any information as to the nationality of the persons who possessed the forged papers? Mr. McCARRAN. Some. I might say that they belonged to all nationalities. Mr. RUSSELL. All nationalities? Mr. McCARRAN, Of the group of na- tionals involved. Mr, RUSSELL, It seems to me that it would be rather difficult to forge a Russian birth certificate. I can under- stand how it might be possible to forge a German birth certificate. However, FEBRUARY 28 it would seem to me to be rather diffi- cult to forge a Russian or other type of birth certificate or residence certificate. Mr. McCARRAN. In the case of forged certificates showing persons as coming from behind the iron curtain, there would be no way of checking be- hind the iron curtain, because it is im- possible to get into those countries to make an investigation. But it was no trouble to claim either birth or residence behind the iron curtain, and in that case residence in the German Trizone was claimed prior to December 22, 1945, so as to bring them within the period pre- scribed. Mr. RUSSELL. Did the Senator re- ceive any information which would in- dicate that there were involved nationals of countries behind the iron curtain who held German papers indicating that they were Germans? In other words, were there any Russians posing as Germans in this area? Mr. McCARRAN. My memory does not serve me as to any particular case of that kind, in which Russians posed as Germans, excepting the general state- ment, which was made by some of the officers who testified before us, that per- sons were coming in as displaced persons under Russian guidance for subversive purposes. Mr RUSSELL. Those persons usually had Russian papers? Mr. McCARRAN. They either had Russian papers, or they might have had German papers, claiming to have been Germans, when, in fact, thcy were Russians, Mr. RUSSELL. That is the question I had in mind. Mr. McCARRAN. It is my belicf that the number of displaced persons coming to the United States on fraudulent docu- ments will be substantially and materi- ally reduced by the committee amend- ments which specifically define displaced persons and eligibility, with the final determination on eligibility vested in citizens of the United States who are trained in immigration matters. Passing now from the fraudulent-doc- ument phase, the investigation disclosed a practice which I can only characterize as a direct violation of the law, namely, the removal of matcrial documents from the file on an applicant prior to trans- mitting such file to the American consul, When a field analyst rejects an appli- cant because he believes him to be in- eligible, the practice has been, and still is, to have the senior officer review the rejection. If approved by the senior of- ficer, the entire file is then sent to Com- mission headquarters in Frankfurt, with an accompanying letter of rejection, set- ting out in considerable detail the reasons for such rejection. This case is then re- viewed by the Frankfurt office. If the rejection is reversed, the file is then re- turned to the field office with a directive advising the senior officer of the re- versal, and instructing him to write a fa- vorable report if the applicant is other- wise eligible. It was the practice of the Frankfurt office to conclude its reversal letter with this paragraph: Please withdraw from the file all previous Commission reports and notifications before
1950 forwarding same to the consul. This letter may be incorporated in the file in support of the directed action. Mr. President, here is an applicant for displaced person’s status, who has been rejected by a field officer for some valid reason, @ reason which the field officer believed to be sufficient for rejection, and sufficient to make the officer believe the applicant would not make a good citizen of the United States. But the head of the Displaced Persons Commission at Frankfurt would send this instruction: Please withdraw from the file all previous Commission reports and notifications before forwarding same to the consul. This letter may be incorporated in the file tn support of the directed action. Let me say in all fairness that I am advised this practice was discontinued last fall. I call it to the attention of the Senate only for the purpose of empha- sizing the inclination of Commission employees to act favorably on every dis- placed person who might conceivably qualify under the act in order to reach their “goal” of the maximum number authorized by law, even to the point of withholding from consular and immi- gration officials material adverse opin- ions of Commission employees in the field by withdrawing from the files offi- cial actions of rejection, together with the reasons therefor. The Chairman of the Displaced Persons Commission testi- fied before the committee that this prac- tice was wrong and had been discon- tinued. Mr. President, at the end of the war the Allied armies in central Europe he- came the guardians of approximately 8,000,000 persons who had been displaced during the war. Within a few months after the war approximately 7,000,000 of these persons were repatriated to their native countries, leaving about 1,000,000 persons, who refused to return to their homelands because of fear of persecu- tion. By the expiration date of our pres- ent displaced-persons law, June 30, 1950, there will remain only a few thousand such war-displaced persons in central Europe, other than the so-called “hard core,” who are ineligible for resettlement because of social or physical disqualifica- tions. The number included in this group is reliably estimated as 170,000 per- sons. This statement was made to me re- peatedly during the course of my investi- gation by officials of every agency of our Government operating in Europe, and by former high-ranking Army and Navy personnel who are now employed by the International Refugee Organization. In fact, Mr. Ugo Carusi of the Displaced Persons Commission confirmed this statement before the Judiciary Commit- tee a few days ago. Because we will have exhausted most of the persons eligible for immigration to the United States by the end of the pres- ent act, June 30, 1950, in considering legislation to extend the operation of the act for 1 year, to June 30, 1951, it seems to me there are only two things that may be done, and either of these, or both, could be included in such legislation, namely, (1) to rewrite our definition of CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE a displaced person so as to expand the category of persons who are eligible un- der our act, even though they may not be eligible under annex I of the consti- tution of the IRO, or (2) to change the so-called cut-off date of December 22, 1945, for eligibility. I therefore recommended, as a result of our studies, that section 2 (b) of the present law be repealed so as to divorce eligibility under our law from discretion- ary determinations of the IRO for the reasons which I have heretofore stated, and also so that our definition of a dis- placed person would be expanded to in- clude war displaced persons of World War II who are not now eligible because they are excluded by the interpretive definition of the IRO constitution. I had in mind two large categories who meet every qualification of our act, including the December 22, 1945, cut-off date, but who are nevertheless ineligible. The first of these categories is the German expellees. These are persons of German ethnic origin who resided in countries east of Germany, and who have been forcibly expelled from their country of origin by reason of the Potsdam agree- ment of August 1, 1945. Millions of these people have been driven into Germany and Austria. They are not former Nazis nor former enemies of the United States, but they are expressly excluded from eli- gibility under our law by the constitution of the International Refugee Organiza- tion, notwithstanding that they are, in fact, war-displaced persons who were up- rooted and torn from their homes as a consequence of World War II within the spirit and meaning of the language used in the IRO constitution. The second category is the Greek dis- placed persons who have been displaced from their homes either by the Nazis during World War II or by the Commu- nists during the Greek civil war. These unfortunate people meet every other test of our law except the definition of sec- tion 2 (b), and they have been excluded only because to be “of the concern of IRO” one must be out of his country of origin. Therefore, since these displaced persons are in their native land, they are not “of the concern” of IRO, and they consequently cannot qualify under sec- tion 2 (b) of the present law. After due consideration, Mr. President, the Judiciary Committee approved ex- tension of the 1948 act to June 30, 1951. The committee expanded the definition of displaced persons to include Germans of ethnic origin and natives of Greece. The committee also advanced the so- called cut-off date for eligibility from December 22, 1945, to January 1, 1949. I was, and still am, opposed to the ad- vance of the cut-off date. The Displaced Persons Act of 1948 is based upon the fundamental humanitarian principle of resettling persons who were uprooted from their homes and native lands by the horrors of World War II. I am in hearty accord with this principle and I not only supported the act of 1948 but I also worked diligently as a member of the subcommittee and also the full commit- tee which considered the 1948 act, to for- mulate legislation to carry out that principle. 2475 The war in Europe was ended in May 1945, Mr. President. Some 7 months after the war ended the President, on December 22, 1945, issued a directive dealing with war-displaced persons. When we drafted the act of 1948 we, therefore, fixed the date of the Presi- dent’s directive, December 22, 1945, as a limiting classification for the purpose of segregating the persons who were dis~ placed by the consequences of war from the “displeased” persons who had volun- tarily displaced themselves. I favored then, and I still favor, such segregation, and I believe it will be destroyed if we advance the eligibility cut-off date to January 1, 1949. I realize full well that there are thou- sands of persons who have wandered in- to Germany, Austria and Italy since December 22, 1945, and who are now unable to return to their native lands because of threats of reprisals against them. But these people, Mr. President, have not been displaced as a consequence of World War Il. They have voluntarily displaced themselves and therefore should not be classed as war-displaced persons. If they desire to immigrate to the United States they may do so under our general immigration laws. There is nothing in the December 22, 1945, cut-off date which denies them that oppor- tunity. It therefore seems to me, Mr. President, that if the cut-off date is ad- vanced to January 1, 1949, we will have abandoned the principle on which the act of 1948 is based, we will have de- parted from the principle of World War II displaced persons and will have estab- lished a principle which will be used to tear down our quota immigration sys- tem. Mr. President, I say without fear of contradiction that that is one of the reasons why there is advocacy for this change of date. Today some are asking that 320,000 persons be permitted to come into the United States between the first day of October 1948 and the last day of June 1951. At that time there will be other movements on foot,-under various guises and with various excuses, for bringing in more displaced persons, and our immigration law will be set at naught. Mr. President, there are millions of people who want to come to the United States. This is the “honey pot” of the world and they all want to come here. But will our economy support them? If the cut-off date is advanced we will have established a principle which will be used to open our gates to the turbu- lent populations of the world. That this is the object of special interest groups cannot successfully be denied. One such group during the course of the last 3 years already has registered with the Clerk of the House of Representatives lobbying expenditures of approximately $1,000,000, and senators may be assured that the campaign to circumvent, nulli- fy or repeal our immigration laws will be continued. Mr. President, if we depart from the principle of special consideration for persons displaced by the horrors of World War II, by embracing persons who have left their homeland because
2476 of economic or political reasons more than 4 years after the end of World War II, how can we deny special considera- tion to persons who have been displaced as a result of other wars throughout the world? No one can deny the compelling humanitarian reasons which will be ad- vanced to obtain special consideration for millions of unfortunate displaced vic- tims of the war in China, or approxi- mately 10,000,000 Pakistanian displaced persons in the partition of India, or ap- proximately 1,000,000 Palestinian dis- placed persons in the Palestine war. No one can deny that the principle which would be established by changing the cut-off date from December 22, 1945, to January 1, 1949, will be used to obtain special consideration for the turbulent populations of the world to immigrate to the United States as displaced persons. What is more, Mr. President, the chief officer of the Immigration and Naturali- zation Service in Europe, officials of the Displaced Persons Commission, consular officers, and officials engaged in CIC in- vestigations have testified and empha- sized that advancing the so-called cut- off date to January 1, 1949, will neces- sarily increase the security risk to the United States. These officials have pointed out that countless thousands of Communist agents and other subver- sives have infiltrated into Germany, Austria, and Italy since December 1945 as displaced persons. Therefore, I have been compelled to stand by the principle which we wrote into the act of 1948, and I am opposed to advancing the so-called cut-off date. Mr. President, it has been loosely charged—and I use the word “loosely” advisedly—that the United States has not taken its fair share of displaced persons, and that our present law should, therefore, be amended so as to drastically increase the number of per- sons who may be admitted. As a mat- ter of fact, Mr. President, we have taken more than any other nation; and what is more, during the period immediately preceding the war, down to the present date, we have taken more than all of the other nations of the world combined. Mr. President, lest perchance I might be misquoted, I shall repeat that state- ment: As a matter of fact, we have taken more displaced persons than any other nation has; and, what is more, during the period immediately preceding the war, down to the present date, we have taken more displaced persons than all the other nations of the world combined have taken. It should be remembered that, unlike most countries of the world, the United States operates under an immigration- quota system whereby approximately 154,000 quota immigrants may be re- ceived annually for permanent resi- dence, chiefly from European countries. In addition, immigrants are received for permanent residence on a nonquota im- migration basis without any numerical limitation. The latter group consists chiefly of immigrants from the Western Hemisphere and of relatives of citizens of the United States. As an example, during the fiscal year 1948, there were admitted for permanent residence 92,- 526 quota immigrants and 78,044 non- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE quota immigrants, or a total of 170,570 immigrants. During the fiscal year 1949, there were admitted for perma- nent residence 113,046 quota immigrants and 75,271 nonquota immigrants, or a total of 188,317 immigrants. Although our general immigration Jaws do not provide specific categories for displaced persons, reliable official and semiofficial estimates are that dur- ing the Nazi regime, through 1947, we re- ceived into the United States under our immigration laws between 250,000 and 300,000 displaced persons for permanent residence, and approximately 200,000 displaced persons for temporary stay. In addition, pursuant to a Presidential directive of December 22, 1945, approxi- mately 44,000 displaced persons were ad- mitted into the United States for per- manent residence from the date of the directive to the effective date of the present displaced-persons law, June 25, 1948. The Displaced Persons Act of 1948 pro- vides for the admission of 205,000 dis- placed persons over a 2-year period, and also provides for adjusting to perma- nent residence the status of 15,000 dis- placed persons who have gained admis- sion on a temporary basis into the United States. Thus, it is seen at a glance that, with- out amending the present law, by June 30, 1950, we shall have received approxi- mately 549,000 displaced persons for permanent residence and approximately 200,000 for temporary stay, of which 15,- 000 will be permitted to adjust their sta- tus to permanent residence. In addi- tion, of the 358,887 quota and nonquota immigrants during the fiscal years 1948 and 1949, some were undoubtedly dis- placed persons coming as regular immi- grants, but there is no reliable way of estimating the number of displaced per- sons arriving under our general immi- gration laws. So you see, Mr. President, the charge that we have not taken our fair share is not founded on fact, and this is demonstrated by the record. The bill, as reported to the Senate, will increase the total numerical Imitation of displaced persons under the act of 1948 from 205,000 to 320,000, an increase of 115,000. Of the total of 320,000 visas authorized to be issued, 2,000 will be available to natives of Czechoslovakia, as provided in the present law; 10,000 will be available to natives of Greece; 18,000 will be available to certain members of the armed forces of the Republic of Poland; and 290,000 will be available to displaced persons in the general cate- gory, as compared to 203,000 under the present law. If the 115,000 increase pro- vided in the bill is agreed to, we shall have received for permanent residence in the United States 300,000 as regular immigrants, plus 44,000 under the Presi- dent’s directive, plus 15,000 temporary residents who may have their status ad- justed to permanent residence, plus 320,- 000 under the Displaced Persons Act, as amended, or—mark this, Mr. President— approximately 679,000 displaced persons by June 30, 1951, without counting those who are admitted as regular immigrants during 1948, 1949, 1950, and 1951. In ad- dition, the bill makes provision for the admission of 5,000 orphans or abandoned FEBRUARY 28 children and 5,000 adopted children. How can it be said that we have not taken our fair share, in the face of this record? It has also been loosely charged, Mr. President, as I stated previously—and again, Mr. President, I use the word “loosely” advisedly—that our displaced persons program discriminates against persons of the Jewish and the Catholic faiths. A brief glance at the record will demonstrate that this charge is not founded upon fact. Mr. President, I stated in the earlier part of my remarks that I was a member of the subcommittee, which acted under its very able chairman, Senator Rever- comb, of West Virginia, in the Eightieth Congress, when the 1948 act was drafted. I do not think it is necessary for the senior Senator from Nevada to state that he is a Roman Catholic. I do not think it should be necessary for him to state that some of his most intimate friends, some of his best friends in all the world, belong to the Jewish faith. I do not think it should be necessary, so far as my colleagues are concerned, for me to state that there is nothing in my make-up which would cause me to discriminate against anyone by reason of his religion or his blood. Certainly it need not be stated that I would not be a party to the formation of any measure which would discriminate against the religion which was given me by my mother. So, Mr. President, to state that there is discrimination in the 1948 act against Catholics and Jews, is to fly in the face of the record. During the war years, of the hundreds of thousands of displaced persons who were admitted into the United States, it is reliably estimated that approximately four-fifths were of Jewish faith. Under the President's directive of De- cember 22, 1945, visas were issued to 23,- 594 displaced persons of Jewish faith; 5,924 to displaced persons of Catholic faith; and 3,906 to displaced persons of Protestant faith; in other words, 88 per- cent to persons of Jewish or Catholic faith, 12 percent to persons of Protestant faith. The Visa Division of the State Depart- ment reports that under the Displaced Persons Act of 1948, as of November 30, 1949, visas had been issued to 127,866 dis- placed persons; 53,402, or 41 percent, to displaced persons of Catholic faith; 33,- 479, or 26 percent, to displaced persons of Jewish faith; 20,279, or 16 percent, to displaced persons of Protestant faith; 19,283, or 15 percent, to displaced persons of Greek Orthodox faith; and 1,423, or 2 percent, to displaced persons of un- known faith. On January 23, Mr. Ugo Carusi, of the Displaced Persons Commission, testificd before the Judiciary Committee that the registration of displaced persons com- pleted by the International Refugee Or- ganization in April 1947 showed that 60 percent were of Catholic faith, 25 per- cent were of Jewish faith, and 15 percent were of Protestant, Greek Orthodox, and other faiths. It should be noted that the IRO registration includes the so- called “hard core,” who are not eligible for immigration to the United States, and also includes persons who immigrate