1950 entitled “Looking Forward,” by W. Percy Williams, publisher of the Paris (Tenn.) Post-Intelligencer, which appears in the Ap- pendix.] THE FULBRIGHT EXCHANGE PROGRAM IN OPERATION—ARTICLE BY CHARLES E. ODEGAARD |Mr. FULBRIGHT asked and obtained leave to have printed in the R&corp an article en- titled “The Fulbright Exchange Program in Operation,” by Charles E. Odegaard, pub- lished in the December 1049 issue of the News Letter of the American Council of Learned Societies, which appears in the Appendix.) CONDITIONS IN CHINA—ARTICLE BY WALTER LIPPMANN (Mr. CONNALLY asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an article en- titled “Three Bad Weeks,” written by Walter Lippmann and published in the Washington Post of February 14, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] WASHINGTON AND LEE UNIVERSITY— ARTICLE BY E. A. WATSON {[Mr. ROBERTSON asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an article entitled “Washington and Lee University and Its Bicentennial Celebration,” written by E. A, Watson, editor of the Ironworker, and re- printed in the twentieth anniversary edition of Dixie Business, which appears in the Ap- pendix. ] COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN IRRIGATION PROJECTS Mr. CHAVEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I may be per- mitted to make an observation for 2 or 8 minutes. I wish to call a matter to the attention of the majority leader. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob- jection, the Senator may proceed. Mr. CHAVEZ. House bill 5472 is a rivers-and-harbors and _  flood-control bill. It was developed by the House of Representatives, after thorough and lengthy public hearings. It passed the House of Representatives on August 22, 1949. The Senate Committee on Public Works held 17 days of hearings on the bill. Modifications of the provisions made by the House and the consideration of additional projects were developed be- fore the committee. The committee re- ported the bill to the Senate on Octo- ber 7, 1949; and shortly thereafter the Senate passed the bill, including all but a few of the provisions reported by the committee. Before reporting the bill, the commit- tee considered the multiple-purpose pro- gram for the Columbia River Basin, in- volving flood control, navigation, power, and irrigation projects. The Committee on Public Works considered all those projects; but inasmuch as irrigation mat- ters fall within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Interior and Insular Af- fairs, the Committee on Public Works reached a decision to act only with re- spect to the flood-control, navigation, and power projects. At the informal request of the chair- man of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, it was agreed that that committee would consider the irrigation projects and subsequently would offer, on the floor of the Senate, an amendment covering their recommendations with respect to the irrigation projects. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE The Committee on Public Works has been most tolerant and extremely pa- tient in connection with this matter. Nevertheless, we think this bill should be considered. Since the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs was not able to conclude its consideration of the irri- gation projects during the last session, the bill was held over until the present session, the second session of the Eighty- first Congress. We have now been in ses- sion approximately 6 weeks. The Com- mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs has recently been holding further hear- ings on the irrigation projects, but has not yet arrived at any conclusion regard- ing them. Over 4 months have now elapsed since the Committee on Public Works reported the bill to the Senate, but the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs has not yet completed its action on the Irrigation projects. We wish to give the Committee on In- terior and Insular Affairs as much time as possible, and as much time as is sound, to consider those matters. But there is no reason whatever why a bill that is being considered and handled by the Public Works Committee of the Senate should be delayed any longer. I hope the majority leader and the chairman of the Committee on Interior and In- sular Affairs can now give us some infor- mation as to when the Senate may be able to take up the bill, which Js so im- portant to every one of the 48 States of the Union. I wonder whether we can get information from the majority leader on when we may expect action. Mr. OMAHONEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. I yield. Mr. O'MAHONEY. The Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs has been holding almost daily sessions for more than a week considering certain amend- ments recommended by the Bureau of the Budget with respect to reclamation features which Members of the Senate desire to have considered in connection with the bill. Mr. CHAVEZ. May I interrupt the Senator a moment? Mr. O’MAHONEY. Certainly. Mr. CHAVEZ. They referred, did they not, to the Columbia River Basin? Mr. O’MAHONEY. The amendments to which I refer, and to which the Com- mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs is now giving its attention, relate to the Columbia River Basin project. Mr. CHAVEZ. Does the Senator from Wyoming know that at this moment the bill has been completed entirely by the Senate committee, excepting only the matters which the Senator’s committee is now considering? Mr, O'MAHONEY. The Senator from Wyoming is perfectly well aware of that. The Senator from New Mexico was very indulgent at the last session of the Con- gress, when his bill was placed upon the calendar. We had an exchange on the floor at that time in which, as I recall, it was agreed that opportunity would be extended to Senators who desired to in- clude these reclamation features to offer the amendments. It has been neces- sary, however, because of the great inter- est among the people of the Northwest, 1791 to await reports from various organiza- tions and from State and local govern- ments in the Northwest. This morning the last of the reports were received. I am hoping that the hearings upon the bill may be concluded tomorrow, and that thereafter, very quickly and as ex- peditiously as the chairman can bring it about, the committee will reach its conclusion as to what amendments should be offered, Mr. CHAVEZ. I wish to make one further observation. The Committee on Public Works of the Senate met this morning, and I may say in all sincerity they have been extremely annusyed that a bill which comes under the jurisdiction of the Public Works Committee should be delayed to such an extent. They do not mind a request for tolerance, they do not mind a desire for patience, they do not mind fair play, they do not mind fine gestures and consideration on the part of other committees, but we do feel that the bill should be passed. It is a Senate bill. Mr. President, the jurisdiction of the Public Works Committee goes to matters pertaining to rivers and navigation, flood control, public roads, and public build- ings. The fact that we now have in the bill irrigation or reclamation matters is only incidental to the fact that the Com- mittee on Public Works has jurisdiction over the bill. The fact that reclamation comes into the picture is only because the Reorganization Act provides that, where there are several multiple-purpose matters, the committee having the supe- rior interest in the whole purpose shall have jurisdiction. We do not handle anything with reference to reclamation as such. The only reason for our han- dling reclamation is because certain of the navigation and flood-control projects which are being considered also involve reclamation within the area of the proj- ects. My committee is becoming rather impatient. I hope that both the leader- ship and other committees will have * some consideration for our committee. Mr, O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, I may say I also hope that all members of the Committee on Public Works will have consideration for Members of the Senate who may desire to propose amendments to the bill. We are endeavoring, to the very best of our ability, to examine and report upon amendments which have been suggested by the Bureau of the Budget and the Bureau of Reclamation, which are very important to the great northwestern area of the United States; and I am quite sure the Committee on Public Works will continue to show the spirit of cooperation which the Senator from New Mexico has already shown. Mr. CHAVEZ. We want to show that spirit of cooperation, but I insist, I may say to the Senate, we are not going to let any other committee legislate for the Committee on Public Works. Mr. LUCAS subsequently said: Mr. President, with respect to the colloquy between the distinguished Senator from New Mexico (Mr. CHavez] and the dis- tinguished Senator from Wyoming [Mr. O’Manonty] with reference to House bill 5472, which is known as the flood- control bill, I should like to say that that
1792 bill has been on the calendar for a long time, and it is the hope of the majority leader that the distinguished Senator from Wyoming will conclude the hear- ings as rapidly as may be possible in order that he may be in position to offer any amendments to the bill which may be deemed advisable in protecting the in- tercsts of the Northwest. I hope we may reach consideration of the bill within a very short time, because the members of the Committee on Public Works are crowding the Senator from Illinois, and I am sure the Senator from Wyoming will cooperate with me in the matter. Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. I yield. Mr. O’MAHONEY. The Senator from Wyoming is happy to cooperate, and the committee has been cooperating. The amendments which have been recom- mended by the Bureau of the Budget and sustained by the Secretary of the Interior have been transmitted to the committee only toward the end of the month of January and at the beginning of this month. I do not want anyone, on reading the Recorp, to gain the idea that the Committee on Interior and In- sular Affairs has not been diligently working upon the measure, because it has been. The amendments were con- sidered as soon as they were received, and there have been almost daily sessions of the committee with reference to them. CONSERVATION OF WILDLIFE IN THE UNITED STATES Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 1 minute, to make an announcement. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob- jection, it is so ordered. Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. President, yesterday, and again today, I assisted the distinguished junior Senator from Rhode Island in conducting the annual hearings of the Subcommittee on Wild- life of the Senate Committee on Expendi- tures in the Executive Departments. Those hearings will be available within’ about 2 weeks, and will be mailed to every Member of the Senate. I hope all my distinguished colleagues will read the hearings, because they deal with a great natural resource. They refer to the fact that there are 28,000,000 sportsmen in this Nation vho buy hunting and fishing licenses and who distribute annually about $4,000,000,000, to say nothing of the contribution made by this type of outdoor life to a happy and contented citizenry. Mr. President, during the course of the hearings yesterday, I referred to a friend in Germany who shot a deer on the land of a farmer with whom he was hunting. The deer fell over the fence on adjoining land, and the German farmer refused to retrieve it, “Because,” as he said, “in Germany we do not tres- pass upon the property of others.” There were also witnesses who told us that last year about 25,000,000 ducks had been killed legally and illegally, of a total of possibly 50,000,000. The distinguished chairman of the subcommittee, the junior Senator from Rhode Island, returned to his home with these problems upon his mind, When he CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE went to sleep, he had a dream, and, al- though he had never shot a gun in his life, he dreamed he was in a duck blind in Rhode Island when a cloud of ducks came over. He dreamed that he shot into the middle of the flock, killing a duck, which, to his dismay, fell in Mas- sachusetts. Being a law-abiding citi- zen of Rhode Island, he could not tres- pass in Massachusetts, and he was un- able, therefore, to recover the first and only duck he ever killed. (Laughter.] FACILITATION AND SIMPLIFICATION OF THE WORK OF THE FOREST SERVICE Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I move that the unfinished business be tempo- rarily laid aside and that the Senate pro- ceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 1082, House bill 5839. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. WitnHers in the chair). The clerk will state the bill by title for the information of the Senate. The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (H. R. 5839) to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service, and for other pur- poses, Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. I yield. Mr. WHERRY. Is this one of the bills listed for consideration at the time the statement was made by the majority leader last week as to what was expected to come before the Senate? Mr. LUCAS. The Senator is correct. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion of the senior Senator from Illinois. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the bill (H. R. 5839) to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service, and for other purposes. Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. Mr. Pres- ident, the bill before the Senate is House bill 5839, to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service, and for other purposes. The facts are that the Forest Service as a bureau has plenty of laws for its guidance. These laws, as a rule, were passed in the form of amendments many of them to appropriation bills. The Department recommends that the Congress codify the laws pertaining to the Forest Service, and it has submitted the bill now pending for the considera- tion of the Congress. The bill was before the Eightieth Con- gress for consideration. The appropriate committee held extensive hearings on the recommendations of the Department. and reported the bill, which was later passed by the House. It came to this body, but for some reason it was not acted on by the Senate during the Eight- ieth Congress. In the Eighty-first Con- gress the House again considered the bill, passed it, and sent it to the Senate, and the Senate now has before it House bill 5839. When the bill reached the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, a subcom- mittee was appointed to consider it and to make recommendations. The chair- man of the subcommittee was the dis- tinguished senior Senator from Minne- sota [Mr. Taye]. Hearings were held, and a report was submitted, but the sub- committee did not see fit to offer any FEBRUARY 14 amendment to the bill. Therefore, the bill we have before us today for consid- eration is the bill in the same form in which it passed the House of Representa- tives. I am advised that after the bill was reported and placed on the calendar the distinguished Senator from Wyoming (Mr, O’MaHONEY] considered the meas- ure and found that for the benefit of the Forest Service, in his opinion, some amendments to the bill were needed. I am also advised that those amendments are pending, that the chairman of the subcommittee of the Committee on Agri- culture and Forestry was consulted, and that the subcommittee is in agreement with the amendments to be submitted by the Senator from Wyoming. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, when this bill was reached upon the call of the calendar during the first session of the Eighty-first Congress, I was one of those who made objection to its pas- sage at that time by unanimous consent, because a reading of the bill convinced me that some perfecting amendments and some additional amendments should be made. I had conversations with the able senior Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Tuyr!] at that time, and it was agreed that amendments should be worked out during the recess of the Congress. During the recess, Mr. President, the matters were considered broadly by graz- ing users of the forests and by the For- est Service itself. I arranged for a con- ference between the chief of the Forest Service and his staff, and committees of the grazing users of the national for- ests, with the thought that they could work out, between them, amendments upon which there would be agreement. I participated in conferences with the head of the Forest Service. I advised the Senator from Minnesota of the prog- ress of all these negotiations, and placed in his hands copies of the amendments to be proposed. I am now in receipt of a letter from the senior Senator from Minnesota, dated February 14, in which he expresses my understanding, namely, that the amendments which I am about to pro- pose meet his agreement, and also meet. the agreement of the Forest Service. I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the letter be printed in the Recorp at this point. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: UniItrEp STaTES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY, Washington, D.C., February 14, 1950. The Honorable JosepH C. O’MAHONEY, United States Senate, Washington, D.C. Dear SENATOR O'MAHONEY: Since I am au- thor of a companion bill in the Senate and also designated by the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry to report H. R. 5839, I regret that I am unable to be present at the session of the Senate on Tuesday, February 14, when this measure will be under consideration. I am writing to you at this time to say that I believe this measure to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service will make it possible for that service to carry
1950 out its functions more effectively and effi- ciently. As indicated in the report of the committee, the changes and improvements in the law relating to the Forest Service which are proposed in this bill are the out- growth of cumulative experience of the serv- ice and are based upon careful study. I wish also to say, as I stated on the floor of the Senate on February 1, that I have no objection to the amendments which you have offered to this bill. I have been advised by the Forest Service that that agency desires to interpose no objection to these amend- ments, I hope the Senate will act favorably upon HY. R. 5889 with the amendments which you have proposed. Sincerely yours, Epwarp J. THYE, United States Senator. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, in his letter, the Senator from Minnesota says, among other things: I have been advised by the Forest Service that that agency desires to interpose no objection to these amendments. Mr. President, when this same bill was reached upon the call of the calendar at this session of the Eighty-first Congress, the Senator from Utah [Mr. Warxins] interposed an objection, and the bill went over. His objection has now been re- moved, and I have a letter from the office of the Senator from Utah express- ing withdrawal of his objection. I ask that this letter may also appear in the body of the Recorp. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Unrrep STATEes SENATE, Washington, D.C., February 13, 1950, Senator JoszPH C. O’MAHONEY, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. Dear Senator: I wish to take this oppor- tunity to clarify my position on the omnibus forest bill, H. R. 5839. As you know, I objected to this bill when it was called on the calendar last February 1. You will recall that it was proposed for passage, a8 amended, the previous day. I had had no opportunity whatever to study the amendments and I could not, with a clear conscience, vote on something I knew nothing about. Further, I had promised my constituents in Utah that they would have an opportunity to analyze any amendments to this bill and give me their opinions of them before any action was taken. There- fore, when the amendments were introduced one day and the bill called on the next day, my constituents in Utah knew nothing of their terms and I was under obligation to give them the opportunity I had promised. Since that time, I have had an opportunity to go over the amendments and have re- ceived notification from Utah that they have had an opportunity there to analyze them. Iam happy to tell you that I will support the bill and the amendments when the legisla- tion is again called on the calendar. Sincerely yours, ARTHUR V. WATKINS. Mr. O'MAHONEY. Mr. President, the first amendment I wish to offer is amend- ment lettered “E,” which proposes to in- sert a new section at the end of the bill, This section provides for the establish- ment of local advisory boards in the various forests of the Nation, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE On page 2 of the amendment as printed, in line 17, appears the word “may,” in the following sentence: In addition a wildlife representative may be appointed as a member of efch such board by the State game commission, or the corresponding public body of the State in which the advisory board is located, to advise on wildlife problems. Some questions have been directed to me as to whether the word should be “may” or “shall.” The amendment was drawn with the word “may” in it, be- cause, as & reading of the sentence indi- cates, the appointment of such persons will be dependent upon the action of the various State game commissions, and it was not desired to contro] action by the State commissions if the State commis- sions did not intend to act, but if the State commissions do act, it is my under- standing that the persons so recom- mended shall be appointed. So I believe no change js required in that respect. Mr. President, with this explanation, I hope that the first amendment may be agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the amendment, The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. It is proposed to insert a new section at the end of the bill, as follows: Sree. .(a) (1) To provide national forest grazing permittees means for the expression of their recommendations concerning the management and administration of national forest grazing lands, a local advisory board shall be constituted and elected as herein- after provided for each national forest or administrative subdivision thereof whenever & majority of the grazing permittees of such national forest or administrative subdivision so petitions the Secretary of Agriculture. Each elected local advisory board existing for such purpose at the time of the enactment Of this act, and recognized as such by the Department of Agriculture, shall continue to be the local advisory board for the unit or area it represents, until replaced by a local advisory board or boards constituted and elected as hereinafter provided. (2) Each such local advisory board shall be constituted and elected under rules and regulations, consistent herewith, now or hereafter approved by the Secretary of Agri- culture, and shall be recognized by him as representing the grazing permittees of the national forest or administrative subdivision thereof for which such local advisory board has been constituted and elected. (8) Each such local advisory board shall consist of not less than 8 nor more than 12 members, who shall be national forest grazing permittees in the area for which such board is constituted, elected, and recog- nized. In addition, a wildlife representative may be appointed as a member of each such board by the State game commission, or the corresponding public body of the State in which the advisory board is located, to advise on wildlife problems. (4) Each such local advisory board shall meet at least once annually, at & time to be fixed by such board, and at such other time or times as its members may determine, or on the call of the chairman thereof or of the Secretary of Agriculture or his author- ized representative. (b) Upon the request of any party affected thereby, the Secretary of Agriculture, or his duly authorized representative, shall refer to the appropriate local advisory board for its advice and recommendations any matter pertaining to (1) the modification of the terms, or the denial of a renewal of, or a 1793 reduction in, @ grazing permit, or (2) the establishment or modification of an indi- vidual or community allotment. In the event the Secretary of Agriculture, or his duly authorized representative, shall over- rule, disregard, or modify any such recom- mendations, he, or such representative, shall Turnish in writing to the local advisory board his reasons for such action. (c) (1) At least 30 days prior to the issu- ance by the Secretary of Agriculture of any regulation under this act or otherwise, with respect to the administration of grazing on national forest lands, or of amendments or additions to, or modifications tn, any such regulation, which in his judgment would substantially modify existing policy with respect to grazing in national forests, or which \ou'td materially affect preferences of perm: ttees in the area involved, the local advisory bourd for each area that will be affected thereby shall be notified of the in- tention to take such action, If asa result of this notice the Secretary of Agriculture shall receive any recommendation respecting the issuance of the proposed regulation and shail overrule, disregard, or modify any such regu- lations, he or his representative shall furnish in writing to the local advisory board his reasons for such action. (2) Any such local advisory board may at any time recommend to the Secretary of Agriculture, or his representative, the issu- ance of regulations or instructions : eluting to the use of national forest lands, scasons of use, grazing capacity of such lands, and any other matters affecting the administration of grazing in the area represented by such board. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend- ment. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, my attention was diverted. Has the amend- ment been agreed to? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment has been agreed to. Mr. WHERRY. Which amendment was that? Mr. O’MAHONEY, It is the amend- ment setting up local advisory boards. The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is the amendment lettered “E.” Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, I should like to ask the Senator from Wyoming whether or not the junior Sen- ator from Colorado [Mr. M1LurK1n] has been advised of all these amendments. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Yes, Mr. Presi- dent; I think every one interested has been advised. Mr. WHERRY. I understood that at one time, before the amendments were offered, the Senator from Colorado wanted to make some suggestions as to amending the bill. Mr. O’MAHONEY. I understand the point of view of the Senator from Colo- rado is exactly the same as my own, and that he is satisfied with the amendments. Mr. WHERRY. I thank the Senator, and I shall not ask for a reconsideration of the vote by which the first amendment ‘was just agreed to. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, I now offer amendment lettered “D,” which proposes a new section to be inserted at the end of the bill, which would author- ize the Secretary to issue 10-year grazing permits. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the amendment.
1794 The Lecistative CLERK. It is proposed to add a new section at the end of the bill, to read as follows: Sec. . The Secretary of Agriculture in regulating grazing on the national forests and other lands administered by him in con- nection therewith is authorized, upon such terms and conditions as he may deem proper, to issue permits for the grazing of livestock for periods not exceeding 10 years and re- newals thereof: Provided, That nothing here- in shall be construed as limiting or restricting any right, title, or interest of the United States in any land or resources. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend- ment. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, I now offer amendment lettered “C.” This is a substitute for section 12 of the bill. The amendment is to come on page 9, beginning with line 11, to strike out through line 9, on page 10, and insert in lieu thereof certain language. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the amendment. The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. On page 9, beginning with line 11, it is proposed to strike out through line 9 on page 10, and to insert in lieu thereof the following: Src. 12. Of the moneys received from graz- ing fees by the Treasury from each national forest during each fiscal year there shall be available at the end thereof when appro- priated by Congress an amount equivalent to 2 cents per animal-month for sheep and goats and 10 cents per animal-month for other kinds of livestock under permit on such national forest during the calendar year in which the fiscal year begins, which appropriated amount shall be available until expended on such national forest, under such regulations as the Secretary of Agri- culture may prescribe, for (1) artificial re- vegetation, including the collection or pur- chase of necessary seed; (2) construction and maintenance of drift or division fences and stock-watering places, bridges, corrals, drive- ways, or other necessary range improve- ments; (3) control of range-destroying ro- dents; or (4) eradication of poisonous plants and noxious weeds, in order to protect or improve the future productivity of the range The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend- ment. The amendment was agreed to. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, I now offer the amendments lettered “F.” This is a series of technical amend- ments which change words. For ex- ample, the words “Forest Service” are stricken out and the words “Secretary of Agriculture” are inserted in lieu there- of. On page 3, line 25, after the word “cost”, it is proposed to strike out the words “or the depositor’s share thereof,” and to insert “of the work to be done for the benefit of the depositor.” The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendments will be stated. The LEGISLATIVE CxierK. It is pro- posed on page 3, line 18, after the word “The”, to strike the words “Forest Serv- ice” and insert, “Secretary of Agricul- ture.” ’ On page 3, line 25, after the word “cost”, to strike the words “or the de- positor’s share thereof” and insert “of the work to be done for the benefit of the depositor.” CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE On page 5, line 5, after the word “cost”, to insert the words “and the funds re- ceived as reimbursement.” On page 6, line 3, after the word “re- quired”, to insert the words “‘by the Sec- retary of Agriculture.” On page 8, line 12, after the word “‘is”, to insert the words “‘determined by the Secretary of Agriculture to be.” On page 8, line 17, after the word “the”, to strike the words “Forest Serv- ice” and insert the words “Secretary of Agriculture.” On page 8, line 21, to strike the worais “other than national forest lands” and insert the words ‘‘(other than national forest lands).” Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, since these are merely technical amend- ments, to which there is no objection, I ask unanimous consent that the amend- ments may be considered en bloc. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the consideration of the amendments en bloc? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, before the amendments are agreed to, I should like to ask the distinguished Senator from Wyoming a question, since I was not on the floor of the Senate during all his able presentation of the amend- ments. It is my understanding that the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. THye£], the Senator from Utah {[Mr. Watkins], and the Senator from Colorado ILMr. MILLIKIN] are agreeable to all the amendments. They attended the hear- ings, and the Senator knows that they feel that the amendments should be agreed to; does he? Mr. O’MAHONEY. The Senator is quite correct. I have made a part of the record letters which I have received from the Senator from Minnesota | Mr. THYE] and the Senator from Utah [Mr. Watkins), and in response to the Sena- tor from Nebraska I have expressed my belief that the Senator from Colorado (Mr, MILLIKin1 is satisfied. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend- ments en bloc. b The amendments were agreed to en loc. Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, at this time I should like to call to the attention of the Senate the fact that the working out of these amendments, and arriving at an agreement on the part of all parties, is very satisfactory, and a very happy solution of the questions in- volved, so far as the people in my State and in the West generally are concerned. I therefore ask that an editorial from the Salt Lake Tribune be made a part of the ReEcorp at this point. It com- mends all those who have taken part in perfecting the legislation. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: AGREEMENT OF STOCKMEN AND FOREST OFTICIALS ON RANGE PROGRAM PRESAGES BETTER DAYS There is good news today, too. Heralding better relations between the United States Forest Service and organized stockmen, compromise legislation has been worked out to improve grazing conditions and administration of national forests. FEBRUARY 14 Agreements have been reached on some con- troversial points in the omnibus forest bill (H. R. 65839), sponsored by Congressman GranceR, of Utah. The original measure was passed by the House of Representatives last August, but was tied up in the Senate after stockmen objected. With some 4,000,000 acres of forest ranges in need of rehabilitation, a spirit of coopera- tion which would remove the roadblocks to such improvements would be a great boon to the region. It would remove a sore which could fester to damage seriously basic west- ern industries. Compromises worked out with the help of Senator O'MaHoney, of Wyoming, have been accepted generally by forest officials and lead- ers of various cattle and sheep associations. (Active in the conference was J. M. Jorres, of Salt Lake City, executive secretary of the Na- tional Wool Growers’ Association, and other prominent leaders of stockmen’s associa- tions.) Better understanding and enlight- enment—egiving a green light to rebuilding barren watersheds—would greatly benefit the livestock industry and hundreds of commu- nities depending upon the mountain areas for water. A Board of Appeals is established to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on appeals from decisions of the Chief of the Forest Service involving public use of the forests. The Board is to comprise five persons in agencies within the Agriculture Department, exclud- ing the Forest Service. The Board would consider each appeal on its merits and make recommendations to the Secretary. After the stockmen-Forest Service confer- ences Senator O'MAHONEY introduced three amendments to the Granger bill, which are aimed to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service. They are: 1. A substitution for controversial section 12 of the bill (which was fought by the stockmen), providing that 2 cents per head of sheep and 10 cents per head of other live- stock per animal month of the grazing fees should be used for range improvements, when appropriated by Congress. Funds would go for artificlal revegetation, purchase of seed, construction and maintenance of fences, bridges, corrals, driveways, other range im- provements, control of rodents, and eradica- tion of poisonous plants. 2. A provision for election by pe:mittees of local advisory boards for each national for- est, when requested by 2 majority of the permittees. A representative of wildlife in- terests might be named to the boards by the State game commission. The advisory boards would make recommendations concerning terms, renewals, and reductions of grazing permits or establishing or modifying allot- ments. If the Secretary of Agriculture did not follow the recommendations, he would be required to furnish the local advisory board of his reasons in writing. The boards would be notified at least 30 days in ad- vance of any changes in regulations or policy and given a chance to make recommenda- tions. 3. A section authorizing the Secretary of Agriculture to issue grazing permits and re- newals for permits not exceeding 10 years. This is hatled by stockmen as a recognition of grazing as one of the basic uses of forest land. It permits the Agriculture Department to open the question of permit renewals at 10-year intervals. The omnibus bill, with the O'Mahoney amendments, would result in no radical de- partures in forest management, but would formalize, and in some cases remove, any question of legality in present procedures. It would recognize formally the advisory boards, though final authority would still rest with the Department of Agriculture. As expressed by Senator O'ManHoney, the conference between Chief Lyle F. Watts and Assistant Chief Granger of the Forest Service
1950 and the committee of stockmen “have formed @ pattern of cooperation * * * which a@ugurs well for the future.” The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment. If there be no further amendment to be offered, the question is on the engrossment of the amendments and the third reading of the bill. The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time. The bill was read the third time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question now is on the passage of the bill. The bill (H. R. 5839) was passed. Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma. I move that the Senate insist on its amend- ments, request a conference with the House thereon, and that the Chair ap- point the conferees on the part of the Senate. The motion was agreed to; and the Presiding Officer appointed Mr. ELLENpDER, Mr. Hoey, Mr, Houuanp, Mr. AIKEN, and Mr. Tye conferees on the part of the Senate. Mr. O’MAHONEY. Mr. President, I should add, now that the bill has been passed, that in addition to the amend- ments which have been agreed to, the Forest Service recommended, and the Secretary of Agriculture signed an order under the authority which he has under existing law, establishing a National Ad- visory Board of Appeals, to which per- mittees who may be dissatisfied may, upon written application, carry their ap- peals for consideration by the Board and for recommendation to the Secretary. I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Recorp at this point a statement which I issued on January 31, 1950, explaining the amendments which have just been adopted and the manncr in which they were developed. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Following conferences with Forest Service Officials and representatives of livestock in- terests using the national forests for grazing purposes, which started during the closing weeks of the first session of the Eighty-first Congress and continued during the recess and early weeks of the second session, a pro- gram designed to improve grazing conditions and administration of the national forests has been agreed upon. First is the establishment by Executive order, printed in the Fedcral Register of Jan- uary 25, 1950, of a National Forest Advisory Board of Appeals to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on appeals to him from the deci- sions of the Chief of the Forest Service in- volving any public use of the national forests. This Board shall be comprised of five mem- bers from any agencies within the Depart- ment of Agriculture except the Forest Serv- ice. It will be the duty of this Board to consider each appeal on its merits and fur- nish its advice snd recommendations to the Becretary. Conferences which I arranged last week between the Forest Service and a committee of stockmen representing cattle and sheep permittees, I am happy to say, have resulted in agreement on three additional important proposals, which I introduced today as amendments to H. R. 5839, the Granger bill, to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE The first amendment is a substitution for section 12 of the above bill and provides that, of the grazing fees collected in each national forest, 2 cents per animal month for sheep and 10 cents per animal month for other kinds of livestock, when appropriated by Con- gress, shall be available for range improve- ments in such forest, such as artificial revege- tation, the collection and purchase of seed, construction or maintenance of drift or divi- sion fences, bridges, corrals, driveways, and other range improvement, and the control of rodents and the eradication of poisonous plants, to protect and improve the forest ranges. The second amendment proposes a new section to the bill which establishes a local advisory board of not less than 3 nor more than 12 permittees for each national forest or administrative subdivision thereof when requested by a majority of the grazing per- mittees. This amendment uses the identical language proposed in a bill, 8 33 of the Eightieth Congress, by Senator McCarran, of Nevada, to establish local advisory boards to provide national forest grazing permittees a means for the expression of their recommen- dations. These boards are to be elected by the permittees and recognized by the Secre- tary of Agriculture as representing the graz- ing permittees of the national forest for which they are elected. A wildlife representative may also be appointed to such board by the State game commission to advise on wildlife problems. These boards are to meet at least once a year at a time fixed by the boards, and at other times determined by the mem- bers, or on call of the chairman, or of the Secretary of Agriculture. On the request of any affected party, the Secretary shall refer to these advisory boards for advice and rec- ommendations concerning terms, renewals, and reductions in a grazing permit or the establishment or modification of an individ- ual or community allotment. If the Secre- tary of Agriculture does not follow such rec- ommendations, he would be required to fur- nish the local advisory board, in writing, with his reasons At least 30 days prior to the issuance of any regulation by the Secretary of Agriculture concerning administration of grazing on national forests which modify existing policy or affect the preference of a permittee in the area, the local board for such area will be notified of the intention to take such action and be called upon for recommendations, and these boards may also at any time make recommendations to the Secretary concerning the administration of grazing, seasons of use, grazing capacity, and similar matters in their area. The third amendment which I introduced authorizes the Sccretary of Agriculture to issue grazing permits and renewals for pe- riods not exceeding 10 years I feel that the conferences between Chief Lyle F. Watts and Assistant Chief C M. Granger, on behalf of the Forest Service, and the committee of stockmen have been most successful. They have formed a pattern of cooperation between the Forest Service and the livestock industry which augurs well for the future. J B. Wilson, secretary, Wyoming Wool Growers Association; F. E Mollin, secretary, American National Live Stock Association; Vernon Metcalf, Nevada; J. M. Jones, secre- tary, National Wool Growers Association; Floyd Beach, permittee, Uncompahgre Forest, Colo.; Clarence Currey, permittee, Roosevelt Forest, Colo.; Everett Shuey, secretary, Mon- tana Wool Growers Association; Louis Hor- rell, chairman, Joint Livestock Committee; Frank Mockler, cattle permittee, Wyoming; Radford Hall, assistant secretary, American National Live Stock Association; and John Noh, chairman, forestry committee, National Wool Growers Association, were among the members of the livestock committee who have been working diligently upon this mat- 1795 ter here in Washington for the past 2 weeks. I feel that they have done an excellent piece of work. INTERNATIONAL CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT OF 1949 Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, in ac- cordance with the statement made by the majority leader at the last session, which was held on Friday of last week, that the next business to be taken up, after the passage of House bill 6839, which has just been acted upon, would be House bill 4406, Calendar No. 810, I now move that the Senate proceed to the consider- ation of House bill 4406. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, does the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island feel that a quorum call is neces- sary? Mr. GREEN. Ido not think so. The objections which have been voiced here- tofore have been overcome. I am sure no objection will be made to the consider- ation and passage of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Rhode Island. The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to consider the Dill (H. R. 4406) to provide for the settle- ment of certain claims of the Govern- ment of the United States on its own be- half and on behalf of Amcrican nation- als against foreign governments, which had been reported from the Committee on Foreign Relations with amendments. Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, House bill 4406 came over from the House, and was referred, together with a similar bill, to the Committee on Foreign Relations. A subcommittee of the Committee on Foreign Relations was appointed to con- sider the bill, and hearings were held. Finally, after being considered at several meetings, it was unanimously voted to report the bill favorably, with certain minor amendments. It now comes be- fore the Senate for action. The bill was reported by me on July 28, 1949, by direc- tion of the Foreign Relations Committee. Mr. President, the immediate purpose of the bill is to provide for the distribu- tion of a fund provided by the Yugoslav Government for claimants against that government, by reason of the taking in various ways of property of American citizens. A bloc sum of $17,000,000 was agreed upon, and that sum has becn ready since the time the fund was estab- lished, for distribution among the Amer- ican claimants. The bill sets up a commission of three, & commission similar to one which was set up in 1942 for the handling of claims by American citizens against Mexico. The bill not only sets up a com- mission to deal with the particular set- tlements of American claimants against Yugoslavia, but it further provides that similar action may be taken in regard to claims arising out of World War II, and which may be made in the future by American citizens against other govern- ments which are not enemy states. Mr. President, the $17,000,000 in ques- tion, or so much of it as can be proved to be due to American claimants, is greatly needed. I have received some pathetic letters from Americans practically all of
1796 whose property had been taken in one way or another, or, to use a more de- sirable term, lost in one way or another in the tragic days of the setting up of @ new government in Yugoslavia. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question at this time, or would the Senator rather proceed with his statement now, and yield for ques- tions later? Mr. GREEN. I am glad to yield to the Senator now. Mr. WHERRY. May I ask the distin- guished Senator from Rhode Island why the claims provided for in the bill are limited to claims by American citizens against Yugoslavia? Mr. GREEN. They are not. The commission is set up to deal with claims of Americans against other countries which are not enemy countries. Mr. WHERRY. Then why does there appear in line 21 on page 2 of the bill the expression “the term ‘Yugoslav Claims Agreement of 1948’ ’’? Mr. GREEN. Because a claims agree- ment has been reached with that one country. Similar agreements are being negotiated with other countries. It is necessary to have such a commission set up to take care of claims by American citizens against other nonenemy coun- tries. Mr. WHERRY. Will the claims con- sidered by such a commission include claims made by German nationals to whom the United States may owe money which may have been impounded by the Alien Property Custodian? Let us as- sume that the beneficiary of such a Ger- man nationalist may be an American boy whose mother lives in Germany. Does the bill include in its terms the right for such an American boy, or his German mother, to set up a claim against the United States Government? Mr. GREEN. No. The bill has simply to do with claims against friendly gov- ernments. Mr. WHERRY. individuals? Mr. GREEN. Well, yes; individual claims against the Yugoslav Government, or against any other friendly govern- ment. Mr. WHERRY. I understand the bill applies to claims against friendly gov- ernmexts, and that it would not extend to citizens of Germany, because Ger- Many was an enemy government in World War II, as well as World War I. But let us consider the case of a lad of German descent, who fought in the forces of the United States, and who at the time of the war was a citizen of the United States, but whose mother may live in Germany. Is any opportunity af- forded under the proposed legislation for recovery in such a case? Mr. GREEN. The settlement is a bloc settlement. In other words, it provides for a lump sum, that amount to cover all American citizens who have filed claims against Yugoslavia, or may file claims against Yugoslavia. Mr. WHERRY. I understand that, I will say to the Senator. I shall give the reason for my question. Recently several Senators joined in introducing a bill which dealt, as does the bill sponsored by the Senator from Rhode Island, with It does not apply to CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE claims by American citizens against friendly countries; but included in the proposed legislation was the proposal to take care of such a situation as I have just inquired about of the Senator from Rhode Island. I wonder why it would not be possible to offer an amendment at this time to include other American citi- zens who, it seems to me, are entitled to money which has been impounded by the Alien Property Custodian, but which be- longs to persons who live in countries which are not friendly countries. That is the point I was raising, and I think it a very important point. I fully un- derstand the point made by the Senator respecting claims against friendly coun- tries. But why should we not consider as well other claims by American citi- zens for money which has been im- pounded by the Alien Property Cus- todian, who now is in control of that money? Mr. GREEN. The Yugoslav claims agreement does not include claims against any other countries. It provides for a bloc settlement, and the United States undertakes to devote the money provided by that settlement to payments of claims on the part of Americans against Yugoslavia. Mr. WHERRY. I understand. Mr. GREEN. The payments must be made for such a purpose. Otherwise the money would be returned to Yugo- slavia. Mr. WHERRY. In other words, the bill applies only to claims coming under the Yugoslav Claims Agreement. Is that correct? Mr. GREEN. The bill provides for the Yugoslav Claims Agreement, but it also would set up a commission which could enter into agreements with other friendly countries respecting claims against them by American citizens. Mr. WHERRY. The bill provides for the establishment of a commission, and that commission shall now take care of payments to Americans who have claims against Yugoslavia, but shall also under- take investigation of claims by Amer- ican citizens against other friendly gov- ernments, and shalt undertake to enter into agreements with them similar to the Yugoslav Claims Agreement of 1948 between Yugoslavia and the United States? Mr. GREEN. That is correct. Mr. WHERRY. In other words, such an agreement would have to be nego- tiated between the United. States and Germany in order to include claimants against Germany? Mr. GREEN. It could not be nego- tiated with Germany, because Germany is an enemy country. Mr. WHERRY. I understand that the war is not over for all purposes, and for that reason Germany is still an enemy country. The Senator knows that there are claims of individuals in Ger- many which are just as legitimate as the claims covered by this bill, and which ought to be resolved in the same way. Mr. GREEN. But that would require settlement outside the scope of this bill. Mr. WHERRY. I understand that they are outside the scope of the pur- poses of the proposed act. I thank the Senator from Rhode Island. I see the FEBRUARY 14 point of the bill. However, we are going all over the map, to Yugoslavia and other countries, to do the very thing which I am talking about, and which we cannot do under the provisions of the proposed act for citizens of this country who may live in an unfriendly country. Mr. GREEN. That is correct. The amendments which were agreed upon by the Foreign Relations Commit- tee as a result of its hearings are enu- merated at the bottom of page 2 of the committee’s report. The most important amendment is the proviso with respect to future agrecments. It was at first felt that this provision might be applied in the present case, but it was not included in the agreement executed. We limited the improvement, if it may be called that, to future cases. The amendment reads as follows: Provided, however, That if any agrce- ment hereafter concluded between the Gov- ernment of the United States and a foreign government, of the character mentioned in section 4 (a) of this act, includes provisions for the settlement and discharge of claims of individuals who, at the time of nationall- zation or other taking, (1) were permanent residents of the United States and (2) had declared their intention to become citizens of the United States in conformity with the provisions of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended, such individuals shall, for the pur- poses of this act, be deemed “nationals of the United States” if they shall have acquired citizenship of the United States prior to the effective date of the relevant intergovern- mental settlement agreement. This provision apples not to the case of Yugoslavia, but to agreements which are to be negotiated in the future. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. GREEN. I yield. Mr. WHERRY. How many agree- ments does the Senator anticipate may be signed between the United States and other countrics in anticipation of such claims? Mr.GREEN. Idonot know how many other agreements are now pending. Mr. WHERRY. Are we negotiating to do with other countries what we are try- ing to do with Yugoslavia? Mr. GREEN Yes; similar agree- ments are in process of negotiation. Of course, the various executive agreements may differ somewhet. Mr. WHERRY. I understand, I am just trying to get an idea of the extent of the program, Mr. GREEN. There is at present an agreement, practically completed, be- tween the United States and Panama. I do not know what other agreements are pending at the present time. Mr. WHERRY. Does the Senator an- ticipate that there will be others? Mr. GREEN. I remember two other cases. An agreement with Czechoslo- vakia is one, and one with Poland is an- other. Mr. WHERRY. Does the Senator have any idea what amount of money is involved in the other agreements? Mr. GREEN. No, I have not. The $17,000,000 figure is merely an estimate, but it is founded on precedent. Mr. WHERRY. Estimates usually fall short of actual appropriations. I was wondering what the total amount of the
1950 liability might be. In this bill we are not only authorizing the agreement in- volved, but we are authorizing the Com- mission to settle claims under similar agreements which may be negotiated in the future, Is that correct? Mr. GREEN. That is correct. Mr. WHERRY. The Senator cannot give me any idea of the amount which might be involved in future appropria- tions? Mr. GREEN. I do not believe anyone can do that. That would depend on the individual claims and the extent of the claims, as well as the percentage of them which might be justiciable and the per- centage which might be well founded. Mr. WHERRY. We have already set- tled some of these claims with other countries, have we not? Mr. GREEN. I think not. Mr. WHERRY. Have not payments been made for damages sustained by seyeral other countries in Europe, which we arrived at by agreement of some kind? Mr. GREEN. This does not involve a payment by the United States. Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. GREEN. I yield. Mr. GEORGE. This does not involve @ payment by the United States. It con- templates payment out of a lump sum, agreed upon with the Government of Yugoslavia, to American citizens whose property was expropriated, or confis- cated, or nationalized, in Yugoslavia. Mr. WHERRY. None of the money represented by the $17,000,000 fund is to be appropriated by the United States? Mr. GEORGE. No; none of itis. The only obligation incurred by the United States is in connection with the author- ization of the creation of a commission to negotiate similar settlements with other countries, such as Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, or any other country which may likewise have confiscated the property of American citizens. Mr. WHERRY. The Commission is authorized to make a study of the claims and enter into an agreement as to the amounts to which Americans living in a certain country are entitled? Mr. GEORGE. That is a process of long negotiation between representa- tives of the State Department and rep- resentatives of foreign governments. When they arrive at the amounts which our citizens are entitled to be paid, or the amounts which the other country is willing to pay to our citizens, a com- mission will be established for the pur- pose of administering the fund. In the case of Yugoslavia, any money which is not paid out to American claimants will, of course, go back to the Yugo- slavian Government. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the distinguished Senator from Rhode Island yield so that I may ask a question of the distinguished Senator from Georgia? Mr. GREEN. I yield. Mr. WHERRY. Are the administra- tion costs to be paid out of the $17,000,- 000 fund? Mr. GEORGE. I think so. Mr. GREEN. The costs of adminis- tration will be 3 percent of.cach claim, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Mr. GEORGE. Each claim will bear its pro rata share of the cost of admin- istration. Mr. GREEN. I might say that that represents a decided bargain, because in connection with previous agreements the administrative cost was 5 percent. Mr. WHERRY. I thank the Senator. Iam always in favor of bargains for the American taxpayers. Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for one more state- ment? Mr. GREEN. I yield. Mr. THOMAS of Utah. The question was asked as to how many of these claims might arise in the future. My hope is that many more of them will be coming in. It must be realized that when revo- lutionary governments come into power we cannot always take care of the inter- ests of our people. Here we have an ex- ample of a nation which is willing to assume its obligation to pay for property which that Government confiscated. It is to be hoped that we may have many more such agreements in the future. Mr. WHERRY. Does the Senator see any objection to the Commission’s going into other claims, such as were men- tioned in the discussion between the jun- jor Senator from Nebraska and the Sen- ator from Rhode Island—for example, claims of citizens of the United States with respect to which money has been impounded by the Alien Property Cus- todian? Why could not the Commission go into all such claims? Mr. THOMAS of Utah. The proce- dure in the case of the Alien Property Custodian is entirely different. Mr. WHERRY. I understand. This is a Commission to settle claims to be paid to people in a certain country. Mr. THOMAS of Utah. No; to be paid to American citizens in this country. Mr. WHERRY. Or wherever the citi- zens are. Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Yes. The more we study this problem the easier it is to keep things on a peaceful keel. At the same time the Senator from Ne- braska must know that because of the difference in conditions in various coun- tries the negotiation processes must be individually considered with respect to each country. Mr. DARBY. Mr. President, the sen- jor Senator from Kansas [Mr. SCHOEP- PEL] has been excused from attendance on the sessions of the Senate through Thursday, February 16. At the request of the senior Senator from Kansas, I ask unanimous consent to have printed at this point in the body of the Recorp a statement prepared by him regarding the bill now under consideration, to- gether with an article entitled “Nomads’ Fraud,” written by Tris Coffin and pub- lished in the Washington Times-Herald of August 3, 1949. There being no objection, the state- ment and article were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: STATEMENT OF SENATOR ANDREW F’, SCHOEPPEL Mr. President, I obtained consent to be absent from the Senate from February 10, through Thursday, February 16, and I have been advised that there is a possibility that 1797 during my absence H. R. 4406 will be called for consideration in the Senate. I have prepared a statement that sets forth some of the points that have been raised and presented to me for consideration. I feel that this information should be made available to the Senate before final vote in order that in the final consideration of this measure an opportunity might be afforded to clarify some phases of the legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the state- ment be filed in the body of the Recorp and that an article entitled “Nomads’ Fraud,” by Tris Coffin, published in the Washington Times-Herald under date of August 8, 1949, be inserted in the body of the Recorp follow- ing my statement. Fresruary 9, 1950. STATEMENT Subject’ H.R 4406, an act to apply for the settlement of certain claims of the Gov- ernment of the United States on its own behalf and on behalf of American na- tionals against foreign governments. 1. HISTORY IN THE HOUSE H. R. 4406, in the House of Representatives, was a controversial bill. A motion to re- commit, for which a roll call was demanded, Tesulted in yeas 151, and nays 177. During the debate on the bill several serious ques- tions were raised concerning its provisions, Adequate answers to these questions aro not found in the Senate committee hearings or in the report of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which reported the bill. 2. TERMS OF THE ACT The provisions of H. R. 4406 are well out- lined in the report of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations beginning on page 4. Certain aspects of the bill should be brought particularly to mind. It calls for the estab- lishment of the International Claims Com- mission set up entirely within the Depart- ment of State to distribute funds set aside for satisfaction of Yugoslav claims. The de- cisions of this Commission, which operates within the Department of State, “shall be final and conclusive on all questions of law and fact and not subject to review by the Secretary of State or any other department, agency or establishment of the United States or by any court, by mandamus or other- wise.” Another provision of the bill is that the Commission shall exist to settle Yugoslav claims and similar claims settlements which may be made in the future with Poland, Czechoslovakia, or other nations. Although the Commission can be terminated by the President when its immediate task at hand is completed, it also may be reinstated by the President at any time when the need arises, without further action by the Congress. The bill provides that a corporation is a person under the proposed law providing ‘20 percent or more of any class of outstanding securities which were at such time (the time of the nationalization or other taking of property) owned by individuals of the United Btates.” It is conceivable, as the Senate committee points out, that the remaining 80 percent of the corporation might be held by foreign nationals, resident or nonresident of the United States. 3. BACKGROUND OF THE SETTLEMENT WITH YUGOSLAVIA Yugoslavia made a settlement with the United States on July 19, 1948, providing a lump-sum payment by the Yugoslav Govern- ment of $17,000,000 to be divided in satisfac- tion of claims of American nationals which allegedly amounted to some 840,000,000. The claims on behalf of American na- tionals against Yugoslavia grow out of poli- cies and actions of the postwar Communist Government of that country. These are, principally: an agrarian reform law of August 1925, a law of December 6, 1946, nationalizing
1798 basic industries; a law of May 20, 1948, nationalizing small-business enterprises; & law of June 23, 1948, nationalizing virtually all remaining property in Yugoslavia. At the time this settlement was made, the United States Government had 846,800,000 in gold held as frozen assets of the Yugoslav Government in the Federal Reserve Bank in New York. The gold had been brought by submarine to the United States early in the war to prevent its falling into the hands of the Nazis. We permitted the entry of the gold into this country as a gesture of help to a friendly country about to be invaded. Subsequently Yugoslavia was taken over by the Commu- nists who presented their claim to the gold. While we held the $47,000,000 of gold as- sets in New York, the State Department set- tled American claims of approximately that amount for $17,000,000 and released the bal- ance to Tito. The action must have been inspired by a desire of the Department of State to aid the Tito stand against Moscow. The Department of State recently has en- couraged the World Bank to make a §$20,- 000,000 loan to Yugoslavia of which the first installment has already been issued accord- ing to press reports of October 11, 1949. On August 17, it was announced that Tito’s regime would be allowed to purchase a steel mill in the United States. This settlement, which released more than 560 percent of frozen gold assets to the Yugoslav Government in- stead of applying it to the settlement of American claims, may have been prompted in part by a desire to put gold in Tito’s hands a@s soon as possible. Subsequent to the American settlement, the British have had to settle with Yugo- slavia at considerably less than 25 cents on the dollar for British property that was nationalized by the Communists. The French reportedly are now settling for 4,500,000 their property which they valued at some $60,000,000 to 8100,000,000. 4. BENEFICIARIES UNDER THE BILL The United States Government will bene- fit from the bill directly in very minor de- gree. The United States has claims against the Yugoslav Government for a jeep and two airplanes, There is not much information in the hear- ings either in the House or in the Senate as to who other beneficiaries will be. A charge has been made by the Honorable LINDLEY BrEckwortH, of Texas, of the House, that much of the $17,000,000 will go to several large corporations. Among these are Ameri- can corporations such as Socony-Vacuum with a claim of 87,000,000 to @11,000,000, and the American-Yugoslav Electric Co., which has a claim for $3,500,000. One witness told the House committee that he had heard that there are six or seven million-dollar claims, One of the beneficiaries is a Swiss corpora- tion, which claims because more than 20 percent of the corporation is owned by Amer- ican citizens. Almost no information has been presented to the Congress about the exact ownership of this corporation and whether 80 percent is owned by foreign nationals, Mr. BEcKworrtH also charged that stock of some of the corporations that will claim a part of the $17,000,000 was bought up for speculation purposes after the property was nationalized by the Communists. In the House hearings, on page 71, Hon. A. A, Rii- corr, of Connecticut, declared: “I have a sit- uation which has been called to my attention where a group of Americans acquired ap- proximately a $17,000,000 interest for $20,000 plus a contingent payment of $260,000. There must be many bona fide claimants who will come before the State Department Commission if this bill passes, but the Con- gress has not been presented information on who these claimants are or what the nature of their claim is. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE 5. RELATION TO THE POINT 4 PROGRAM It has been argued in the House that this bill sets up a general pattern for confiscation of property of American nationals by foreign governments. If this bill is passed, the Claims Commission established will distrib- ute the Yugoslav settlement which the State Department has made and also any settle- ment that may be made with Poland and Czechoslovakia, both of which now are pend- ing. Claims against Czechoslovakia total about $8,000,000 growing out of nationals and other taking of American property interests. Similar claims against Poland total $175 ,000,000. The Senate will be asked this session to vote on a bill guaranteeing American inves- tors in foreign countries against loss of prop- erty through confiscation by foreign govern- ments, Asa part of the point 4 program the Export-Import Bank would issue such guar- anties to investments made abroad. The De- partment of State, holding $40,000,000 of as- sets Of Yugoslavia, allowed the Communist government there to confiscate American property of approximately that value and then settled for $17,000,000. If this proce- dure is followed in future negotiations with foreign nations under the point 4 program, the losses through Export-Import Bank guar- anties could prove tremendous. The failure of the Department to get a better settlement when it had the possibility of receiving a 100-percent settlement might well be noted when point 4 1s considered. 6. THE CLAIMS COMMISSION In the House there was serious objection raised to establishing a Claims Commission within the Department of State from whose decisions no appeal could be made. Such a procedure was not followed in settling the Mexican claims or in any other previous Claims distribution. It was proposed in the House that this settlement be distributed to claimants through the Court of Claims, pre- sumably by an amendment extending the ju- risdiction of that court. It was also proposed that the War Claims Commission might han- dle the settlement. In the original bill the Claims Commission was to have been named by the Secretary. The Senate has amended it to have the Com- mission named by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. 7. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS Settlement made by the Secretary of State with Yugoslavia is an accomplished fact about which the Senate can do nothing. Discussion of the terms of the settlement on the Senate floor will not in any way help bona fide Amer- ican Claimants whose property has been con- fiscated by a Communist dictator. Construc- tive criticism might prove helpful as a de- terrent to similar action in the future by the Department of State. It is imperative at this time that the legis- lation set-up for distributing the funds to claimants shall be as sound as possible. This bill has several aspects which should have full discussions: (a) Should the claims be settled entirely within the Department of State, which made this original bad settlement, without any right of appeal to a court of justice? (b) Would it not be advisable to have this settlement distributed in a regular court of law or by @ claims commission from which appeal could be taken? (c) Is it wise in legislation of this type to create a commission which the President in the future may call into being without con- sulting Congress, whenever he needs such a commission to distribute future settlements which the State Department may make? (ad) Would it be advisable to recommit this bill to committee for further hearings in order that the State Department may present full information as to the number of claimants, the nature of the claims, and the status of their citizenship? FEBRUARY 14 [From the Washington Times-Herald of August 3, 1949] Nomans’ Fravp (By Tris Coffin) A new racket in misery is lurking behind a $17,000,000 claim bill in the House. On the surface, everything is on the up and up. The Yugoslav Government has agreed to pay $17,000,000 to American in- vestors whose properties in that country were taken over by the Communist govern- ment of Marshal Tito. But hard-hitting young Representative LINDLEY BECK WORTH, of Texas, was curious. He dug around and discovered that under the bill tossed to Congress most of the dough would go to lawyers, international specula- tors who bought up the claims, and a few big United States corporations. For example, one allegedly American con- cern, scheduled to get a $5,000,000 slice of the Yugoslav compensation, is, in reality, owned by Swiss interests. Another wad would go to wealthy Yugo- slavs who raced away to a safe haven in the United States when Hitler was pound- ing on the gates. Most of them, BEcKworTH discovered, did not become naturalized Americans until very recently, 50 as to col- lect the compensation. The international sharpies went to work as soon as the word leaked out that Yugo- slavia was going to pay back the $17,000,- 000 in claims. They bought up claims for as little as a penny to the dollar, Brcx- WworTH acidly described these operators as citizens of no country. BeckworrtH also discovered that under the terms of the claim bill, lawyers could collect as much as 60 percent. And this is only the beginning. Claims are in against Poland, Czechoslovakia, and other communized nations in the east. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will proceed to state the commit- tee amendments, The amendments of the Committee on Foreign Relations were, on page 2, line 7, after the word “aliens”, to insert a colon and the following proviso: “Pro- vided, however, That if any agreement hereafter concluded between the Gov- ernment of the United States and a foreign government, of the character mentioned in section 4 (a) of this act, includes provisions for the settlement and discharge of claims of individuals who, at the time of nationalization or other taking, (1) were permanent resi- dents of the United States, and (2) had declared their intention to become citi- zens of the United States in conformity with the provisions of the Nationality Act of 1940, as amended, such individuals shall, for the purposes of this act, be deemed ‘nationals of the United States’ if they shall have acquired citizenship of the United States prior to the effective date of the relevant intergovernmental settlement agreement”; on page 3, line 5, after the word “‘persons”, to strike out “who have been admitted to the bar of the highest court of any State, Terri- tory, or the District of Columbia,”; in line 7, after the word “the’’, to strike out “Secretary of State” and insert “Presi- dent by and with the advice and consent of the Senate’; in line 9, after the word “the”, to strike out “Secretary of State” and insert “President”; in line 17, after the word “‘the”, to strike out ‘Secretary of State” and insert “President”; on page 4, line 10, after the word “The”, where it occurs the second time, to strike out “Secretary of State” and insert ‘‘Presi-
1950 dent”; on page 11, line 12, after the word “Administrative”, to strike out “Pro- cedures” and insert ‘Procedure’; in line 13, after the numerals “1946”, to insert “except as otherwisé specifically pro- vided by this act”; in line 22, after the word “act”, to insert “for transmission to the foreign government concerned”; on page 12, line 8, after the word “sec- tion”, to strike out “7” and insert “8”; in line 16, after the word “section”, to strike out “7” and insert “8”; on page 18, line 11, after the word “paragraphs”, to strike out “(4) and (5)” and insert ‘“(3) and (4)”; on page 15, line 9, after the word “section”, to strike out “6” and in- sert “7”; in line 18, after the word “sec- tion”, to strike out “6” and insert “7; and on page 16, line 6, after the word section”, to strike out “6” and insert The amendments were agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment. Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, let me inquire for my own information whether the clerk has stated the amendment which I read. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Yes; all amendments have been stated and agreed to. If there is no further amendment to be offered, the question is on the en- grossment of the amendments and third reading of the bill. The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third time. The bill was read the third time. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the question is, Shall it pass? The bill (H. R. 4406) was passed. CALL OF THE ROLL Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for a quorum call be rescinded and that fur- ther proceedings under the call be sus- pended. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. CREATION OF STANDING COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS Mr, LUCAS. Mr. President, the un- finished business, as everyone knows, is Senate bill 75, authorizing the construc- tion, operation, and maintenance of a dam and incidental works in the main stream of the Colorado River at Bridge Canyon, together with certain appurte- nant dams and canals, and for other pur- poses. Apparently no Senators desire to address the Senate upon that measure, and in accordance with the agreement I have made with the minority leader, I ask unanimous consent to lay aside tem- porarily Senate bill 75, and to proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 596, Senate Resolution 58, to amend the Sen- ate rules by creating a standing Com- mittee on Small Business. This is in line with the agreement which has here- tofore been made by the majority leader with the minority leader, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE - The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the resolution by title. The Lxcisiative Currx. A resolution (8, Res. 58) to amend the Senate Rules by creating a standing Committee on Small Business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the present consideration of the resolution? There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the resolution (8. Res. 58) to amend the Senate Rules by creating a standing Committee on Small Business. LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished majority leader for making Senate Resolution 58 the un- finished business. I understand he will make an announcement relative to when it is to be taken up. Mr. LUCAS. The Senator {s correct. Mr. President, when we recess, we shall recess to Thursday next, and I should like to make an announcement which I hope Senators will read in the Recorp, because it is important. Following the disposition of Senate Resolution 58 we shall then proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 563, Senate bill 1498, to amend the Natural Gas Act, approved June 21, 1938, as amended. This is something which was not included in the agreement I made originally with the distinguished Sena- tor from Nebraska. I have assured him we will not vote on the bill under any circumstances before late Monday after- noon. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. I yleld to the Senator from Nebraska. Mr. WHERRY. Of course, I want to comply with the majority leader’s re- quest, and I appreciate very much the announcement which has been made that Senate bill 1498 will be the order of business after Senate Resolution 58. But the majority leader realizes also that a Senator may object to taking up the bill by unanimous consent, even though the Senator asks it, and that in such event it would be necessary for the Senator to move to take it up. Mr. LUCAS. The Senator is correct about that. ASSISTANCE TO STATE AGENCIES ADMINISTERING LABOR LAWS Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. I yield. Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina. Mr. President, I want to ask the majority leader and also the minority leader a question about a bill that is on the cal- endar. I do not want to take up the bill at this time. I understand we have had an agreement that we shall take up only certain bills. But I am anxious to have this bill considered at some time in the future. I refer to Calendar 854, Senate bill 1439; to provide for assist- ance to State agencies administering Jabor laws in their efforts to promote, establish, and maintain safe workplaces and practices in industry, thereby reduc- ing human suffering and financial loss and increasing production through safe- guarding available manpower. I merely 1799 wish at this time to call the bill to the attention of the majority leader and also of the minority leader, so that, if pos- sible, at some future date, we may set a time when the bill will be taken up. Mr. LUCAS. I appreciate the interest ‘of the Senator from South Carolina in the measure, about which I know some- thing. I concur in the Senator’s view that it is meritorious, and the Senator has the assurance of the majority leader that it will be taken up in due course. ADMITTANCE OF STATE DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES TO CAPITOL PRESS GALLERIES—EDITORIALS FROM THE EVENING STAR AND THE NEW YORK TIMES Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, I have noted that effort has been made by the State Department to open the facilities of the Senate Press Gallery to its news- gathering representatives. Although it is indicated by the news- Papers today that this effort has been postponed, I wish at this time to take the position that the standing committee of correspondents should firmly reject any such move by the State Department or any such move by the State Department or any other agency of the Government or any private organization not directly engaged in the dissemination of news in the purest sense of the word. Likewise, I hope the Committee on Rules and Administration and the Senate will reject any such application if an ap- peal should be taken to either of those bodies. If the news representatives of the State Department are allowed the privileges of the Senate Press Gallery, then all the propaganda experts of every Government agency will be entitled to the same priv- flege. This would require extensive ad- ditions to the Senate Press Gallery, but my principal concern is with respect to the precedent which would be estab- lished. The Senate Press Gallery is set apart for the convenience of the free press of America. It is a free press that we have, and a free press is one of the foundation stones upon which our democracy 1s founded. It should not be open to any agency of the Government, just as it should not be open to any private organ- ization that has for its purpose the dis- semination of propaganda. I ask to have inserted in the Recorp as a part of my remarks a very able edi- torial from the Washington Star of yes- terday, and the column written by Mr. Arthur Krock in the New York Times of today. There being no objection, the editorial and column were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: {From the Washington Star of February 13, 1950] Ann Now—A “Firth Estate’’? It is to be hoped that the Standing Com- mittee of Correspondents—newspapermen chosen by their brethren to administer the Capitol Press Galleries—will stand firm against the State Department’s application for admittance to these galleries of its own news-gathering representatives. For if the State Department can present @ rational thesis for the admittance of its news gatherers, there is no logical ground on which tu turn down the propaganda and
1800 public-relations agents of other Government departments who may be expected to seek identical privileges. * There are more of them now than there are accredited press repre- sentatives in the galleries. Perhaps the State Department, in its rela- tively new undertaking of distributing propa- ganda on a world-wide basis, should have its own reporters at the Capitol. But let us keep them out of the press gallery, up to this time reserved for bona fide representa- tives of the independent newspaper press of the United States. Let the Government, if it is committed to the business of gathering and dispatching news for propaganda pur- poses, set up its own gallery, appropriately labeled “Government propaganda gallery.” The press galleries stand as a symbol of the Fourth Estate—separate from and inde- pendent of Government. Once the infiltra- tion of Government agents begins, this symbol is endangered. It 1s worth pre- serving. [From the New York Times of February 14, 1950] A Press GALLekY Is ONE or It ISN'T (By Arthur Krock) WasHiNGTON, February 13.—The renewed attempt of the State Department to have Members of its own publications staff ac- credited to the press galleries of the Capitol reveals a misconception which is typical of these abnormal times. The danger line, which even in wartime must be guarded if a free and independent press is to be main- tained as conceived in the basic design of this Republic, has often become a blur to representatives of Government, and this is the latest instance. The State Department, with the approval of Congress and apparently most of the pub- lic, uses tax dol’ars to engage in certain press and radio activities. Part of these are for the purpose of distributing factual informa- tion to the American Government in the field, and part are for propaganda purposes among foreign peoples. The entire project is accepted generally as a function of modern government, made valuable or even necessary by the threat of international communism. To achieve this project the State Depart- ment is a subscriber to various publications, and to the news tickers on which events, especially those in Washington, are unrolled as they occur. “hese ticker reports are, however, available to the Department as an information service only; its reportorial and editorial staffs (it has them) are not al- lowed to put this material in the depart- mental press or on its radio by the terms of contracts with the Associated Press and the United Press. Hence this staff must itself confirm the accuracy of what it reads in the newspapers and on the tickers and get such other items as may be thought required. For these reasons, the Department sub- mits, its news-gathering processes lag be- hind those of the contemporary press and it is often late with its publications. These ticker reports, however, are available to the Department for use as wireless dispatches in its fleld publications only; they may not be used in the Voice of America according to the terms of the contract with press asso- ciations. Hence the editorial and reportorial staffs of this enterprise must, it is com- plained, collect and verify much news on its own. THE ADMISSION STANDARDS This seemed so plain to the committee of reporters who manage the galleries for the Senate and the House that the first re- quest of the State Department for member- ship therein was rejected. But now the plea has been renewed; there are to be hearings before the committee next month; and, if the original decision stands, the State De- partment can appeal to the Senate and House, which have the power to overrule it. - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE The press galleries, of course, are the prop- erty of Congress as much as the public and diplomatic reservations, etc., and backers of the State Department's application find it extraordinary that this particular Govern- ment area should be barred from representa- tives of another branch of Government, going about the public’s business, and preserved for the exclusive use of representatives of a private industry. That is as far as they can see the issue, which amounts to not seeing it at all. To begin with, the managing committee of correspondents requires for admission that applicants shall establish these things: Their principal income is derived from news cor- respondence designed for publication in newspapers entitled to second-class mailing privileges; the applicant is not engaged in paid publicity or promotion work; is not concerned with any claim before Congress or before any other Government unit and will not be; and is not a lobbyist for anything or will become one. These regulations were set up to assure that the special facilities for getting infor- mation about public matters at the Capitol which Congress has provided to that end shall be used by none but members of the press who are concentrating on that task alone and have no private or official interests to serve. That is the historical origin of the press gallery in parliamentary nations, and it is obvious that no Government employee, however similar or commendable his assign- ment, comes within it. To admit the 1e- porters of the State Department would re- quire a new set of rules under which the gal- leries should be equally available to em- ployees of all units of the Government. And if the State Department reporters were ad- mitted under any twisted construction of the rules, that would be the logical development, also. THE FOURTH ESTATE The press gallery was established in the House of Commons as the public’s window on the proceedings of Parliament. The State Department's proposal is for a complete and drastic revision of this objective, which Ma- caulay, in his essay on Hallam’s constitu- tional history, described as follows: “If the Commons [whose privileges in 1642 all London rose in arms to defend] were to suffer the Lords to amend money bills we do not believe the people would care one straw about the matter. * * * We doubt whether a surrender of their [Commons] constitutional rights would excite half so much dissatisfaction as the exclusion of strangers from a single important discussion. The gallery in which the reporters sit has be- come a fourth estate of the realm. * * * Publication of the debates * * * is now regarded by many persons as a safeguard, tantamount * * * to all the rest to- gether.” A press gallery infiltrated by government is not the same thing. RESIGNATION OF LEWIS L. STRAUSS FROM ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, the Nation suffered a great loss in the resignation of Lewis L. Strauss as a member of the Atomic Energy Commission. In my judgment, Admiral Strauss has performed a preeminently notable serv- ice in charting the course of the Atomic Energy Commission, one of the most difficult assignments that has been given to any Government official. He is a man of great ability, high patriotism, and in- defatigable energy. He served 5 years in the Navy, where he rose to the rank of rear admiral, and his contribution to the Nation’s welfare both in the Navy and as a member of the Atomic Energy Com- mission places him on the very high level FEBRUARY 14 of those who have given great national service in a period of crisis, such as we have gone through in the past 10 years. I am very proud of the fact that Lewis L. Strauss is a Virginian. I agree with the Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch that he is one of the most distinguished of living Virginians. I ask unanimous consent to insert in the body of the REcorD, as a part of my remarks, an editorial from the Times- Dispatch, entitled “A Notable Vir- ginian.” There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: A NOTABLE VIRGINIAN Lewis L. Strauss, one of the most distin- guished of living Virginians, is entitled to resign his membership on the Atomic Energy Commission, after undergoing more than 3 years of strain and overwork as a member of that body. His service there followed 6 ycars in the Navy, where he rose to the rank of rear admiral. President Truman's decision to proceed with the manufacture of the H bomb ap- parently was in part due to the urging of AEC member Strauss. This is only the lat- est example of the remarkable public service performed by this remarkable man, who 18 still only 54. He attended the public schools in Rich- mond, and although he did not go to college, he was elected last year to the presidency of the world famous Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, N J. He is one of the Nation's leading bankers, having risen to a partnership in the New York firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. at the age of 33. He left Rich- mond in May 1917, at the age of 21 years for Washington, and soon became secretary to Herbert Hoover. He remained Mr. Hoov- er's secretary during the period when the President-to-be was directing relief activities for multitudes of starving peoples overseas. His services in the recent war were so con- spicuous that he was awarded various decora- tions and citations by both the Army and the Navy. He was already the recipient of decorations from half a dozen foreign governments. It was his physics textbook at old John Marshall High School, when he was a student there, which aroused the interest of Lewis Strauss in science. As a result, he was in- strumental years later in the construction of a laboratory at California Institute of Tech- nology for research in the fleld of atomic energy. His appointment to the Atomic Energy Commission by President Truman was the natural outgrowth of his long-time interest in the latest atomic developments. Mr. Strauss has also been preeminent 4s a lay religious leader, having been president of Congregation Emanu-El, in New York. He is likewise a foremost patron of music and the arts, and is a director both of the Metropolitan Opera, in New York, and the Virginia Museum of Fine Arts, in Richmond. Although he is hale and vigorous, and ap- parently a long way from retirement, Mr. Strauss’ admirers and friends in Virginia are glad to note that he has a country estate near Brandy Station, Culpepper County. If he doesn’t retire eventually to his old home town of Richmond, Richmonders will count on him to settle no farther away than Culpepper. RECESS TO THURSDAY Mr, LUCAS. Mr. President, I move that the Senate stand in recess until Thursday next at 12 o’clock noon. The motion was agreed to; and (at 1 o’clock and 51 minutes p. m.) the Senate took a recess until Thursday, February 16, 1950, at 12 o’clock meridian.
1950 NOMINATIONS Executive nominations received by the Senate February 14 (legislative day of January 4), 1950: DIPLOMATIC AND ForEIGN SERVICE David McK. Key, of Tennessee, a Foreign Service officer of the class of career minis- ter, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Burma. INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION James K. Knudson, of Utah, to be an Inter- state Commerce Commissioner for the re- mainder of the term expiring December 31, 1953, vice Carroll Miller, deceased. Richard F, Mitchell, of Iowa, to be an Inter- state Commerce Commissioner for a term expiring December 31, 1956. (Reappoint- ment.) Unrrep Status Districr JuDGE William 5. Steckler, of Indiana, to be United States district judge for the southern dis- trict of Indiana, vice Hon. Robert C. Baltzell, retired. ASSOCIATE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT, TERRITORY or Hawai Hon. Edward A. Towse, of Hawaii, to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, Ter- ritory of Hawali, vice Hon. Albert M. Cristy, deceased. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuespay, Fesruary 14, 1950 The House met at 12 o’clock noon. Dr. Leonard R. Sutton, pastor, First Methodist Church, Rantoul, Il., offered the following prayer: Eternal Father God, when the whole world is wrestling with giant fears and frustrations, and men’s hearts are failing them because of the terrifying possibili- ties of national and racial destruction, give to our leaders and statesmen such farsighted vision and courage that the way of truth and freedom shall have a new birth. Help us to continue to believe in the high destiny of this great Nation. Make vital again the hopes and aspirations of men who dreamed, lived, fought, and struggled for a better way of life. Help us to preserve this heritage. Help us to continue to believe that the ultimate destiny of mankind is not in the hands of men of fear, hate, arrogance, and might, but in the hands of men of good will and faith. Give us patience not only with those who do not understand us, but give us patience with ourselves. Help us to hear what the centuries are saying against the hours of selfishness, hatred, and greed. Give us a courage to work and labor for enduring values—values that will not mock us in years to come, Bless these men, our Representatives, who must make decisions, who are often criticized and maligned unfairly. Make them fearless of the right, but fearful ’o the betrayal of their sacred trust. Save us from cheap politics and give us a vision of our responsibility for the well-being of our entire Nation; save us from sectional animosities and strife. Extend Thy rule over human hearts. Hasten the coming of Thy kingdom on earth and give us wisdom as we labor for it; let not despair rule or crush our CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE spirits. Forgive us of stupidity, error, and sin, and help us to know that right- eousness exalts a nation, but sin is a reproach to any people. Where Thou hast made us bearers of the torch of liberty, help us to keep ‘it such that it may impart light to those that despair in this day of confusion. Amen. The Journal of the proceedings of yes- terday was read and approved. SWEARING IN OF MEMBER The SPEAKER laid before the House the following communication from the Clerk of the House, which was read: Frsrvuary 10, 1950. The honorable the SPEAKER, House of Representatives. Sm: A certificate of election in due form of law showing the election of WiILLiam B. WIDNALL as a Representative-elect to the Eighty-first Congress from the Seventh Con- . gressional District of New Jersey to fill the vacancy caused by the resignation of J. Par- nell Thomas is on file in this office. Very truly yours, RALPH R, ROBERTS, Clerk of the House of Representatives, Representative-elect WILLIAM  B. WIDNALL presented himself at the bar of the House and took the oath of office. CALL OF THE HOUSE Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that there is no quo- rum present. The SPEAKER. Evidently no quorum is present. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I move a Call of the House. A call of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the fol- lowing Members failed to answer to their names: [Roll No. 43] Abbitt Dolliver Johnson Addonizio Dondero Jonas Allen, Calif. Donohue Jones, Ala. Allen, Ill. Douglas Jones, N.C. Barden Eaton Judd Barrett, Pa. Eberharter Kean Barrett, Wyo. Elliott Kearney Bates Elston Kearns Battle Engel, Mich. Kee Bland Fallon Kelley, Pa. Bolton, Ohio Fenton Kelly, N Y. Bonner Ford Kennedy Bosone Fulton Keogh Boykin Furcolo Kerr Brehm Gamble King Brown, Ga. Garmatz Kirwan Brown, Ohto Gary Klein Buckley, N.Y. Gavin Kunkel Bullwinkle Gilmer Lane Burke Goodwin Lanham Burton Gore Latham Byrne,N Y. Gorski LeFevre Byrnes, Wis. Gossett Lichtenwalter Canfield Graham Linehan Cannon Green Lodge Cavalcante Gwinn Lovre Celler Hall, Lyle Chiperfield Leonard W. McCulloch Christopher Halleck McDonough Chudoft Hand Mc@rath Clemente Harden McGregor Combs Harvey Macy Cooley Hays, Ohto Mahon Corbett Heffernan Martin, Iowa Coudert Heller Martin, Maas, Crawford Herter Mason Davenport Hill Merrow Davies, N. Y. Hobbs Meyer Davis, Tenn, Hoeven Miller, Md. Dawson Hoffman, Til. Miller, Nebr. DeGraffenried Jackson, Calif. Morgan Delaney James Murphy Denton Javits Nicholson Dingell Jenison Nixon Dollinger Jennings O'Toole Pace Rodino Stanley Patten Rogers, Mass, Stockman Pfeifer Roosevelt Taber Joseph L. Badlak Talie Pfeiffer, Sadowski Taylor William L. St. George Teague Philbin Sanborn Thomas Phillips, Calif. Saylor Wadsworth Phillips, Tenn. Scott, Hardie Wagner Plumley Scott, Walsh Potter Hugh D., Jr. Weichel Poulson Shafer Werdel Powell Sheppard Wickersham Quinn Short Wilson, Ind. Rains Sikes Wilson, Tex. Reed, Dl, Simpson, Ii. Withrow Reed, N. ¥. Sims ‘Wood Rhodes Smathers Woodhouse Ribicoff Smith, Ohio Zablocki Riehlman Staggers The SPEAKER. On this roll call 242 Members have answered to their names, @ quorum. ‘ By unanimous consent, further pro- ceedings under the call were dispensed with. JAMES M. CURLEY Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts? There was no objection. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I know the double tragedy that last Sat- urday visited the family of our former colleague, James M. Curley, of Massa- chusetts, is keenly regretted by all of my colleagues, for within a period of 14 hours death took his only daughter, Mary Cur- ley Donnelly, and one of his three re- maining sons, Leo F. Curley. It is not only a sad, but a terrible blow to our friend and former colleague, but with that faith and fortitude that he has always displayed, and in his intense grief, he turns to God for consolation, saying he “does not question God’s will to take a life away.” His daughter, Mary Curley Donnelly, unusually gifted, was very close to her father. She was an adviser to her father and for years past took an active part in his campaigns. She was loyal to her friends. She was kind to all and generous to the poor. His son, Leo Curley, had already estab- lished a reputation for ability and for honorable and constructive public serv- ice. He had a great future ahead of him. James M. Curley has had a long and honorable career in public life. Some years ago I properly termed him as “the mayor of the poor.” Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield to the gentleman from Pennsylvania. Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, I join with my colleague, the distinguished majority Jeader, in expressing our deep regret at this shocking tragedy to the former mayor of Boston. To have a father lose one child is heart rending, indeed, but that within 1 day this blow should fall twice upon a parent is shocking in ex- cess. I extend my sympathies to the bereaved parent and his loved ones. Mr. McCORMACK. I thank the gen- tleman very much. Mr. HUBER. Mr. Speaker, wil] the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield to gentleman from Ohio. the
1802 Mr. HUBER. I want to join our dis- tinguished majority leader in expressing sympathies to the Curley family. I real- ize anything we may say here will be of slight consolation to this bereaved fam- ily, and I extend my sincere and heart- felt sympathies. Mr. McCORMACK. I appreciate very much the gentleman’s observation. Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield to the gen- tleman from Massachusetts. Mr. HESELTON. In the absence of other Republican Members of the Mas- sachusetts Delegation I feel that I can speak for them and for all Members on this side in joining with the majority leader in expressing our heartfelt sym- pathies to Mr. and Mrs. Curley and the surviving members of the family on these sudden and tragic deaths. Mr. McCORMACK. I thank the gen- tleman very much. In his deep sorrow in this double trag- edy of the death of his daughter and son, I know I speak the thoughts and senti- ments of all of my colleagues in express- ing and extending to him and the other members of his family and to Mrs. Leo Curley, his son’s widow, our heartfelt sympathy in their bereavement. EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. SUTTON asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the REc- orp and include an editorial appearing in the Nashville Tennessean and one ap- pearing in the Southern Farmer. Mr. MURDOCK asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the ReEcorp and include the transcript of a radio address given last night over sta- tion KFT. Mr. TAURIELLO asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp in two instances and include in one an article appearing in the Buffalo Evening News regarding James A. Farley. Mr. BLATNIK. Mr. Speaker, last Thursday I was given permission to ex- tend my remarks in the Recorp and in- clude an article entitled “Jefferson as a National Planner.” I am informed by the Public Printer that this will exceed two pages of the Recorp and will cost $205, but I ask that it be printed not- withstanding that fact. The SPEAKER. Without objection, notwithstanding the cost, the extension will be made. There was no objection. Mr. MITCHELL asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include extraneous matter. Mr. MARCANTONIO asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include a letter ap- pearing in the New York Daily Com- merce. Mr. HARRISON asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include a newspaper article. Mr. YATES asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include a newspaper article, Mr. FLOOD asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include an editorial. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE THE COAL INDUSTRY Mr.FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- imous consent to address the House for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Penn- sylvania? There was no objection. Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, while it is true that President Truman, in his tax message to the Congress in referring to the plugging of tax loopholes, made no reference to the 5-percent percentage depletion tax as affecting the coal-min- ing industry, nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to bring to the attention of the Committee on Ways and Means of the House and of the Congress itself that under no circumstances can any movement be initiated witr. the ref- erence to removing this vitally important economic aid of the 5-percent percentage depletion tax in the coal industry. Faced with the ever increasing and di- versified competition, both domestic and foreign, as well as the seasonal nature, to a considerable extent, of the industry market, taken in conjunction with all of the other factors that have developed in the mining industry, in both production and marketing, every conceivable and reasonable aid and assistance and every right and privilege which exists must be jealously safeguarded, It is not neces- sary, Mr. Speaker, to bring to the at- tention of the Government or of the peo- ple the importance to our national economy in both peace and war of the anthracite coal industry and of the coal- mining industry generally. Even now a great to-do is being made and national emergencies being declared. Certainly the Government has given ample evi- dence time and again that it considers any circumstance surrounding the coal- mining industry one which affects the national welfare and safety. Certainly there is no lack of subsidy for many other industries contributing to the national economy. This Congress has provided for the subsidies in agri- cultural pursuits on everything from tung nuts and honey to potatoes. I do not, at this point, intend to debate the pros and cons of governmental sub- sidy. I merely point out that many phases of our economy benefit by our di- rect dollar subsidies. The great and im- portant coal-mining industry benefits by no such advantage. Time and again I have brought to the attention of the various governmental agencies concerned the advisability of some form of Government subsidy, whether it be in the purchase or stock piling of coal to guarantee the spread of employment or some other type and kind of aid. To this date my pleas have gone unheeded. The Ways and Means Committee is now conducting hearings on the oil in- dustry. Of course, at this point I have no idea what action will be taken by the Ways and Means Committee or by the Congress. These hearings are now going on. But I do say that if the Congress fails to act upon the sugeestion of the President and reduces the oil percentage depletion priv- FEBRUARY 14 ilege from 15 to 5 percent, then by the same token, I feel that the coal-mining industry has the right to demand the same privileges be extended to it and that its percentage depletion taxation priv- ileges be raised to the same 15-percent level. EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. THOMPSON asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include extraneous material, notwithstanding the fact that it was esti- mated by the Public Printer to exceed two pages of the Recorp and cost $615. Mr, ANDREWS asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include a speech by Mr. Frank A. Waring, of the Philippine War Damage Commission. Mr. WHITE of Idaho asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp in three instances and include certain excerpts. Mr. BLACKNEY asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include an article from the National Wildlife Federation. Mr. RICH asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the Recorp in two instances. Mr. BOGGS of Delaware asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the REcorpD. Mr. HALE asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the RecorpD and include extraneous matter. Mr. SCUDDER asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include an editorial from the Press Democrat of Santa Rosa, Calif. Mr. VELDE asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include two letters he received. FAIR EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES COM- MISSION LEGISLATION Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Florida? There was no objection Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, giving proponents of FEPC full credit for be- ing sincere, and leaving out the vote- getting implications, I can only para- phrase Madam Rolland and say, “O jus- tice, what wrongs are committed in thy name.” For the information of those who have been misled into believing that FEPC will solve any problems of any kind, I should like to quote briefly from a speech made by Dr. J. A. Long, Jr., of Palatka, Fla., at the dedication of a new Negro hospital at Tallahassee last week. It will be discouraging to agitators of race ha- tred to learn that Dr. Long, a Negro physician, is highly respected by both whites and Negroes in Florida. He said: We are not wanted in white neighborhoods, not always because of race but often be- cause of risk, not alway because of prejudice but often because we destroy property, not always because of color but often because of character.
1950 Dr. Long goes on to say that the Ne- groes of the Southland are challenged because of these facts, and urges upon them that they meet the challenge in- dividually. Dr. Long knows the problem and knows the answer. He knows that the answer is not in any forced Employment Practices Commission legislation. I commend him for a very excellent statement, and join with millions of Southern people, both white and colored, in continuing our efforts to help the Ne- gro meet and overcome this challenge in the proper way. THE EFFECT OF DESTROYING SURPLUS POTATOES Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks and include certain Statistics. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts? There was no objection. Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, last night I received a message from the First District of Massachusetts that there are available for immediate use 7,000,000 pounds of surplus potatoes. This morn- ing I asked the Department of Agricul- ture, through the Bureau of Home Nutri- tion and Home Economics, to advise me what the average consumption of white potatoes is per week for an average fam- ily. In studying 68 cities in the spring of 1948 they found the average consump- tion to be 6.7 pounds per family per week or 348.4 pounds per year. Using round numbers, the amount of surplus pota- toes available in the Connecticut valley area would feed 20,000 average families for a full year. Yet, that is only a small fraction of the 50,000,000 bushels, or 3,000.000,000 pounds, that have been ordered to be destroyed. I do not know whether any of you saw the article that appeared in the last part of the Post this morning, but it is very interesting. It was from The District Line, by Bill Gold. The headline was “Uncle Sam holds sack—Canadians help fill it with potatoes.” The article is: While the Agriculture Department won- ders how to get rid of its tons of surplus po- tatoes, Canadian growers are smuggling in thousands of bushels which they're selling to Uncle Sam, at his artificially high prices. The problem calls for clear thinking and fast action, or first thing you Know we'll be subsidizing Canada’s output, too. The thing to do is to beat them at their own game. Let’s smuggle American potatoes into Canada at a faster rate than they’re smuggling their potatoes into the United States. Organize a new airlift, and dump the spuds overboard in sparsely populated regions. Re- verse the Canol pipe line, and pump through @ river of mashed potatoes. Bribe border guards; put our old time rum runners to work on this patriotic project. Let's show the world that anybody who underestimates American ingenuity for wast- ing money makes a big mistake. This last paragraph was emphasized py being italicized, as well it should have ecn. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE I now insert a news story from Wash- ington from the Newspaper Enterprise Association, by Douglas Larsen, appear- ing in the Berkshire Evening Eagle, Pittsfield, Mass., last Friday. Its head- line, “ ‘Spudlegging’® adds surplus woes.” The article is as follows: WasHINGTON.—The unique crime of “spud- legging” has been added to the Department of Agriculture's woes of this year's potato- surplus fiasco. Untold thousands of bushels of potatoes are being smuggled across lonely stretches of the Maine border. By avoiding the duty and taking advantage of the high-support price in this country, {illegal operators are making from 30 to 45 cents a bushel, If this traffic isn't controlled, Agriculture Officials admit it might mean that the net cost of the spud surplus will be higher than the $100,000,000 top estimate made by Sec- retary Charles F. Brannan. PROFIT EITHER WAY In some cases, it’ is said, United States farmers are buying Canadian potatoes, sneak- ing them over the border past customs offi- clals, and selling them to the Government at the support price This operation nets about 45 cents 4 bushel. In other cases, Canadian and United States operators are buying up Canadian potatoes and selling them on the open market in Maine. This brings less than 45 cents a bushel because the markct price is below the support price. But he difference still makes the transaction profitable and apparently worth the risk. Customs officials here admit that they have sent as many additional inspectors and agents to Maine as thetr dreadful shortage of personnel will permit, to try to halt this traffic. But they say that it is increasing and that they are considerably disturbed about the situation, Under the law, Canadian potato growers are allowed to ship into the United States 4,000,000 bushels at half the normal duty, which is 75 cents per hundred pounds. This quota was quickly filled this year. But even at the full 75-cent duty Canadian potatoes have been underselling American potatoes by from 13 to 15 cents a bushel. Last year total Canadian potato sales in America amounted to about 10,000,000 bushels. This year it is expected to be close to that figure, adding that much more to the estimated 70,000,000-bushel United States surplus In effect, this arrangement with Canada means that Uncle Sam is supporting the price of Canadian potatoes. Canadian farmers are working just as hard to grow mcre potatoes to take advantage of it as are American farmers, according to USDA experts. TI noted in yesterday’s REcorpD, as many Members undoubtedly did, the agonizing complaint which has been repeated here from time to time since this scandal has attracted Nation-wide attention and condemnation, by ardent supporters of the so-called Brannan plan that this never would have happened if that plan had been in effect. It is quite beside the point and wholly unnecessary to take up the merits or demerits of the so-called Brannan plan except to the extent that its author is a key figure in the current unpleasant mess. So that those who are so deeply distressed over failure to enact the Brannan plan may have the objec- tive opinions expressed by others, I call their attention to the three editorials I placed in the Appendix of the Recorp yesterday at page Al018 and emphasize 1803 the fact that the first editorial is from the Boston Post, the leading Democratic paper in New England. More important, however, are the ac- tual facts, and I would suggest again to our unhappy colleagues that they spend a little time studying the Recorp of February 2 and 3. Specifically, at page 1427 will be found certain important facts. Briefly, they are that before the Secretary appeared before the Commit- tee on Agriculture in the other body some sort of a press release was issued stating that under the act of 1949 the Secretary could not pay any transportation on all or any of the potatoes to get rid of them other than to an alcohol plant or some other place like that. When he was be- fore the committee the Secretary wai asked if that statement was not an in- accurate one. He replied that he had his lawyer present and would refer the ques- tion to him. Mr. Edward M. Shulman, associate so- licitor in charge of production and ad- justment, Commodity Credit Corpora- tion, advised the committee that the Secretary did have this authority, or at least that there was no prohibition against doing the thing which he claimed he could not do in the release he had given to the press. Furthermore, the ReEcorp indicates that there was an apology made by the Secretary addresced to the former Sec- retary of Agriculture, the junior Senator from New Mexico. It would bc well also for our colleagues 2 study with care the former Secretary’s remarks. Let us look further at the Recorp. This Congress last June passed a Com- modity Credit charte. bill. By vhe terms of the bill the resident was instructed to appoint al advisory board of five per- sons whenever the Secretary should ar- rive at a situation he felt made their ad- vice desirable and necessary. That ad- visory board was not appointed until the lst of February this year. The Secre- tary came before the Agriculture Com- mittee of the other body on February 2. This had the cffect of taking the purpose out from under the advisory board which Coneress had authorized to be set up for the very purpose the Secretary indicated led him to come before a legislative com- mittee. And it is incredible that the De- partment with its far-flung organization did not forsee this situation months ago. I think any objective and ceasonable person familiar with the functions and responsibilities of the legislative and ex- ecutive branches of this Government would agree that Congress cannot con- cern itself with the duties of every ad- ministrative program end that it was entirely correct and sound for the com- mittee in the other body to decline to ad- vise the Secretary, particularly in terms of what had developed before the com- mittee as to the Department's actual in- terpretation of the law and as to the belated creation of this advisory board, J. EDGAR HOOVER Mr. VELDE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- imous consent to address the House for 1 minute and revise and extend my re- marks.
1804 The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tllinois? There was no objection. Mr. VELDE. Mr. Speaker, while Mr. J. Edgar Hoover probably does not need the support of us Members of Congress in the fight against communism and against those who would purge his pa- triotic efforts to establish a sound secu- rity in the United States of America, I want to add my commendation of his work over the past 26 years. I want to assure him, too, that I, as a former FBI agent, will oppose the at- tempis by subversive forces to oust him as Director of the FBI. The diabolical attempts of those would-be traitors to purge Mr. Hoover can be traced directly to the Kremlin, have no doubt about that. It has been proven very definitely that those forces are desperately at- tempting to turn our constitutional form of government into a socialistic and So- viet dictatorship. I, for one, resent it. I do not object to the Russians and those who are loyal te Russia having any type of government they see fit, but I do feel very definitely that those people within our continental boundaries who are not here under diplomatic immunity, and who are loyal to foreign governments, should be thrown out of the United States and sent back to their respective homelands so that they might live un- der the type of government to which they are loyal. Stalin has often described our Ameri- can constitutional government as the weakest type of government yet devised and has set out with every available treachery at his disposal to prove it. So, regardless of our political affiliations, let us all band together as Americans to back up such men as J. Edgar Hoover, whom we all know as a good American, fighting for the cause of liberty and jus- tice and for American constitutional government. EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. DONDERO (at the request of Mr. MICHENER) was given permission to ex- tend his remarks in the REcorp and in- clude a magazine article. INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE OF SECRET INTELLIGENCE Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and revise and extend my remarks. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania? There was no objection. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, top- level military planners from England are working with their military opposites in the Pentagon and elsewhere on the fol- lowing projects: (a) Mutual exchange of top-level se- cret intelligence; (b) Standardization of weapons and ammunition to permit greater flexibility in our military assistance program for Europe; (c) Mutual exchange of industrial se- crets relating to weapons. I believe the policy of exchanging se- cret information with a trusted ally is an CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE unsound principle. My reasons are based on the fact the Navy proximity fuse was given to the British during the war; sold by the British Government to Sweden after the war and later sold by the Swedes to Russia. Should war come with Russia, our pilots will now fly into our own lethal weapon. This unsound principle of giving in- formation on secret weapons to a trust- ed ally has proven disastrous on two dif- ferent occasions: First, the proximity fuse, and second, the secret of atomic weapons, both of which are now in pos- session of the Russians. It is high time, in my opinion, that we retain all of our information on se- cret weapons so as to protect the welfare of our country. EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. HAGEN asked’ and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the REcorpD and include extraneous matter. Mr. KEOGH asked and was given per- mission to extend his remarks in the ReEcorD and include a speech. Mr. BIEMILLER asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp in three instances and include extraneous matter. REQUEST TO ADJOURN OVER Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet on Thursday. Mr. McCORMACK and Mr. MARCAN- TONIO objected. RACIAL MINORITIES DRIVING WHITE AMERICANS FROM THE FEDERAL PAY ROLL Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and revise and extend my remarks. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi? There was no objection. Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, this at- tempt to smear J. Edgar Hoover out of office is just another step in the Com- munist program, ‘They used a similar method to destroy the Civil Service Com- mission. That movement eliminated the requirement that an applicant furnish a picture, and other information, was Com- munist inspired. The result is that the Federal pay roll is now stacked with in- competents, many of whom took the examination by proxy. We hear men whine about racial minorities, in their attempts to force on us this crazy FEPC, which is the most dangerous piece of communistic legislation with which this Government has ever been threatened. Do not forget that these alleged racial minorities have from 50 to 100 times as many of their own groups on the Federal pay roll in Washington as they are numerically entitled to, while our white American servicemen who fought the Nation’s battles in time of war, and must now support its institutions in time of peace, are driven from the Federal pay roll. I never saw a Jap or a Chinaman on the Federal pay roll until the last few FEBRUARY 14 years, that I remember. Everywhere you go now you see these racial minori- ties in control, with the result that the service has degenerated to an unspeak- able degree. The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Mississippi has expired. EXTENSION OF REMARKS Mr. BUCHANAN asked and was given permission to extend his remarks in the Recorp and include a statement by William F. Green. CONCORDIA CHOIR Mr. HAGEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- imous consent to address the House for 1 minute. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Min- nesota? There was no objection. Mr. HAGEN. Mr. Speaker, I desire to call to the attention of the House a rare musical treat tonight in Constitution Hall. The Concordia Choir of 60 voices, from Moorhead, Minn., in my district in Minnesota, will sing a concert at Con- stitution Hall tonight at 8:30 o’clock. This outstanding world-famous choir is under the direction of Paul J. Christian- sen, son of the famous musical director, F. Melius Christiansen, of St. Olaf Col- lege, of Northfield, Minn. So I urge all of you to go to Constitution Hall tonight to hear this famous choir of 60 voices from northwestern Minnesota. The SPEAKER. The time of the gen- tleman from Minnesota has expired. LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of ab- sence was granted to Mr, HEFFERNAN (at the request of Mr. Kroau), for the bal- ance of the week, on account of illness. SENATE BILL REFERRED A bill of the Senate of the following title was taken from the Speaker's table and, under the rule, referred as follows: S 2440 An act to authorize certain con- struction at military and naval installations, and for other purposes, to the Committee on Armed Services. ADJOURNMENT Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, a parlia- mentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. RANKIN. Would a motion to ad- journ until Thursday be in order? The SPEAKER. It would, as long as there is a quorum present and no point of order is raised against it. Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn until Thursday at 12 o’clock noon. The question was taken; and on a divi- sion (demanded by Mr. RanKIN) there were—ayes 15, noes 48. Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask for the yeas and nays. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. Mr. RANKIN. But he did not have the floor. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Massachusetts offered a preferential motion. Mr. RANKIN. But I had demanded the yeas and nays,
1950 The SPEAKER. The motion to ad- Journ takes precedence of a demand for the yeas and nays. Mr. RANKIN. I demanded the yeas and nays on my motion to adjourn until Thursday. The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormacx]. The motion was agrecd to; accordingly (at 1 o’clock and 2 minutes p. m.) the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, February 15, 1950, at 12 o’clock noon. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. 1231. Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, a letter from the Secretary of the Army, transmitting a letter from the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, dated July 25, 1949, submitting a report, to- gether with an accompanying papers and an illustration, on a preliminary exami- nation and survey of a channel from the ocean through St. Helena Sound or through Port Royal Sound to Beaufort, 8. C., authorized by the River and Har- bor Act approved on March 2, 1945 (H. Doc. No. 469), was taken from the Speak- er’s table, referred to the Committee on Public Works, and ordered to be printed, with one illustration. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows: Mr. ASPINALL: Committee on Public Lands. H.R.7220. A bill to expedite the rehabilitation of Federal reclamation projects in certain cases; with an amendment (Rept. No. 1631). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, Mr. GARMATZ: Joint Committee on the Disposition of Executive Papers. House Re- port No. 1632. Report on the disposition of certain papers of sundry executive depart- ments. Ordered to be printed. Mr. GARMATZ: Joint Committee on the Disposition of Executive Papers. House Re- port No. 1633. Report on the disposition of certain papers of sundry executive depart- ments. Ordered to be printed. Mr. GARMATZ: Joint Committee on the Disposition of Executive Papers. House Re- port No. 1634. Report on the disposition of certain papers of sundry executive depart- ments, Ordered to be printed. PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 3 of rule XXII, public bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows: By Mr. ALLEN of Louisiana (by re- quest): H.R 7288. A bill to provide Government protection for widows and children of de- ceased veterans of World Wars I and II; to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, By Mr. MACK of Washington: H.R. 7289. A bill to provide that firing squads shall be furnished at Government expense for certain war veterans’ funerals; to the Committee on Armed Services. By Mr. PATTERSON (by request): H.R. 7290. A bill to provide protection for members of the Reserve components of the armed forces who suffcr disability or death from injuries incurred while engaged in XCVI——114 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE training; Services. By Mr. EVINS (by request) : H.R. 7291. A bill to remove requirement that @ parent be dependent for award of gratuitous national service life insurance and to extend the time within which eligible per- sons may apply for this benefit; to the Com- mittee on Veterans’ Affairs. to the Committee on Armed PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows: By Mr. BURNSIDE: H. R. 7292. A bill tor the relief of Erio Louis Tomita and Fumiko Tomita; to the Commit- tee on the Judiciary. By Mr. D'EWART: H.R. 7293. A bill authorizing the Secre- tary of the Interior to issue a patent in fee to Charlotte Geisdorff Kibby; to the Com- mittee on Public Lands. H.R. 7294 A bill authorizing the Secre- tary of the Interior to issue a patent in fee to Rebecca Collins Ross; to the Committee on Public Lands. By Mr. HESELTON: H R.7205. A bill for the relief of Chi- Cheng Chen; to the Committee on the Judi- ciary. By Mr. McMILLEN of Illinois: H.R 7296. A bill for the relief of Miss Ilona Agoston; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr SABATH: H.R.7297. A bill for the relief of Ignas Malcius, to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. WADSWORTH: H.R. 7298. A bill for the relief of Lueg Mee; to the Committee on the Judiciary, PETITIONS, ETC. Under clause 1 of rule XCXII, petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk’s desk and referred as follows: 1845. By Mr. HAGEN: Petition signed by Kelly I. Drey, president, and Richard E Mel- by, secretary-treasurer, West Central Minne- sota Life Underwriters Association, Fergus Falls, Minn., against any form of socialized medicine and any further expansion of Gov- ernment life insurance; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. 1846. By Mrs. NORTON: Petition of New Jersey district, Kiwanis International, urg- ing immediate implementation of the recom- mendations of the Hoover Commission in their entirety by the Congress of the United States, to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments. 1847, By Mr. RICH: Petition of Tioga Val- ley Grange, No. 918, Mansfield, Pa., against the enactment of legislation legalizing any form of compulsory health insurance or any system of political medicine designed for national bureaucratic control; to the Com- mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. 1848. By the SPEAKER: Petition of Clara E. Milleson and others, Peoria, Ill., favoring legislation to prohibit alcoholic-beverage ad- vertising over the radio; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wepnespay, Fesruary 15, 1950 The House met at 12 o’clock noon. The Chaplain, Rev. Bernard Bras- kamp, D. D., offered the following prayer: Let us pray. O Thou who art the Lord God om- nipotent, grant that we may meet the 1805 tasks and responsibilities of this new day with a resolute faith in the guid- jing and sustaining presence of Thy spirit. We pray that Thou wilt create within our minds and hearts those nobler thoughts and finer feelings which are the progenitors of achievement in the building of a better world. Show us how we may release the hid- den splendor of humanity and bring to fulfillment those capacities for beauty and strength of character which Thou hast planted within the soul of man. To Thy name we ascribe the glory. Amen, POINT OF ORDER Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I make a point of order that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. Will the gentleman withhold his motion for a moment until the Journal is read and we can receive a message? Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. I withho!d the motion. THE JOURNAL The Journal of the proceedings of yes- terday was read. Mr. RANKIN (interrupting the read- ing of the Journal). Mr. Speaker, a point of order. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order against the Journal for the simple reason that it is incorrect. On yesterday just before the motion to adjourn I asked unanimous consent that the House adjourn until Thursday. It was objected to by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Marcantonio], the FEPC leader in the House. That should go into the Recorp; that is part of the REc- orp of the proceedings, and it is not in this report. I demand that it be placed there at the proper point and that it also go into the permanent Recorp. The SPEAKER. The Clerk is reading the Journal, not the RrEcorp. Mr. RANKIN: I understand that it is the Journal. The SPEAKER. The Journal reflects only the actions that are taken. Mr. RANKIN. It fails in this instance. The SPEAKER. I am sure that if the gentleman will look in the Rrcorp he will find the objection he refers to. Mr. RANKIN. No; it is not there; I have already looked at the Recorp. Mr. BIEMILLER. It is in the Recorp. The SPEAKER. The gentleman can correct the Recorp; that would be the correct method; but that is not the Jour- nal. If the objection is not there I am sure there would be no objection to cor- recting the Recorp to make it appear. Mr. McCORMACK. I might state to the gentleman that it appears in the REcorpD on page 1804: Mr, McCormack and Mr. MaRcANTONIO ob- jected. Mr. RANKIN. I wanted to be sure to get that into the Recorp, and in the Journal. Now, Mr. Speaker, I call the Speaker’s attention to the fact that on yesterday I asked for a vote on my motion that the House adjourn until Thursday. While Mr. Speaker,
1806 we were taking that vote the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack] moved that the House adjourn. The vote on my motion was interrupted; the motion to adjourn made by the gentle- man from Massachusetts was given pre- cedence and was voted on and agreed to. I protest that that ruling was in fla- grant violation of section 5360 of Hinds’ Precedents, which states: While a motion to adjourn takes precedence over other motions, yet it may not be put while the House is voting on another motion or while a Member has the floor in debate. We had offered a motion to adjourn until a day certain. We were voting on it at that time. However, in violation of the rules of the House, the gentleman from Massachusetts was permitted to offer a motion that the House adjourn. In order to keep the record straight I call that to the attention of the House, and I wish also t- call attention to the fact that Jefferson’s Manual has the fol- lowing provision in section XX XIII rela- tive to adjournment: A motion to adjourn simply takes place of all others; for otherwise the House might be kept sitting against its will, and indefinitely. Yet this motion cannot be received after an- other question is actually put and while the House 1s engaged in voting. I call that to the attention of the House in order to keep the record straight. My distinguished colleague from Mississippi [Mr. WILLIAMS], who was going along with me, also endeayv- ored to secure a roll call on the motion to adjourn until Thursday. We were absolutely within the rules of the House and the motion to adjourn by the gen- tleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Mc- Cormack] was not in order. The SPEAKER. The Chair does not agree with the gentleman. On the mo- tion made by the gentleman, upon which there was a vote, there was a vote by divi- sion, and the motion was lost. Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, I asked for a roll-call vote on that motion. The SPEAKER, Then the gentleman asked for the yeas and nays, but before that question was put the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack] moved that the House adjourn, which was a preferential motion. The Chair put the question and the House did ad- journ, Mr. RANKIN. And the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. WILLIAMS] and I were asking for the yeas and nays and the Chair refused to put the question. The SPEAKER. The Chair has just tried to say to the gentleman that any- one can ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were not ordered. The gentleman from Massachusetts was within his rights and made a preferen- tial motion to adjourn, and the House did adjourn. Mr. RANKIN. We had asked for the yeas and nays and our request for a roll- call vote was not even submitted, but the motion of the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts was put instead, which was a violation of the rules of the House. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will con- tinue the reading of the Journal. The Clerk concluded the reading of the Journal. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE The Journal of the proceedings of yes- terday was approved, MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate, by Mr. Frazier, its Chief Clerk, announced that the Senate had passed, with amendments in which the concurrence of the House is requested, a bill of the House of the following title: H. R. 4406. An act to provide for the settle- ment of certain claims of the Government of the United States on its own behalf and on behalf of American nationals against for- eign governments. The message also announced that the Senate had passed, with amendments in which the concurrence of the House is requested, a bill of the House of the fol- lowing title: H.R 5839. An act to facilitate and simplify the work of the Forest Service, and for other purposes. The message also announced that the Senate insists upon its amendments to the foregoing bill, requests a conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Housés thereon, and appoints Mr. ELLENDER, Mr. Horey, Mr. HOLLAnp, Mr. AIKEN, and Mr. THYE to be the con- ferees on the part of the Senate. The message also announced that the Senate insists upon its amendment to the bill (H. R.627) entitled “An act for the relief of Southern Fireproofing Co., of Cincinnati, Ohio,” disagreed to by the House; agrees to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. KiLGoreE, Mr. Macnuson, and Mr. Don- NELL to be the conferees on the part of the Senate. CALL OF THE HOUSE Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. Obviously a quorum is not present. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I move a call of the House. A Call of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the fol- lowing Members failed to answer to their names: [Roll No. 44] Allen, Calif. DeGnaffenried Lovre Bailey Dingell McCulloch Burrett, Pa. Dolliver McDonough Barrett, Wyo. Dondero McGrath Bates Donohue Macy Battle Elliott Martin, Iowa Bentsen Fellows Mason Bland Gilmer Meyer Boggs, La. Gwinn Murphy Bolton, Ohio Halleck Nixon Boykin Hand Patten Brehm Harden Pfeiffer, Brown, Ga, Harvey William L. Brown, Ohio Hays, Ohio Philbin Buckley, N.Y. Heffernan Phillips, Tenn. Bulwinkle Hinshaw Potter Burke Hobbs Riehlman Byrne, N.Y. Hoeven Sadlak Byrnes, Wis, Hoffman, Tl. Sadowski Carroll Jackson, Calif. St. George Chatham James Sanborn Chiperfield Jennings Short Christopher Jones, Ala, Simpson, Tl. Combs Judd Simpson, Pa. Coudert Kerr Smathers Crawford King Smith, Ohlo Curtis Kirwan Talle Davenport LeFevre Taylor Davies, N. Y. Lichtenwalter Vursell Davis, Tenn. Linehan Wadsworth Dawson Lodge Walsh FEBRUARY 15 Weichel Wilson, Ind. ‘Wood White, Idaho Withrow Wier Wolcott The SPEAKER. On this roll call 333 Members have answered to their names, @ quorum. Without objection, further proceedings under the call will be dispensed with. Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I object to dispensing with further pro- ceedings under the roll call. The SPEAKER. The question is: Will the House dispense with further proceed- ings under the roll call? Mr. DAVIS of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I ask for the yeas and nays, The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken; and there were—yeas 258, nays 82, not voting 92, as follows: YEAS—258 Abbitt Garmatsz Madden Addonizio Gillette Magee bert Golden Mansfield Andersen, Goodwin Marcantonio H Carl Gordon Marsalis Andresen, Gore Marshall August H. Gorski Martin, Mass Angell Gossctt Merrow Aspinall Granahan Michener Auchincloss Granger Miles Bailey Green Miller, Calif. Baring Gross Miller, Md Beall Hagen Miller, Nebr. Bennett, Mich. Hale Mitchell Bentsen Hall, Monroney Biemiller Edwin Arthur Morgan Bishop Hardy Morris Blackney Hart Morton Blatnik Havenner Moulder Boggs, Del. Hays, Ark, Multer Bolling Hays, Ohio Murdock Bolton, Md Hedrick Murray, Wis. Bosone Heller Nelson Breen Herter Noland Buchanan Heselton Norblad Buckley, Ill. Hil Norton Burdick Hinshaw O'Brien, Ml. Burleson Hoffman, Mich O'Brien, Mich, Burnside Holifield O’Hara, Ill. Burton Holmes O'Hara, Minn. Camp Hope O’Konski Canfield Horan O'Nelll Cannon Howell O'Sullivan Carnahan Hubor O'Toole Carroll Hull Patman Case,.N J Irving Patterson Cavalcante Jackson, Wash Perkins Celler Jacobs Peterson Chelf Javits Pfeifer, Chesney Jenkins Joseph L. Chudoff Jensen Phillips, Calif. Church Jonas Pickett Clemente Karst Poage Cole, Kans. Karsten Polk Cole, N ¥. Kean Powell Cooley Kearney Price Corbett Kearns Priest Cotton Keating Quinn Crook Kee Rabaut Crosser Keefe Rains Cunningham’ _ Kelley, Pa. Ramsay Curtis Kelly, N. Y. Reed, Ill. Davenport Kennedy Reed, N Y. Davis, Wis. Keogh Rees Delancy Kilburn Regan Denton Kilday Rhodes Dingell Klein Ribicoff Dollinger Kruse Rodino Douglas Kunkel Rogers, Mass. Doyle Lane Rooney Eaton Latham Roosevelt Eberharter LeCompte Sabath Ellsworth Lemke Sasscer Elston Lesinski Saylor Engle, Calif. Lind Bcott, Hardie Fallon Lyle Scott, Feighan Lynch Hugh D., Jr. Fenton McCarthy Scrivner Fernandez McConnell Scudder Flood McCormack Secrest Fogar McGregor Shafer Foran McGuire Shelley Ford McKinnon Sheppard Fulton McSweeney Simpson, Pa. Furcolo Mack, Il. Smith, Wis. Gamble Mack, Wash. Spence [Roll No. 45]
1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Wigglesworth Wilson, Okla. Withrow Wolcott Wolverton Woodhouse Woodruff Worley Yates Young Zablock! Pace Passman Preston Rankin Redden Richards Rivers Rogers, Fla. Sikes Sims Smith, Kans. Smith, Va. Stanley Sutton ‘Taber Tackett Thomas Vinson Wheeler Whitaker Whitten Whittington Williams Willis Wilson, Tex. Winstead Murphy Nixon Patten Pfeiffer, William L. Philbin Phillips, Tenn, Plumley Potter Poulson Staggers Underwood Bteed Van Zandt Stefan Velde Btockman Vorys Sullivan ‘Wagner Tauriello Walter Teague Welch Thompson Werdel Thornberry White, Calif. Tollefecon White, Idaho Towe Wickersham Trimble Widnall NAYS—82 Abernethy Frazier Allen, Il, Fugate Allen, La. Gary Anderson, Calif.Gathings Andrews Gavin Barden Graham Beckworth Grant Bennett, Fla. Gregory Boggs, La, Hare Bonner Harris Bramblett Harrison Brooks Hébert Bryson Herlong Carlyle Jenison Case,S Dak. Johnson Clevenger Jones, Mo. Colmer Jones, N C. Combs Lanham Cooper Larcade Cox Lucas Dague McMillan, 8. C. Davis, Ga. McMillen, Il. Deane Mahon D’Ewart Mills Doughton Morrison Durham Murray, Tenn. Evins Nicholson Fisher Norrell NOT VOTING—92 Allen, Calif, Gilmer Arends Gwinn Baurett, Pa. Hall, Barrett, Wyo. Leonard W Bates Halleck Battle Hand Bland Harden Bolton, Ohio Harvey Boykin Heffernan Brehm Hobbs Brown, Ga Hoeven Brown, Ohio Buckley, N. Y. Bulwinkle Burke Byrne,N Y. Byrnes, Wis. Chatham Chiperfield Chiistopher Coudert Crawford Davies, N Y¥ Davis, Tenn. Dawson DeGraffenried Dolliver Dondero Donohue Elliott Engel, Mich Fellows Hoffman, Il. Jackson, Calif. James Jennings Jones, Ala Judd Kerr King Kirwan LeFevre Lichten walter Linehan Lodge Lovre McCulloch McDonough McGrath Macy Martin, Iowa Mason Meyer Rich Riehlman Sadlak Sadowski St George Sanborn Short Simpson, Il. Smuthers Smith, Ohio Stigler Talle Taylor Vursell Wadsworth Wilson, Ind. Wood So the motion was agreed to. The Clerk announced the following pairs: Until further notice: Mr. Brown of Georgia with Mr. Arends. Mr. Murphy with Mr. Hand. Mr. Stigler with Mr. Short. Mr. McGrath with Mr. Wadsworth. Mr. Gilmer with Mr. Chiperfield. Mr. Patten with Mr. William L. Pfeiffer. Mr. Hobbs with Mr. Potter. Mr. Wood with Mr. Halleck. Mr. Donohue with Mr. Leonard W. Hall. Mr. Barrett of Pennsylvania with Mr. Hoff- man of Illinols. Mr. Philbin with Mr. James. Mr. Heffernan with Mr. Allen of California. Mr. Smathers with Mr. Macy. Mr. Kirwan with Mr. Lichtenwalter. Mr. King with Mrs. Bolton of Ohio. Mr. Byrne of New York with Mr. Dondero. Mr. Jones of Alabama with Mr. McCulloch, Mr. Davies of New York with Mr. Taylor. Mr. Boykin with Mr. Coudert. Mr. Battle with Mr. Brehm. Mr, Buckley of New York with Mr. LeFevre. Mr. Bates with Mr. Weichel. Mr. Linehan with Mrs. St. George. Mr. Sadowski with Mr. Meyer. Mr. Davis of Tennessee with Mr. Mc- Donough, Mr. Bland with Mr. Brown of Ohio, Mr. Kerr with Mr. Gwinn. Mr. Wier with Mr. Riehlman. Mr. Elliott with Mr. Sadlak. Mr. DeGraffenried with Mr. Vursell. Mr. Chatham with Mr. Engel of Michigan, Mr. Burke with Mr. Fellows. Mr. Bulwinkle with Mr. Crawford. Mr. Christopher with Mr. Lovre. Mr. ABERNETHY, Mr. ALLEN of Louisi- ana, and Mr. Bennett of Florida changed their vote from ‘‘aye” to “no.” Mr. Bartey, Mr. Beart, Mr. BOuuine, Mrs. Bosone, Mr. BucKLey of Illinois, Mr. Earon, Mr. FALLon, Mr. Fenton, and Mr. Rerp of New York changed their vote from “no” to “aye.” The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. MOTION TO ADJOURN Mr. RICHARDS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. Mr. WILLIAMS. On that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the House voted to dispense with further proceedings under the call for today, what business would there be before the House if it now fails to adjourn? The SPEAKER. Calendar Wednesday business. The Clerk will call the roll. The question was taken; and there werc—yeas 97, nays 236, not voting 99, as follows: Mr. [Roll No. 46] YEAS—97 Abbitt Grant Priest Abernethy Gregory Rains Albert Hardy Rankin Allen, La Hare Redden Andrews Harris Regan Barden Harrison Richards Beckworth Hays, Ark Rivers Bennett, Fla. Hébert Rogers, Fla. Bentsen Herlong Stms Boges, La. Jones, Mo. Smith, Kans. Bolton, Md. Jones, N C. Smith, Va. Bonner Kilburn Stanley Brooks Kilday Sutton Bryson Lanham Tackett Burleson Larcade Teague Burton Lucas Thomas Camp Lyle Thompson Carlyle McMillan,8 C. Thornberry Chelf Mahon Trimble Colmer Marshall Underwood Cooper Miles Vinson Cox Mills Werdel Davis, Ga. Monroney Wheeler Durham Morrison Whitaker Evins Murray, Tenn. Whitten Fernandez Nicholson Whittington Fisher Norrell Williams Frazier Pace Willis Fugate Passman Wilson, Tex. Gary Peterson Winstead Gathings Pickett Worley Gore Poage Gossett Preston NAYS—236 Addonizio Andresen, Auchincloss Alien, Til. August H. Batley Andersen, Angell Baring H. Carl Arends . Beall Anderson, Calif. Aspinall Bennett, Mich. 1807 Norton O'Brien, Ill O’Brien, Mich O'Hara, Il O'Hara, Minn O'Konski O'Neill O'Sullivan O'Toole Patman Patterson Perkins Pfeifer, Joseph L. Phillips, Calif. Polk Poulson Powell Price Quinn Rabaut Ramsay Reed, Ill. Reed, N Y. Roes Rhodes Ribicof? Rodino Rogers, Mass. Rooney Roosevelt Sasscer Saylor Scott, Hardie Scott, Hugh D., Jr. Scrivner Scudder Becrest Shafer Shelley Sheppard Simpson, Pa Smith, Wis. Spence Staggers Steed Stefan Stigler Stockman Sullivan Taber Tauriello Tollefson Towe Van Zandt Velde Vorys Wagner Walter Welch White, Calif Wickersham Widnall Wigglesworth Wilson, Okla Withrow Wolcott Wolverton Woodhouse Woodiufl Yates Young Zablock! Judd Keefe Kerr King Kirwan LeFevre Lichtenwalter Lodge Lovre McCulloch McDonough McGrath Macy Martin, Iowa Mason Meyer Murphy Nixon Patten Pfeiffer, Willtam L. Philbin Phillips, Tenn. Plumley Potter Rich Biemiller Heller Bishop Herter Blackney Heselton Blatnik Hill Boggs, Del. Hinshaw Bolling Hoffman, Mich. Bramblett Holifield Breen Holmes Buchanan Hope Buckley, Ill. Horan Burdick Howell Burnside Huber Canfield Hull Cannon Irving Carnahan Jackson, Wash. Case, N. J. Jacobs Case,S. Dak. Javits Cavalcante Jenison Celler Jenkins Chesney Jensen Chudoff Johnson Church Jonas Clemente Karst Clevenger Karsten Cole,N Y. Kean Corbett Kearney Cotton Kearns Crook Keating Crosser Kee Cunningham Kelley, Pa. Curtis Kelly, N. Y. Dague Kennedy Davenport Keogh Davis, Wis. Klein Deane Kruse Delaney Kunkel Denton Lane D’'Ewart Latham Dingell LeCompte Dollinger Lemke Doyle Lesinski Eaton Lind Eberharter Linehan Ellsworth Lynch Elston McCurthy Engle, Calif. McConnell Fallon McCormack Feighan McGregor Fenton McGuire Flood McKinnon Fogarty McMillen, HI. Foiand McSweeney Ford Mack, Ill Fulton Mack, Wash. Furcolo Madden Gamble Magee Garmatz Mansfield Gavin Marcantonio Gillette Marsalis Golden Martin, Mass. Goodwin Merrow Gordon Michener Gorski Miller, Calif. Graham Miller, Md Granahan Miller, Nebr. Granger Mitchell Green Morgan Gross Morris Hagen Morton Hale Moulder Hall, Multer Edwin Arthur Murdock Hart Murray, Wis Havenner Nelson Hays, Ohio Noland Hedrick Norblad NOT VOTING—99 Allen, Calif. Davis, Tenn. Barrett, Pa. Dawson Barrett, Wyo DeGraflenried Bates Dolliver Battle Dondero Bland Donohue Bolton, Ohio Doughton Bosone Douglas Boykin Eliott Brehm Engel, Mich. Brown, Ga. Fellows Brown, Ohio Gilmer Buckley, N.Y. Gwinn Bulwinkle Hall, Burke Leonard W. Byrne,N Y. Halleck Byrnes, Wis. Hand Carroll Harden Chatham Harvey Chiperfield Heffernan Christopher Hobbs Cole, Kans. Hoeven Combs Hoffman, Ill. Cooley Jackeon, Calif. Coudert James Crawford Jennings Davies, N. Y. Jones, Ala. Riehlman
Babath Simpson, Tl. Walsh Badlak Smathers Weichel Badowsk! Smith, Ohio White, Idaho St. George Taille Wier Sanborn Taylor Wilson, Ind. Short Vursell Wood Bikes Wadsworth So the motion was rejected. The Clerk announced the following pairs: On this vote: Mr. Hobbs for, with Mr. LeFevre against. Mr. Gilmer for, with Mr. Patten against. Mr. Boykin for, with Mr. Walsh against. Mr, Jones of Alabama for, with Mr. Hand against. Mr. Kerr for, with Mr. Murphy against. Mr. Sikes for, with Mr. Heffernan against. Mr. Wood for, with Mr. Hoffman of Illi- nols against. Mr. Brown of Georgia for, with Mr. McGrath against. Mr. Bates for, with Mr. Barrett of Penn- sylvania against. Mr, Battle for, with Mr. King against. Mr. Bland for, with Mrs. Bolton of Ohio against. Mr. Bulwinkle for, against. Mr. Smathers for, with Mr Philbin against. Mr. Chatham for, with Mr. Byrne of New York against. Until further notice: Mr. Sadowski with Mr. Allen of California. Mr. Christopher with Mr. Lichtenwalter. Mr. Davies of New York with Mr. Brown of Ohio. Mr. Wier with Mr. Dondero. Mr. Davis of Tennessee with Mr. Sanborn. Mrs. Douglas with Mr. Short. Mrs. Bosone with Mr. Weichel. Mr. Buckley of New York with Mr. William L. Pfeiffer. Mr. Burke with Mr. Chiperfield. Mr. Dawson with Mr. Taylor. Mr. DeGraffenried with Mr. Engel of Mich- with Mr. Donohue igan. Mr. Elliott with Mr. Macy. Mr, Cooley with Mr. Riehlman. Mr. Combs with Mr. Potter. Mr. Carroll with Mr. Wadsworth. Mr. Preston changed his vote from “no” to “aye.” Mr. Mack changed his vote from “aye” to “no.” The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Does a motion to fix time to adjourn take pre- cedence over a motion to adjourn? The SPEAKER. It does not. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. A fur- ther parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speak- er: Is it in order to offer to a motion to adjourn, an amendment seeking to fix the time of adjournment? The SPEAKER. It is not. MOTION TO DISPENSE WITH CALENDAR WEDNESDAY Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I move to dispense with Calendar Wednesday. Mr. SUTTON. Mr. Speaker, on this vote I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were refused. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I de- mand a division. The question was taken; and on a divi- gion there were—yeas 18, nays 94. Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Speaker, I ob- ject to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present. The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present. The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. The question was taken; and there were—yeas 94, nays 240, not voting 98, as follows: Abbitt Abernethy Albert Allen, La. Andrews Barden Beckworth Bennett, Fla, Bentsen Boggs, La. Bolton, Md. Bonner Brooks Bryson Burleson Burton Camp Carlyle Chelf Colmer Cooper Cox Davis, Ga. Evins Feinandez Fisher Frazier Fugate Gary Gathings Gore Gossett Addonizio Allen, Til. Andersen, H, Carl Anderson, Calif Andresen, August H. Angell Arends Aspinall Auchincloss Bailey Baring Beall Bennett, Mich. Biemiller Bishop Blackney Blatnik Boggs, Del. Bolling Bosone Bramblett Breen Buchanan Buckley, Il. Burdick Burnside Canfield Carnahan Carroll Case, N. J. Case,S Dak. Cavalcante Celler Chesney Chudoff Church Clemente Clevenger Cole, Kans. Cole,N Y. Cooley Corbett Cotton Crook Crosser Cunningham Curtis Dague Davenport Davis, Wis, Deane [Roll No. 47] YEAS—04 Grant Gregory Hardy Hare Harris Harrison Hays, Ark. Hébert Herlong, Jones, N. 0. Ki}burn Kilday Lanham Larcade Lucas Lyle MeMillan, 8. C. Mahon Marshall Miles Mills Monroney Morrison Murray, Tenn. Nicholson Norrell Pace Passman Patman Peterson Pickett Poage NAYS—240 Delaney Denton D'Ewart Dingell Dollinger Douglas Doyle Eaton Eberharter Ellsworth Elston Engel, Mich. Engle, Calif. Fallon Feighan Fellows Fenton Flood Forand Ford Fulton Furcolo Gamble Garmats Gavin Gillette Golden Goodwin Gordon Gorski Graham Granahan Granger Green Gross Hagen Hale Hall, Edwin Arthur Hart Havenner Hays, Ohio Hedrick Heller Herter Heselton Hill Hinshaw Hoffman, Mich. Holifield Holmes Hope Horan Preston Priest. Rains Rankin Redden Richards Rivers Rogers, Fla. Sikes 8ims Smith, Kans. Smith, Va. Stanley Sutton Tackett Tcague Thompson Thornberry Trimble Underwood Vinson Wheeler Whitaker Whitten Whittington Williams Willis Wilson, Tex. Winstead Worley Howell Huber Hull Irving Jackson, Wash. Jacobs Javits Jenison Jenkins Jensen Johnson Jonas Karst Karsten Kean Kearney Kearns Keating Kee Kelley, Pa. Kelly, N Y. Kennedy Keogh Klein Kruse Kunkel Lane Latham LeCompte Lemke Lesinski Lind Linehan Lynch McCarthy McConnell McCormack McGregor McGuire McKinnon MeMillen, Tl, McSweeney Mack, Ill, Mack, Wash. Madden Magee Mansfield Marcantonio Marsalis Martin, Mass. Merrow Michener Miller, Calif, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Miller, Md. Miller, Nebr. Mitchell Morgan Morris Morton iriend urray, Wis. Nelson Noland Norblad Norton O'Brien, Ml. O’Brien, Mich. O'Hara. Il. O'Hara, Minn, O'Konski O'Neill O'sullivan Q’Toole Patterson Perkins Pfelfer, Joseph L. Phillips, Calif. Polk Poulson Powell Price Allen, Calif. Barrett, Pa. Barrett, Wyo. Bates Battle Bland Bolton, Ohio Boykin Brehm Brown, Ga. Brown, Ohio Buckley, N. ¥. Bullwinkle Burke Byrne, N Y. Byrnes, Wis. Cannon Chatham Chipertield Christopher Combs Coudert Crawford Davies, N. Y. Davis, Tenn. Dawson DeGraffenried Dolliver Dondero Donohue Doughton Durham Elliott Fogarty FEBRUARY 15 Rooney Roosevelt Sasscer Saylor 8cott, Hardie Scott, Hugh D., Jr. Scrivner Scudder Secrest Shafer Bhelley Sheppard Smith, Wis. Spence Staggers Steed Stefan Stigler Stockman Bullivan Taber Tauriello ‘ollefson ‘owe Van Zandt Velde Vorys Wagner Walter Welch Werdel White, Calif. White, Idaho Wickersham Widnall Wigglesworth Wuson, Okla. Withrow Wolcott Wolverton Woodhouse Woodruff Yates Young Zablocki NOT VOTING—98 Gilmer Gwinn Hall, Leonard W. Halleck Hand Harden Harvey Heffernan Hobbs Hoeven Hoffman, Il. Jackson, Oalif. James Jennings Jones, Ala. Jones, Mo. Judd Keefe Kerr King Kirwan LeFevre Lichtenwalter Lodge Lovre McCulloch McDonough McGrath Macy Martin, Iowa Mason Meyer Moulder Murdock Murphy Nixon Patten Pfeiffer, William L, Philbin Phillips, Tenn. Plumley Potter Reed, N. ¥. Regan Riehlman Babath Sadlak Sadowski 8t. George Sanborn Short Simpson, Ml, Simpson, Pa. Smathers Smith, Ohio Talle Taylor Thomas Vursell Wadsworth Walsh Weichel Wier Wilson, Ind ‘Wood So the motion was rejected. The Clerk announced the following pairs: On this vote: Mr. Hobbs for, with Mr. LeFevre against. Mr. Gilmer for, with Mr. Patten arainst. Mr. Boykin for, with Mr. Walsh against. Mr. Jones of Alabama for, Mr. Hand against. Mr. Brown of Georgia for, with Mr. Mur- phy against. Mr. Kerr for, with Mr. Heffernan against Mr Wood for, with Mr. Hoffman of Illinois against. Mr. Bates for, with Mr. McGrath against, Mr. Battle for, with Mr. Barrett of Penn- sylvania against. Mr. Bulwinkle for, with Mrs. Bolton oi Ohio against. Mr. Chatham for, with Mr. Kirwan against Mr. Smathers for, with Mr. Burke against Until further notice: Mr. Buckley of New York with Mr. Aller of California Mr. Christopher with My. Halleck. Mr. Moulder with Mr. Gwinn. Mr. Fogarty with Mr. Dondero, Mr. Donohue with Mr. Taylor. Mr. Philbin with Mr. Welchel. Mr. Davies of New York with Mr. Short. Mr. Combs with Mr. Leonard W. Hall. Mr, King with Mr. Coudert. Mr. Regan with Mr. Chiperfield.
1950 Mr. Sabath with Mr. Brehm. Mr. Sadowski with Mr. McCulloch. Mr. Wier with Mr. Lichtenwalter. Mr. DeGraffenried with Mr. William L. Pfeiffer. Mr. Dawson with Mr. Simpson of Pennsyl- vania. Mr. Davis of Tennessee with Mr. Brown of Ohio. Mr Byrne of New York with Mr. Mc- Donough. Mr. Jones of Missour! with Mr. Macy. Mr. Durham with Mr. Meyer. Mr. Elliott with Mr. Potter. Mr. Thomas with Mr. Sanborn. Mr. Murdock with Mr. Sadlak. The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. MOTION TO ADJOURN Mr. GOSSETT. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. Mr. MARCANTONIO. Mr. Speaker, a point of order. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. MARCANTONIO. Just preceding the last roll call the House refused to ad- journ. I submit that this motion is dilatory. I understand that it is entirely within the Speaker's discretion to rule on these motions, but in view of the fact that we have just had a motion to ad- journ this one obviously is dilatory. Mr. GOSSETT. Mr. Speaker, if the Chair will hear me on the point of order, other business has been transacted and another roll call has intervened. The SPEAKER. The Chair is pre- pared to rule. Business has intervened. The Chair holds the motion to be in order. The question is on the motion to ad- journ. The question was taken; and on a divi- sion (demanded by Mr. Gosserr) there were—ayes 69, noes 91. Mr. GOSSETT. Mr. Speaker, I de- mand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken, and there were—yeas 109, nays 219, not voting 104, as follows: [Roll No. 48] YEAS—109 Abbitt Gary O'Hara, Minn, Abernethy Gathings Pace Albert Gillette Passman Allen, La. Gore Patman Andrews Gossett Peterson Barden Grant Pickett Battle Gregory Poage Beckworth Hardy Preston Bennett, Fla Hare Priest Bentsen Harris Rains Bolton, Md Harrison Rankin Bonner Hays, Ark. Redden Bramblett Hébert Regan Brooks Herlong Rich Bryson Hill Richards Burton Hoffman, Mich Rivers Camp Jones, Ala. Rogers, Fla. Cannon Jones, N.C. Sikes Carlyle Kilburn Sims Chatham Kilday Smith, Kans. Chelf Lanham Smith, Va. Colmer Larcade Stanley Cooper Lucas Sutton Cox Lyle Tackett Curtis McMillan, 8 C. Teague Dague Mahon Thomas Davis, Ga Marshall Thompson Evins Mills Thornberry Fellows Monroney Towe Fernandez Morrison Trimble Fisher Murray, Tenn. Underwood Frazier Nicholson Velde Fugate Norrell Wheeler CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Whitaker Willis Wood uff Whitten Wilson, Okla. Worley Whittington Wilson, Tex. Willams Winstead NAYS—2109 Addonizio Green Morris Allen, Il. Gross Multer Andersen, Hagen Murray, Wis. H. Carl Hale Nelson Angell Hall, Norblad Arends Edwin Arthur Norton Aspinall , O'Brien, TI. Auchincloss Leonard W. O'Brien, Mich, Bailey Hart O’Hara, Ill, Baring Havenner O’Konski Beall Hays, Ohio O'Neill Bennett, Mich. Hedrick O'Sullivan Biemiller Heller O'Toole Bishop Herter Patterson Blackney Heselton Perkins Blatnik Hinshaw Pfeiter, Boggs, Del. Ho) {field Joseph L Bolling Holmes Phillips, Calif. Bosone Hope Polk Breen Horan Powell Buchanan Howell Price Buckley, Ill. Huber Quinn Burdick Hull Rabaut Burnside Jackson, Wash. Ramsay Canfield Jacobs Reed, Il. Carroll Javits Reed, N.Y. Case, N, J. Jenison Rees Case,8 Dak. Jensen Rhodes Cavalcante Jonas Ribicoff Chesney Karst Riehlman Chudoft Karsten Rodino Church Kean Rogers, Mass. Clemente Kearney Rooney Clevenger Kearna Roosevelt Cole, Kans, Keating Sabath Cole, N. Y. Keo Sasscer Cooley Kelley, Pa. Saylor Corbett Kelly, N. Y. Scott, Hardie Cotton Kennedy Scott, Crook Keogh Hugh D., Jr. Crosser King Scrivner Davenport Klein Scudder Davis, Wis Kruse Secrest Deane Kunkel Shafer Delaney Lane Shelley Denton Latham Sheppard D’Ewart LeCompte Smith, Wis. Dingell Lemke Spence Dollinger Lesinski Steed Douglas Lind Stefan Doyle Linehan Stigler Eaton Lynch Stockman Eberharter McCarthy Sullivan Ellsworth McConnell Taber Elston McCormack Tauriello Engel, Mich. McGregor Tollefson Engle, Calif. McGultre Van Zandt Fallon McKinnon Vorys Feighan McMillen, Ill. Wagner Fenton McSweeney Walter Flood Mack, Ill, Welch Forand Mack, Wash. Werdel Ford Madden White, Calif. Fulton Magee White, Idaho Furcolo Mansfield Wickersham Gamble Marcantonio Widnall Garmatz Marsalis Wigglesworth Gavin Martin, Mass. Withrow Golden Merrow Wolcott Goodwin Michener Wolverton Gordon Miller, Calif, Woodhouse Gor:ki Miller, Md. Yates Graham Miller, Nebr. Young Granahan Mitchell Zablocki Granger Morgan NOT VOTING—104 Allen, Calif. Celler Hand Anderson, Calif Chiperfield Harden Andresen, Christopher Harvey August H. Combs Heffernan Barrett, Pa. Coudert Hobbs Barrett, Wyo. Crawford Hoeven Bates Cunningham Hoffman, Ill, Bland Davies, N. ¥, Irving Boges, La. Davis, Tenn. Jackson, Calif. Bolton, Ohto Dawson James Boykin DeGraffenried Jenkins Brehm Dolliver Jennings Brown, Ga. Dondero Johnson Brown, Ohio Donohue Jones, Mo. Buckley, N.Y. Doughton Judd Bulwinkle Durham Keefe Burke Elliott Kerr Burleson Fogarty Kirwan Byrne, N. ¥. Gilmer LeFevre Byrnes, Wis, Gwinn Lichtenwalter Carnahan Halleck Lodge 1809 Lovre Patten Smathers McCulloch Pfeiffer, 8mith, Ohio McDonough William L. Staggers McGrath Philbin Talle Macy Phillips, Tenn. Taylor Martin, Iowa Plumley Vinson Mason Potter Vursell Meyer Poulson Wadsworth Miles Sadiak Walsh Morton Sadowski Weichel Moulder St. George Wier Murdock Sanborn Wilson, Ind. Murphy Short ‘Wood Nixon Simpson, Ill. Noland Simpson, Pa. So the motion was rejected. The Clerk announced the following pairs: On this vote: Mr. Hobbs for, with Mr. LeFevre against. Mr. Gilmer for, with Mr. Patten against, Mr. Boykin for, with Mr. Walsh against. Mr. Jones of Missouri for, with Mr, Hand against. Mr. Brown of Georgia for, with Mr. Murphy against. Mr. Kerr for, with Mr. Heffernan against. Mr. Wood for, with Mr. Hoffman of Illt- nols against. Mr. Bates for, with Mr. McGrath against. Mr. Bland for, with Mr. Barrett of Penn- sylvania against. Mr. Boggs of Louisiana for, with Mrs. Bol- ton of Ohio against. Mr. Smathers for, with Mr. Kirwan against. Mr. Vinson for, with Mr. Donohue against. Mr. Burleson for, with Mr. Philbin against. Until further notice: Mr. Buckley of New York with Mr. Allen of California. Mr. Irving with Mr. Chiperfield. Mr. Miles with Mr. McCulloch, Mr. Staggers with Mr. Brown of Ohio. Mr. Sadowski with Mr. Coudert. Mr, Wier with Mr. Dondero. Mr. Fogarty with Mr. Gwinn. . Durham with Mr. Halleck. Mr. Davies of Now York with Mr. Jenkins. . Celler with Mr. Judd. . Byrne of New York with Mr. Weichel. . Davis of Tennessee with Mr Sanborn. Mr. Dawson with Mr. Simpson of Penn- sylvania,. Mr. DeGraffenried with Mr. Lichtenwalter. Mr, Eliott with Mr. Taylor, Mr. Christopher with Mr. Potter. Mr. Moulder with Mr. William L. Pfeiffer. Mr. Noland with Mr. Macy. Mr. Smit of Wisconsin changed his vote from “yea” to “nay.” The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. PARLIAMENTARY INQUIRY Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, @ parlia- mentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. HARRIS. The next business in order, as I understand, is the call of com- mittees under the Calendar Wednesday rule; is that right? The SPEAKER. That is correct. Mr. HARRIS. I believe the Commit- tee on the District of Columbia is the committee with which the call rests, and will be the first committee called today. In view of the fact that this committee has important legislation to present to the House for its consideration would a point of order that a quorum is not pres- ent be in order at this moment? The SPEAKER. The Chair would certainly count to ascertain the presence of a quorum.
1810 Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that a quorum is not resent. The SPEAKER. The Chair will count. [After counting.] Evidently no quorum is present. Mr. MARCANTONIO, Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. MARCANTONIO. If the leader- ship on both sides of the House exercised their influence we would have a quorum present. Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that the gentleman from New York is not in order. The SPEAKER. The gentleman has not submitted a parliamentary inquiry. CALL OF THE HOUSE Mr. PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I move a call of the House, A call of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the fol- lowing Members failed to answer to their names: {Roll No. 49] Allen, Calif. Donohue Meyer Anderson, Calif.Durham Morton Andresen, Eliott Moulder August H. Engle, Calif. | Murdock Baring Fisher Murphy Barrett, Pa. Fogarty Nixon Barrett, Wyo. Gilmer Patten Bates Gwinn Pfelffer, Bland Halleck William L, Boggs, La. Hand Philbin Bolton, Ohio Harden Phillips, Tenn, Bonner Harvey Plumley Boykin Heffernan Potter Breen Hobbs Ramsay Brehm Hoeven Regan Brooks Hoffman, Mi. Sadlak Brown, Ga. Jackson, Calif. Sadowsk! Brown, Ohio James St George Buckley, N.Y. Jennings Sanborn Bulwinkle Johnson Short Burke Jones, Mo, Simpson, Ill. Byrne, N. Y. Judd Smathers Byrnes, Wis. Keefe Smith, Ohio Celler Kerr Talle Cnhiperfield Kirwan Taylor Christopher Klein Vursell Colmer LeFevre Wadsworth Combs Lichtenwalter Walsh Coudert Lodge Weichel Crawford Lovre Whitaker Davies, N Y. McCulloch White, Idaho Davis, Tenn, McDonough Wier Dawson McGrath Wilson, Ind. Dingell Macy Withrow Dolliver Martin, Iowa Wood Dondero Mason Worley The SPEAKER. On this roll cal] 326 Members have answered to their names, @ quorum, Is there objection to dispensing with further proceedings under the call? Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I move that further proceedings under the call be dispensed with. The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack]. The question was taken; and on a divi- sion (demanded by Mr. Pickett) there were—ayes, 126, noes 17. Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I move that we do now adjourn, The SPEAKER. The Chair will count. {After counting.] Evidently a quorum is not present, Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, a preferential motion. I move | that the House do now adjourn; and on that motion I ask for the yeas and nays, The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken; and there were—yeas 126, nays 198, not voting 108, as follows: Abbitt Abernethy Albert Allen, M11. Allen, La. Andresen, August H. Andrews Arends Barden Battle Beckworth Bennett, Fla. Bennett, Mich. Bentsen Bolton, Md. Bonner Bramblett Bryson Burleson Burton Camp Cannon Carlyle Chatham Chelf Clevenger Colmer Cooper Cox Curtis Dague Davis, Ga. DeGraffenried Durham Evins Fallon Fellows Fenton Fernandes Fisher Frazier Fugate Addonzio Andersen, H Carl Angell Aspinall Auchincloss Beall Biemiller Bishop Blackney Boggs, Del. Bolling Bosone Breen Buchanan Buckley, Il. Burnside Canfield Carnahan Carroll Case, N. J. Case,8 Dak. Cavalcante Chesney Chudoff Church Clemente Cole, Kans, Cole, N. ¥. Corbett Cotton Crook Crosser Cunningham Davenport Davis, Wis. Deane Delaney Denton D'Ewart Dollinger Douglas Doyle Eaton Eberharter Ellsworth Elston Engel, Mich, Feighan Flood [Roll No. 50] YEAS—126 Gary Passman Gathings Peterson Gavin Pickett Gillette Poage Gore Preston Gossett Priest Graham Rains Grant Rankin Gregory Redden Hardy Reed, Ill. Hare Rich Harris Richards Harrison Rivers Hays, Ark, Rogers, Fla. Hedrick Shafer Herlong Sikes Hill Simpson, Pa. Hoffman, Mich. Sims Jenkins Smith, Kans, Jensen Smith, Va. Jones, Ala. Smith, Wis, Jones, N.O. Stanley Kilburn Sutton Kilday Tackett Lanham Teague Larcade Thompson Lucas Thornberry McConnell Trimble McMillan, 8.C. Underwood McMillen, lll. Velde Mahon Vinson Marshall Werdel Miles Wheeler Miller, Nebr. Whitten {11s Whittington Monroney Williams Morrison Willis Murray, Tenn. Wilson, Okla. Nicholson Wilson, Tex. Norblad Winstead Norrell Woodruff O'Hara, Minn. Pace NAYS—198 Forand Kennedy Ford Keogh Fulton King Furcolo Klein Gamble Kruse Garmatz Kunkel Golden Lane Goodwin Latham Gordon LeCompte Gorski Lesinski Granahan Lind Granger Linehan Green Lynch Gross McCarthy Hagen McCormack Hie McGregor Hall, McGuire Edwin Arthur McKinnon Hall, McSweeney Leonard W. Mack, Il. Hart Mack, Wash. Havenner Madden Hays, Ohio Magee Heller Mansfield Herter Marcantonio Heselton Marsalis Hinshaw Martin, Mass. Holifield Merrow Holmes Michener Hope Miller, Calif, Horan Miller, Md. Howell Mitchell Huber Morgan Hull Morris Irving Multer Jackson, Wash. Murray, Wis, Jacobs Nelson Javits Noland Jenison Norton Johnson O’Brien, N11. Jonas O'Brien, Mich. Karst O’Hara, Tl. Karsten O’Konskti Kean O'Netll Kearney O'Sullivan Kearns O'Toole Keating Pattersow Kee Perkins Kelley, Pa. Pfetfer, Kelly. N. ¥e Josevh L,_ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE FEBRUARY 15 Phillips, Calif. Saylor Tollefson Polk Scott, Van Zandt Poulson Beott, Vorys Powell Hugh D., Jr. Wagner Price Scrivner Walter Quinn Scudder Welch Rabaut rest White, Calif. Reed, N. ¥. Shelley White, Idano Rees Bheppard Wickersham Rhodes Spence Widnall Ribicoff Staggers Wigglesworth Riehlman Steed Wolcott Rodino Stefan Wolverton Rogers, Mass. Stigler Woodhouse Rooney Stockman Yates Roosevelt Sullivan Young Sabath Taber Zablocki Basscer Tauriello NOT VOTING—108 Allen, Calif. Eliott Murdock Anderson, Calif. Engle, Calif, Murphy Bailey Fogarty Nixon Baring Gilmer Patman Barrett, Pa. Gwinn Patten Barrett, Wyo. Halleck Pfeiffer, Bates Hand William L. Bland Harden Philbin Blatnik Harvey Phillips, Tenn. Boggs, La. Hébert Plumley Bolton, Ohio Heffernan Potter Boykin Hobbs Ramsay Brehm Hoeven Regan Brooks Hoffman, Ml. Sadlak Brown, Ga. Jackson, Calif. Badowsk! Brown, Ohio James St. George Buckley, N.Y. Jennings Sanborn Bulwinkle Jones, Mo, Short Burdick Judd Simpson, Ill. Burke Keefe Smathers Byrne, N. ¥. Kerr Smith, Ohio Byrnes, Wis. Kirwan Talle Celler LeFevre Taylor Chiperfield Lemke Thomas Christopher Lichtenwalter Towe Combs Lodge Vursell Cooley Lovre Wadsworth Coudert Lyle Walsh Crawford McCulloch Weichel Davies, N. Y. McDonough Whitaker Davis, Tenn. McGrath Wier Dawson Macy Wilson, Ind Dingell Martin, Iowa Withrow Dolliver Mason Wood Dondero Meyer Worley Donohue Morton Doughton Moulder So the motion to adjourn was rejected. The Clerk announced the following pairs: On this vote: Mr. Hobbs for, with Mr. Patten against. Mr. Gilmer for, with Mr. LeFevre against. Mr. Boykin for, with Mr. Walsh against. Mr. Jones of Missouri for, with Mr. Heffer- nan against. Mr. Kerr for, with Mr. Hoffman of Tlinois against. Mr. Wood for, with Mr. Barrett of Pennsyl- vania against. Mr. Brown of Georgia for, with Mr. Hand against. Mr. Bates for, with Mr. Murphy against. Mr. Bland for, with Mrs. Bolton of Ohio against. Mr. Bulwinkle for, against. Mr. Boggs of Louisiana for, with Mr. Dono- hue against. Mr. Smathers for, with Mr. Byrne of New York against. Mr. Hébert for, with Mr. Kirwan against, Until further notice: Mr. McGrath with Mr. Towe. Mr. Fogarty with Mrs. 8t. George. Mr. Davies of New York with Mr. Dondero. Mr. Whitaker with Mr. Chiperfield. Mr. Wier with Mr. Brown of Ohio. Mr. Christopher with Mr. Brehm. Mr. Worley with Mr. Lichtenwalter, Mr. Patman with Mr. McCulloch, Mr. Blatnik with Mr. Coudert. Mr. Newson changed his vote from “yea” to “nay.” The result of the vote was announced as above recorded, with Mr. Philbin
'1950 The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts [Mr. McCormack] to dispense with further proceedings under the call. i Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, a par- Mamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. PICKETT. Mr. Speaker, at the time the gentleman from Michigan moved to adjourn, the Speaker had just stated what the question was—which was the motion of the gentleman from Mas- sachusetts [Mr. McCormack] to dispense with further proceedings under a pre- ceding call of the House. I objected to the vote, as was revealed by a division on the question, on the ground that a quo- rum was not present. Is not now the order of business an automatic roll call on the motion of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormack]? The SPEAKER. No; it is not. vote now comes de novo. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCormacx]. The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. PiIcKeETT) there were—ayes 138, noes 6. Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present, and I make the point of order that a quorum is not present. Mr. CAVALCANTE. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. ' The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it Mr. CAVALCANTE. Under the rules of the House, are the cloakrooms a part of the Hall of the House? The SPEAKER. The Chair cannot count any Members that he cannot see. The Chair will count. [After count- ing.] Evidently there is no quorum present. The Doorkeeper will close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms will notify absent Members, and the Clerk will call the roll. The question was taken; and there were—yeas 243, nays 86, answered ‘“‘pres- ent” 1, not voting 102, as follows: The 4 {Roll No. 51] ] YEAS—243 Addonizio Chudoft Fulton Andersen, Church Furcolo H Carl Clemente Gamble Anderson, Calif.Cole, Kans. Garmatz Angell Cole, N.Y. Gavin Aspinall Corbett Gillette Auchincloss Cotton Golden Battle Crook Goodwin Beall Crosser Gordon Bennett, Mich Cunningham Gorski Bentsen Curtis Graham Biemiller Dague Granahan Bishop Davenport Granger Blackney Davis, Wis. Green Blatnik Delancy Gross Boggs, Del. Denton Hagen Bolling D’Ewart Hale Bolton, Md. Dollinger Hall, Bonner Douglas Edwin Arthur Bosone Doyle Harris Bramblett Eaton Hart Breen Eberharter Havenner Buchanan Ellsworth Hays, Ark. Buckley, Ill. Elston Tiays, Ohio Burnside Engel, Mich. Hedrick Canfield Fallon Heller Carnahan Feighan Herter Carroll Fenton Heselton Case, N. J. Fernandez Hill Case, 8. Dak. Flood Hinshaw Cavalcante Fogarty Hoffman, Mich, Cheilf Forand Holifiela Chesney Ford Holmes Hope Horan Howell Huber Hull Irving Jackson, Wash. Jacobs Javits Jensen Johnson Jonas Karst Karsten Kean Kearney Kearns Keating Kee Keefe Kelley, Pa. Kelly, N. Y, Kennedy Keogh Kilburn King Klein Kruse Kunkel Lane Latham Linehan Lyle Lynch McCarthy McConnell McCormack McGregor McGuire McKinnon McMillen, Il. McSweeney Mock, Il. Mack, Wash, Madden Magee Abbitt Abernethy Albert Allen, Tl. Allen, La. Andrews Arends Barden Beckworth Bennett, Fle. Boggs, La. Brooks Bryson Burleson Burton Camp Cannon Carlyle Chatham Clevenger Colmer Cooper . Cox Davis, Ga. Deane DeGraffenried Doughton Durham Evins Mahon Mansfield Marcantonio Marsalis Marshall Martin, Mass. Morrow Michener Miles Miller, Calif. Miller, Md, Miller, Nebr. Mitchell Monroney Morgan Morris Multer Murray, Wis. Nelson Nicholson Noland Norblad Norton O’Brien, Tl. O’Brien, Mich. O'Hara, Il. O'Hara, Minn. O’Konski O'Neill O'Sullivan O'Toole Patman Patterson Perkins Pfeifer, Joseph L. Phillips, Calif, Polk Poulson Powell Price Quinn Rabaut Reed, Ill. Reed, N.Y. Rees Rhodes Ribicoft Riehlman Rodino NAYS—86 Fellows Fisher Frazier Fugate Gary Gathings Gossett Grant Gregory Hardy Hare Harrison Herlong Jenison Jones, Ala. Jones, N C. Kilday Lanham Larcade Lucas McMillan, 8 C. Mills Murray, Tenn. Norrell Pace Passmen Peterson Pickett Poage CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Rogers, Mass. Rooney Roosevelt Sabath Sasscer Saylor Scott, Hardie Beott, Hugh D., Jr. Scrivner Scudder Secrest Shafer Shelley Sheppard Simpson, Pa. Smith, Wis. Spence Staggers Steed Stigler Stockman Sullivan Taber Tauriello Tollefson Trimble Van Zandt Velde Vorys Wagner Walter Weich Werdel White, Calif. White, Idaho Wickersham Widnall Wigglesworth Wilson, Okla. Withrow Wolcott Wolverton Woodhouse Woodruff Yates Young Zablock! Preston Rains Rankin Redden Regan Richards Rivers Rogers, Fla, Sikes Sims Smith, Kans. Smith, Va. Stanley Stefan Sutton Tackett Teague Thompson Thornberry Underwood Vinson Wheeler Whitten Whittington ‘Williams Willis Wilson, Tex. Winstead ANSWERED “PRESENT’—1 Andresen, August H. NOT VOTING—102 Allen, Calif, Bailey Baring Barrett, Pa. Barrett, Wyo. Bates Bland Bolton, Ohlo Boykin Brehm Brown, Ga. Brown, Ohio Buckicy, N. ¥. Bulwinkle Burdick Burke Byrne, N. Y. Byrnes, Wis, Celler Chiperfield Christopher Combs Cooley Coudert Crawford Davies, N.Y. Davis, Tenn. Dawson Dingell Dolliver Dondero Donohue Eliott Engle, Calif, Gilmer Gore Heffernan Hobbs Hoeven Hoffman, Mll. Jackson, Calif. James Jenkins Jennings Jones, Mo. Judd Kerr Murphy Simpson, Til. Kirwan Nixon Smathers LeFevre Patten Smith, Ohio Lichtenwalter Pfeiffer, Talle Lodge William L. Taylor Lovre Philbin Thomas McCulloch Phillips, Tenn. Towe MeDonough Plumley Vursell McGrath Potter Wadsworth Macy Priest Walsh Martin, Iowa Ramsay Weichel Mason Rich Whitaker Meyer Badlak Wier Morrison Sadowski ‘Wilson, Ind. Morton 8t. George Wood Moulder Sanborn Worley Murdock Short So the motion was agreed to. The Clerk announced the following pairs: On this vote: Mr. Patten for, with Mr. Hobbs against. Mr. LeFevre for, with Mr. Gilmer against. Mr. Walsh for, with Mr Boykin against. Mr. Heffernan for, with Mr. Wood against. Mr. Hoffman of Illinois for, with Mr. Kerr against. Mr. Barrett of Pennsylvania for, with Mr. Brown of Georgia against. Mr. Hand for, with Mr. Bates against. Mr. Murphy for, with Mr. Bland against. Mrs. Bolton of Ohio for, with Mr. Bulwinkle against. Mr. Kirwan for, with Mr Hébert against. Mr Celler for, with Mr. Morrison against. Mr. McGrath for, with Mr. Smathers against. Mr. Byrne of New York for, with Mr. Jones of Missour! against. Until further notice: Mr. Christopher with Mr. Weichel. Mr. Burke with Mr. Brown of Ohio. Mr. Buckley of New York with Mr. Mc- Culloch. Mr Moulder with Mr. Brehm. Mr Weir with Mr. Halleck. Mr. Worley with Mr. Short. Mr Whitaker with Mr. William L, Pfeiffer. Mr. Sadowski with Mr. McDonough. Mr. Baring with Mr. Lichtenwalter. Mr. Cuuporr changed his vote from “nay” to “yea ” Mr. Voryrs changed his vote from “nay” to “yea.” Mr. GoLpEN changed his vote from “nay” to “yea.” Mr. JoHnson changed his vote from “nay” to “yea.” The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The doors were opened. CALENDAR WEDNESDAY The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the committees. The Clerk called the Committee on the District of Columbia. Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan, Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The Chair does not yield to the gentleman for a parlia- mentary inquiry at this time. Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. The SPEAKER. The Clerk has called the Committee on the District of Colum- bia. The Chair recognizes the gentle- man from South Carolina [Mr. Mc- MiILran]. Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. That motion is always in crder, The SPEAKER, The Chair has rec- ognized the gentleman from South Caro- lina {[Mr. McMILLan].
1812 Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a preferential motion. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from South Carolina {[Mr. McMr1zan] has been recognized. Mr. COLMER. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from South Carolina {[Mr. McMrLrian] has been recognized. INCORPORATING GIRL SCOUTS Mr. McMILLAN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R. 6670) to incorporate the Girl Scouts of the United States of America, and for other purposes. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That Mrs. Harry 8. Tru- man, of Independence, Mo.; Mrs. Woodrow Wilson, of Washington, D C., Mrs, Calvin Coolidge, of Northampton, Mass.; Mrs Frank- lin D. Roosevelt, of Hyde Park, N. Y.; Mrs. Arthur O. Choate, of New York, N. Y; Mrs. Frederick H, Brooke, of Washington, D C; Mrs. Vance C. McCormick, of Harrisburg, Pa. Mrs. Harvey 8S. Mudd, of Los Angeles, Calif.; Mrs. Alen H. Means, of Los Angeles, Calif.; Mrs. C. Vaughan Ferguson, of Sche- nectady, N. Y.; Dr, Mary H. 5. Hayes, of New York, N. Y.; Mrs. Walter N. Rothschild, of New York, N. ¥.; Mrs Charles Kendrick, of Ban Francisco, Calif.; Mrs. Frederick H Buch- olz, of Omaha, Nebr.; Mrs. Nathan Mobley, of Greenwich, Conn.; Mrs. Amory Houghton, of Corning, N. Y.; Mrs. Gordon Hunger, of Scarsdale, N. ¥.; Mre. Charles H. Ridder, of New York, N. Y.; Mrs. Paul Rittenhouse, of New York, N. ¥.; Mrs. Alfred R. Bachrach, of New York, N. ¥.; Mrs. Stanlee T. Bates, of Cleveland Heights, Ohio; Mrs. D. D. Bovaira, of Tulsa, Oklea.; Mrs. W. Wright Byran, of Atlanta, Ga.; Mrs. R. A. Burnett, of Amarillo, Tex.; Mrs. Cyril T. Carney, of Des Moines, Jowa; Mrs. Leonard G. Carpenter, of Crystal Bay, Minn.; Mre, Everett Case, of Hamilton, N. Y.; Dr. Rosalind Cassidy, of Santa Monica, Calif.; Mra. H. 8. Fenimore Cooper, of Coop- erstown, N. Y.; Mrs. J. Roger DeWitt, of In- dependence, Mo.; Mrs. R. T. Dozier, of Mont- gomery, Ala.; Mrs. Charles W. Farnsworth, of Concord, Mass.; Mrs. Merritt Farrell, of New- town, Ohio; Mrs. W. V. M. Fawcett, of New- ton, Mass.; Mrs. J. T. Finlen, of Butte, Mont ; Mrs. John A. Frick, of Allentown, Pa; Mrs. A. B. Graham, of Portland, Oreg.; Mrs. Ed- ward F. Johnson, of Scarsdale, N. Y.: Mrs. Charles H. Larkin, Second, of Eden, N. Y.3 Mrs. Roy F. Layton, of Chevy Chase, Md.; Mrs. James P. McGranery, of Philadelphia, Pa.; Mrs. Julius Mark, of New York, N. Y4 Miss Clementine Miller, of Columbus, Ind.; Mrs, Dudley H. Mills, of Glen Head, Long Island, N. ¥.; Mrs. Hilleary L. Murray, of Minneapolis, Minn; Mrs, C. E. Robbins, of Pierre, S. Dak.; Mrs. Harry M. Robbins, of Seattle, Wash.; Mrs. Snelling Robinson, of Lake Forest, I1l.; Mrs. Harry M. Sartoris, of Washington, D. C.; Mrs. Theodore Squier, of Milwaukee, Wis.; Miss Dorothea Sullivan, of Washington, D. C.; Mrs. John Arthur Thum, of Glendora, Callf.; Mrs. George L. Todd, of Rochester, N. Y.; Mrs. Abe D. Waldauer, of Memphis, Tenn.; Mrs, Frank L. Weil, of New York, N. ¥.; Mrs. John M. Whalen, of Kings- ton, R. I; Myre. William T. Wilson, Jr., of Winston-Salem, N. C.; Mrs, Albert E. Winger, of New York, N. Y¥.; Mrs. Arthur Woods, of Washington, D. C., officers, directors, or mem-~- bers; and their associates and successors, constituting Girl Scouts of the United States of America, a membership corporation organ~ ized under the laws of the District of Colum- bia (hereinafter referred to as the “old cor- poration”), are hereby incorporated a body corporate and politic of the District of Co~ lJumbia, where its domicile shall be. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—HOUSE Src. 2, The name of such corporation shall be Girl Scouts of the United States of Amer- ica (hereinafter referred to as the “corpora- tion,” and by that name it shall have per- petual succession, with power to sue and be gued in courts of law and equity within the jurisdiction of the United States; to take, re- ceive, and hold, in trust or otherwise, and to sell and convey real and personal property necessary for its corporate purposes, and other real and personal property, the income from which shall be applied to its corporate purposes; to adopt a seal, and to alter or de- stroy such seal; to have offices and to conduct ite business and affairs within and without the District of Columbia and in the several States, Territories, and possessions of the United States; to adopt a constitution, by- laws, rules, and regulations (including regu- lations for the election of associates and suc- cessors) not inconsistent with the laws of the United States, or any State thereof, and from time to time to alter such constitution, bylaws, rules, and regulations, and generally to perform such acts as may be neccessary to carry out the purposes of this act and pro- mote the purposes of the corporation. Src, 3. The purposes of the corporation shall be to promote the qualities of truth, loyalty, helpfulness, friendliness, courtesy, purity, kindness, obedience, cheerfulness, thriftiness, and kindred virtues among girls as @ preparation for their responsibilities in the home and for service to the community, to direct and coordinate the Girl Scout movement in the United States, its Terri- tories and possessions, and to fix and main- tain standards for the movement which will inspire the rising generation with the high- est ideals of character, patriotism, conduct, and attainment, which purposes shall be nonsectarian, nonpolitical, and not for pe- cuniary profit. Src. 4 There shall be a National Council of Girl Scouts, which shall have power to make and amend a constitutton and bylaws, and to elect a board of directors, and officers and agents. The number, qualifications, and terms of office of members ot the national council shall be prescribed by the constitu- tion, except that they shall be citizens of the United States, or residents of its Territories or possessions. The constitution may pre- scribe the number of members of the na- tional council necessary to constitute a quorum, which number may be less than a majority of the whole number. The affairs of the corporation between meetings of the national council shall be managed by a board of directors, except that the bylaws may pro- vide for an executive committee to exercise the powers of the board of directors in the interim between its meetings, and for other committees to operate under the general supervision of the board of directors. The number, qualifications, and terms of office of members of the board of directors shall be prescribed by the constitution. The consti- tution may prescribe the number of mem- bers of the board of directors necessary to constitute a quorum which number shall not be less than twenty, or two-fifths of the whole number. The board of directors, to the extent provided in the constitution and bylaws, shall have the powers of the national council, in the interim between its meetmgs, The national council, or between meetings thereof, the board of directors, may authorize and cause to be executed leases, mortgages, and Hens upon, and sales and conveyances of, any of the property of the corporation; and the proceeds arising therefrom shall be applied or invested for the use and benefit of the corporation. Sec. 5. A meeting of the national council shall be held at least once each 2 years at a time and place to be fixed as provided in the constitution, for elections, and to receive the reports of the officers and board of directors. Special meetings may be called as prescribed in the constitution. The national council FEBRUARY 15 and the board of directors shall have power to hold meetings and keep the seal, books, documents, and papers of the corporation within or without the District of Columbia. Sec. 6. The corporation shall have the sole and exclusive right to have and to use, in carrying out its purposes, all emblems and badges, descriptive or designating marks, and words or phrases now or heretofore used by the old corporation in carrying out its pro- gram, it being distinctly ana definitely un- derstood, however, that nothing in this act shall interfere or conflict with established or vested rights. Sec. 7, On or before the 1st day of April of each year the corporation shall make and transmit to Congress a report of ita proceed- ings for the year ending December 81 pre- ceding, including a full, complete, and item-= ized report of receipts and expenditures of whatever kind. Sec. 8. On the effective date of this act, the separate existence of the old corporation shall cease and the old corporation shall be merged into the corporation. The corpora- tion shall possess all the public and private rights, privileges, powers, and franchises and shall be subject to all the restrictions, dis- abilities, and duties of the old corporation 60 merged into it, and all of the rights, privi- leges, powers, and franchises of the oJd core poration, and all property—real, personal, and mixed—and all debts due it on what- ever account shall be vested in the corpora~ tion; and all property, rights, privileges, powers, and franchises and all other interests of the old corporation shall be the property of the corporation and the title to any real estate vested in the old corporation by deed or otherwise, under the laws of the District of Columbia or any State, shall not revert or be in any way impaired by reason of this act: Provided, however, That all rights of creditors and all liens upon any property of the old corporation shall be preserved unim- paired and all its debts, Mabilities, and duties shall attach to the corporation and may bo enforced against it to the same extent as if such debts, liabilities, and duties had been incurred or contracted by it. Sxc. 9. Congress shall have the right to re- peal, alter, or amend this act at any time. Mr. McMILLAN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gen- tlewoman from New Jersey’ [Mrs. Norton). Mrs. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, before proceeding with my remarks I would like to thank the chairman of the Committee on the District of Columbia and the other members of the committee for having reported this very excellent bill for your consideration. H. R. 6670 is, as you know, a bill to in- corporate the Girl Scouts of America. There is not very much to be said about this bill, except that the purpose of the bill is to give the same prestige to the girls of America as has been given to the boys. You all know that the Girl Scouts and the Boy Scouts of America are the future citizens upon whom we shall have to depend. They are doing a magnificent work. They are building character. They are an honor to our country. The purpose of the scout law, as you know, and as you will see from the re- port that has been submitted by the com- mittee, is to incorporate, by congres- sional act, the Girl Scouts of America. It is presently a membership corpora- tion, organized under the laws of the District of Columbia. This Federal in- corporation is not going to cost the Gov- ernment any additional money. It is