Q President Roosevelt has stated that he believes the axis will lose I take it he means in a military sense. Your radio speech leaves me decidedly under the impression that you are not so sanguine. Now, if you cannot predict a British Tistory, and I don't think anyone can, how do you justify your stand to render aaid to Britain (even to the extent of committing acts of war), thereby dragging us down to possible defeat with her? Q. I think you will agree with me that the United States cannot afford to be tied up with a defeated Britain. From your knowledge of the efforts of the British Government in trying to effect a victory (other than just preaching about it), the morale of the British people, the damage done to the British Isles, the loss in shipping, etc., would you say that the British have a better than 50-50 chance for victory without the United States help? What I am trying to get at, Mr. Kennedy, is this: If we can roughly estimate what Britain's efforts can produce, then find out what we can do, add these two together and balance them or from our knowledge of the axis strength, we can approximate and only approximate-what the result might be and the time required to effect the result. This estimate, of course, does not take into account a possible civil war or revolution in England or a revolution in Germany. Q. In considering this whole problem, Mr. Kennedy, there is one fundamental question which we should be awfully sure about, and that is this: Are the efforts of the British to drag us into this war for the sole purpose of helping to defeat Hitler, or is it to have us change our status from a neutral to a declared belligerent and thereby force us to underwrite all or a part of the peace? Q. In your speech, having reference to the appellation of "appeaser," you state that if "it is charged that I advocate a deal with the dictators contrary to the British desire, or that I advocate placing any trust or confidence in their promises, the charge is false and malicious"-would you say the record of the British in failing to honorably live up to their commitments under the debt-funding agreements inspires any confidence in the American people; or again, their part in effecting the so-called secret treaties which were kept from the American people during the 1914-18 war calls for any particular trust from our people? Q. After all, Mr. Kennedy, wasn't Thomas Jefferson correct when he said: "For us to attempt to reform all Europe and bring them back to principles of morality and a respect for the equal rights of nations would show us to be only maniacs of another character"? Mr. RICHARDS. Mr. Kennedy, my good friend Mr. Tinkham is rather adroit in trying to put words in a man's mouth. Mr. TINKHAM. I object to that, Mr. Chairman. Mr. RICHARDS. I have read some excerpts of your speech, and I just want to ask about three or four sentences and have this testimony show whether they correctly state your position. Did you say in your speech I favor now, as I did in my talk for the President, that we give the utmost aid to England. By so doing we will be assisting a nation which the American people want to see win. But more than that, we are helping ourselves, and we will be securing for ourselves the most precious commodity we need-time. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. I said time. Mr. RICHARDS. That is, time to arm? There are just two other sentences I want to question you about. Did you say this: Because aid to England is part of constructive American policy to safeguard America, we should go to the very limit in our assistance, but not to a point which would endanger our own protection. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. Now, there is one other sentence. I quite agree that if England should win this war we would be a great deal better off than we would be if England lost. Is that correct? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. I think perhaps it would be better if the rest of the sentence be put in there. The CHAIRMAN. Kindly read it. Mr. RICHARDS. That is the complete sentence. You mean the rest of the paragraph? Mr. KENNEDY. I mean the rest of the paragraph. Mr. RICHARDS. You say there is no argument on that score? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. The whole paragraph reads as follows: I quite agree that if England were to win this war we would be a great deal better off than we would be if England lost. There is no argument on that score. The point of argument, however, is on the question of whether to help England win the war we should get into the war ourselves, thus exhausting our own resources so as to threaten our whole civilization. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. Now, I have read your speech, and there are three main points in it. One of them was that we must stay out of war. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. The second main point was that we must give the utmost aid to England. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. And the third main point is that the class and quantity of material we can safely give to England must be decided by the President, acting with the Army and Navy. Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. I think I would add a fourth to that and that was that we should go "all out" to rearm now. There should be no limitation to it. Mr. RICHARDS. You think we should go "all out" to rearm now? Mr. RICHARDS. Without limit? Mr. KENNEDY. We should rearm to the best of our ability now. Mr. RICHARDS. For the protection of the United States? And the good that it would do to England, then, you consider incidental? Mr. KENNEDY. I do, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. Now, let me ask you this: That being true, you agree that time is of the essence, do you not? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. That being true, how can we do that without placing large discretionary power somewhere? Mr. KENNEDY. I quite agree. If you also read from the speech, so long as we are referring to it, I would also like to read that. One hears the argument that if war is declared the President will secure powers nceded for our defense. The President has very wide authority under existing law. Congress, I feel certain, will give him all the power that the protection of American interests require. The recent bill, H. R. 1776, called the lease-lend bill, seeks to confer upon the President authority unheard of in our history. It seeks to vest in the Executive powers which the President says he does not want and would not accept but for the emergency. The opponents of the bill claim that it amounts to an abdication by Congress of its responsibility and that it is not necessary at this time. Fortunately, out of the hearings the American people will learn what are the factors which it is claimed make the bill necessary, what is the meaning of its proposals in detail and what powers are to be exercised. Personally, I am a great believer in centralized responsibility and therefore believe in conferring all powers necessary to carry out that responsibility. Moreover, I appreciate full well that time is of the essence. Nevertheless, I am unable to agree with the proponents of this bill that it has yet been shown that we face such immediate danger as to justify the surrender of the authority and responsibility of the Congress. I believe that after the hearings have been completed there will be revealed less drastic ways of meeting the problem of adequate authority for the President. However, after there has been debate and a bill, whatever it may be, becomes part of our law, I think the duty of every American citizen is plain. All of us must rally behind the President so that he may carry on with a Nation which has debated in a democratic manner and acted in a democratic manner and is united in the cause of preserving our own democracy. In other words, I do not think there is any essential difference, but merely a question of whether a way cannot be found of giving the necessary discretionary authority and still have Congress function. Mr. RICHARDS. That is a very admirable statement, Mr. Ambassador. I want to get this plain. What we are trying to do is do a job. Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. Mr. RICHARDS. And you are trying to do a job? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. Mr. RICHARDS. And we want that job to be done in the best interests of the United States regardless of the interests of any other nation? Mr. KENNEDY. That is right, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. All right. We want to know how to do that job. Now, you believe that the President under our Constitution has vast powers already; has he not? Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. Mr. RICHARDS. He has charge of all the matters involving foreign relations, has he not? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. Mr. RICHARDS. He is Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy, is he not? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. If discretionary power is placed anywhere outside of the Congress, then do you agree it should be in the President of the United States? Mr. KENNEDY. Quite right. Mr. RICHARDS. Now, what you are concerned about, as I get it, is that Congress should not surrender any of its prerogatives; is that right? Mr. KENNEDY. I think, I imagine they will have to surrender some prerogatives in this emergency, and it is a question of how great it is, and if it is as I understand it is then they should. Mr. RICHARDS. It is the history of a democracy, is it not, that every time a democracy gets in a war, in order to function efficiently its parliamentary body has to surrender some of its peacetime prerogatives? Mr. KENNEDY. That is quite right. Mr. RICHARDS. And you think this is a case of emergency and the Congress will have to surrender some of its prerogatives now! Mr. KENNEDY. I think it is very definitely. It requires some effort to get action. Mr. RICHARDS. Then the question comes: Where is the line of demarcation? Mr. KENNEDY. That seems to me to be the problem that you gentlemen have to decide. Mr. RICHARDS. And that, under our great free system of judgment, is a matter of individual opinion? Mr. KENNEDY. That is quite right, sir. Mr. RICHARDS. And there is nothing in the Constitution or the law of the land about that line of demarcation? Mr. KENNEDY. Nothing that I am aware of. I do not qualify as an expert in that answer. Mr. RICHARDS. After all, the greatest power that Congress has, is it not, is the control of the purse strings of this Nation. That is the greatest power we have when it comes to a common-sense interpretation, certainly? Mr. KENNEDY. Certainly in peacetime that is absolutely true. Mr. KENNEDY. Well, I am perfectly willing to admit when you get into wartime it is an entirely different question. The only point you and I might have any difference upon is whether at this particular time Congress can have all its coordinating influence. Mr. RICHARDS. But you just stated in reply to a question, by Judge Kee, I think, that if the President or any department of the Government needed funds to carry out the provisions of this bill, they would have to come back to the Congress for such funds. Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. Mr. RICHARDS. They would have to appear before the Appropriations Committee of the Congress? Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. Mr. RICHARDS. And that committee would have full authority to go fully into the purposes of the appropriation; would they not?" Mr. KENNEDY. Perhaps you can answer this question for me then. What powers do this bill give that the President does not already have? You know the question. That is, that will not get us into war? Mr. RICHARDS. Now, you asked me a question. I will answer that question. What I think about it is, I think the President has far greater powers now under the Constitution, powers that could be stretched into carrying this Nation into war, than anything this bill gives him. It is elementary that the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of this country can order the Army anywhere and it is also obvious that he could order it to a place that would cause conflict with foreign governments. That is my answer to that. Now, we are all driving at the same thing. I am worried about this thing, too, just as you are, Mr. Kennedy. You are a businessman and a very successful businessman. Not all of the witnesses we have had here have specialized in the business field. If the general purposes of this bill are carried out, it will call for a great expansion of our industry, will it not? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. Mr. RICHARDS. And if we are properly preparing, which you say we should do, we should enable our industry to expand as fast as we can; should we not? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. Mr. RICHARDS. Then no matter what help this gives to Great Britain through the expansion of our industry and the production of war materials and so forth, what do you think about the question of our getting a dollar back or not, and as to whether it would be worth while to the United States in the event we did not? Mr. KENNEDY. I said also in my radio speech: So far as financing the assistance we give to Great Britain is concerned, my personal opinion is that the British ought to make available to us all the assets we can use. If, after the resources of Great Britain were used up, it was still sound American policy to assist them, I would prefer that it be done through outright gifts, since I would not expect that loans could be repaid. Mr. RICHARDS. Now, you say, "after their resources have been used up" and if it were the "sound American policy." Do you consider it would be sound American policy? Mr. KENNEDY. How can one tell at that time? I do not know, because I do not know at what period their assets will be used up. This thing changes so very quickly I think then we should take a look at the picture and see just exactly what is still American policy, because otherwise it seems to me that if you say we will go on continually and finance the war that the arguments against economic involvement in the war come immediately to the surface because then we would be underwriting a war about which we know no limit and about which we know not how much it will cost. It seems to me you only have to maintain to yourself the right to decide at any particular time what is the American policy at that time. Mr. RICHARDS. And our right to state what we think about the President's function and our right to decide what the American policy should be? Mr. KENNEDY. You mean who is to decide? Well, is that provided for? Is Congress willing to say that the President should decide that? Personally, my judgment may be a little biased, but I think he is a great fellow. But nevertheless I still want to keep out of war. Mr. RICHARDS. That is right. I think I agree with you along that line. I do not think Congress should surrender any of its rights. Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. If it has not any rights, then, Congressman, there is no point of you and I arguing about it. Mr. RICHARDS. What I am trying to get at is this, what do you think about the bill? When it comes to a frank proposition you first say you are in favor of the general objectives of the bill? Mr. KENNEDY. Yes. Mr. RICHARDS. You further say to get results you have to place discretionary powers somewhere. Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. Mr. RICHARDS. You further say that the discretionary powers should be in the hands of the President. Mr. KENNEDY. That is right. Mr. RICHARDS. Now, you do not think it would operate, or insure good operation of the law, to place it in the hands of some board. do you? Mr. KENNEDY. Well, the President has established a very good precedent by putting his production in the hands of a board. Mr. RICHARDS. That is right. But they are under his direct supervision. And the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy are, too. Mr. KENNEDY. Well, I would think their problem would be some way of working this thing out. It seems to me we ought not to make a big issue of something that we can adjust very easily. I |