I have the honor to advise you, therefore, that in my opinion persons on the retired list of the Army, holding Medals of Honor, are not eligible under existing legislation to receive the pension provided by the act of April 27, 1916.

Respectfully,

HOMER CUMMINGS.

The CHAIRMAN. If there are no further questions of the witness, and he has nothing further to tell us, let us excuse him with the thanks of the committee.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN G. ALEXANDER, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, THIRD DISTRICT, MINNESOTA

The CHAIRMAN. Let us hear Representative Alexander, the author of H. R. 8051, next.

Mr. ALEXANDER. I am interested in this bill because we have an outstanding hero in the city of Minneapolis and in my district. That is, we did have one, but he died 2 or 3 years ago as a result of war service. His name was George H. Mallon. His widow and two orphans are living there now and they are in great need.

This case was brought to my attention by many residents of that community who think, as does Mr. Schafer, that a rank injustice is being done the dependents of these men we have in mind, such a rank injustice as to indicate a decadence in our country. My constituents feel that it is very unfair to allow the widow and orphans of a man who has been signally honored for heroism under fire, as was Captain Mallon, to be let down this way.

The widow is, of course, receiving a pension of $30 a month. Captain Mallon was a high-class man. He was a candidate for Lieutenant Governor of the State of Minnesota and came very near being elected shortly after he came back from war service in France. He was in civil life accustomed to making a salary of $400 to $500 a month. Now, when his family has to live on $30 a month plus a little allowance for the children, according to present pension laws, that is plainly a severe injustice.

Mr. BOLLES. How many dependents did the deceased leave?
Mr. ALEXANDER. A wife and two daughters.

Captain Mallon was wounded twice in line of duty. He captured single-handed, according to a citation given by General Pershing, 100 German soldiers, 11 machine guns, 1 antiaircraft gun, and four 155-millimeter howitzers. He did that in addition to leading his men in the accomplishment of other duties.

Mr. SCHAFER. He did better than Sergeant York, did he not?

Mr. ALEXANDER. What I have told you about his work is in accordance with records I have in my office and that have been supplied to me by veterans' organizations interested in this deceased captain. Captain Mallon had a very distinguished service record throughout the whole World War. He not only served in the World War, but also in the Philippine Islands, where he was cited for bravery in line of duty.

I want to add just one thing in connection with this matter, although what I am about to say may not be relevant in this hearing. It seems to me that we are considering real assets of the Nation. It seems to me that bravery and heroism are true assets of any country. What today stands out as the greatest thing in the world? Is it not

the bravery of these intrepid Finns, with their limited resources but never flagging courage and zeal, against a great nation like Russia with, practically speaking, unlimited resources? There is no greater asset in the United States, having in mind even our immense stores of gold and other evidences of material wealth, that exceeds bravery and heroism, which is infectious,

The way we are letting down these few men who have displayed outstanding heroism and patriotic devotion is, to me, an indication of decadence in our great country. I do not think that policy should be allowed to continue. I think we are simple neglecting to recognize and appreciate one of the greatest things that we as a nation up to now have always enjoyed, namely, heroism and devotion to welfare of country.

I do not know of any finer thing that we as Congressmen could do than to show a tangible appreciation of these qualities of fidelity and courage. We should do something for the dependents of these worthy men who have passed on, for the dependents of such men as Captain Mallon.

I remember reading in the Washington papers only last week of the case of Mrs. Sadie Monssen, a widow whose hero husband had been honored by naming a warship after him. Lieutenant Monssen had been given the Congressional Medal of Honor; yet his wife did not have money enough to make the trip from New York to the west coast to witness the christening of a war vessel named in honor of her deceased husband. She is getting only $30 a month.

Mr. SCHAFER. Your bill would grant only $10 additional, would it not?

Mr. ALEXANDER. No. This is a special pension. It would give the widow and the children, if any, $40 plus what they are now receiving.

Mr. SCHAFER. Would she be able to get what she is now receiving and the additional amount carried in your bill?

Mr. ALEXANDER. That is the intention.

Mr. SCHAFER. What did you have in mind when you introduced this bill?

Mr. ALEXANDER. I had in mind giving Mrs. Mallon $40 a month in addition to the $38 a month received now.

Mr. BOLLES. Why not state it in the bill?

Mr. ALEXANDER. I had thought I did by having in the bill the word "special."

General HINES. All the rulings have been that two pensions may not be received.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Suppose the bill should read "in addition to her present pension"?

The CHAIRMAN. In this type of bill it would not provide an additional pension. One may not draw two pensions from the Government, except by special acts.

Mr. SCHAFER. One could if the law should read, "In addition to any other pension now received." The way the bill is drawn now, it calls for the maximum rates carried in this bill.

The CHAIRMAN. This is about the same as was the special bill in favor of Mrs. Hobson.

Mr. BOLLES. I think you would have to insert "$70 a month."
The CHAIRMAN. Would not that make it a private bill?

Mr. ALEXANDER. I am sure that General Hines would know best. I am thinking of the widows and the orphans who have been deprived of their husbands and fathers, the providers.

Mr. SCHAFER. Is it not a fact that your bill is not in the nature of a special act? You are just citing this one case to show the injustice of existing law and the necessity for the enactment of a bill to recognize the service, by granting pensions, in all cases of Medal of Honor men. You want to look out for their dependents after the men have passed away.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That is the idea. I am assuming that practically all of these Medal of Honor cases are parallel, almost similar to the two I have mentioned.

Mr. SCHAFER. You would not confine the benefit only to cases like the one you have presented, where the widow is now receiving a pension. There are, no doubt, other Medal of Honor men who do not receive pensions, and when they die their widows do not receive pensions under the general law. Your idea is a recognition of the meritorious service which resulted in the issuance of these Medals of Honor, and you want to make sure that the dependents of the men who received those medals are properly taken care of after the veteran passes on

Mr. ALEXANDER. That is the idea.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to read from the act of April 27, 1916, as shown at page 123 of the laws of the United States governing the granting of Army and Navy pensions, as follows:

Other pensions not affected. Such special pension shall not deprive any such special pensioner of any other pension or of any benefit, right, or privilege to which he is or may hereafter be entitled under any existing or subsequent law, but shall be in addition thereto.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That was my understanding of the matter when I introduced H. R. 8051.

In conclusion, I would like to have permission to insert in the record a letter I have received regarding this matter from Mrs. John Hamas, San Diego, Calif., in which letter she calls attention to the men who have received the Distinguished Service Crosses, and Navy crosses, for bravery in line of duty..

The CHAIRMAN. In the absence of objection, you may do so.
Mr. ALEXANDER. The letter reads as follows:

3536 LARK STREET, SAN DIEGO, CALIF., January 25, 1940.

Hon. JOHN GRANT ALEXANDER,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. ALEXANDER: As a member of the Women of Army and Navy Legion of Valor I wish to congratulate you on your bill to increase the pension of recipients of the Army and Navy Medal of Honor. You are to be commended for sponsoring legislation in behalf of the "rank and file of our dollar-a-day soldiers," for as a general rule these are the men who do the heroic deeds and world conditions being as they are today we need Representatives in Congress like you to see that these brave men are in a measure compensated for the sacrifice they make.

May I respectfully ask that you amend this bill to include also those men who have received the Distinguished Service Cross and the Navy Cross for bravery in action? As you probably know, Mr. Congressman, the total number of those receiving these three medals is about 1,500. I believe, too, Mr. Alexander, that you will see the fairness in including the Distinguished Service Cross and Navy Cross holders so as not to discriminate against any branch of the military service. Some holders of these medals are those who saw service in bandit-infested Nicaragua and China, and while these skirmishes were in the

class of undeclared wars nevertheless it seems only fair that these men should receive some recognition akin to those who served in the World War. Some States gave their World War veterans a bonus, tax exemption on their homes, and so forth, and this applied to all veterans-not only to those who actually did heroic deeds.

I would appreciate receiving a copy of this bill, as it is not always convenient for me to get a copy of the Congressional Record. Also I would appreciate your sending the president of my organization a copy of the bill so that it may be discussed at the Women's Patriotic Conference on National Defense which is meeting in Washington, D. C., January 31, February 1 and 2; addressing her as Mrs. Sterling L. Morelock, national president, Women of Army and Navy Legion of Valor, Mayflower Hotel, Washington, D. C. Mrs. Morelock's home address is 228 Lexington Avenue, Aspinwall, Pa. Mrs. Morelock may know about this legislation already, but I am writing her also, as I am sure the various organizations meeting at the conference will be helpful in getting this piece of legislation enacted. Assuring you of my sincere appreciation for the noble work you are doing, and hoping you may see fit to amend this bill as suggested.

Most respectfully,

EDNA HAMAS (Mrs. JOHN).

STATEMENT OF VERNON E. MOORE, SECRETARY TO THE HONORABLE C. JASPER BELL, MEMBER OF CONGRESS, FOURTH DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Vernon E. Moore, secretary to Hon. C. Jasper Bell, the author of H. R. 3385, is present and desires to be heard. Mr. MOORE. H. R. 3385 was prompted by virtually the same motive that moved Mr. Alexander in connection with the case of the captain he mentioned.

We have in our district the case of a veteran named Charles Barger, who, after a quite hectic life following his return from the World War, committed suicide, leaving a widow and three children.

I prepared a statement for the committee and sent it to Mr. Bell for his approval, expansion, or correction, but I have not as yet received a reply from him. He is ill in Missouri, convalescing from an illness which has prevented him from returning to Washington for the current session. I am pleased to report that he is feeling much better now.

The statement I have conveys, I am quite sure, the general purport of what he would wish to say in reference to this matter if he were here; and if you gentlemen of the committee would like to hear the statement, I shall be glad to read it. Is that agreeable to gentlemen of the committee?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; that is agreeable.

Mr. MOORE. The filing of this measure was prompted by the desire to be of material aid to Mrs. Charles Barger and her dependents, left without means of support when her husband, Charles Barger, died by suicide after a frustrated life.

Returning from the World War as a hero, Charles Barger was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest award in the United States. For years he was figuratively carried about on the shoulders of his fellow members of the American Legion in my district and the State of Missouri as a hero, an honor justly earned. He was unfitted for peacetime life of earning a living for himself and his family. The laudations he received from those who admired his heroism only complicated that situation. Yet his fellow members

of the American Legion did see to it that he was given gainful employment until such a time as the general public and those who could give employment to veterans becamse apathetic to the appeals for help on the ground he was a national hero.

This man's case is somewhat typical of that of many veterans. Charlie Barger was not a bum-he was a good man but one ill-adjusted to the urban life into which he was thrown by necessity after the war. It seems a hollow thing to have the Congress of the United States confer upon a veteran the Congressional Medal of Honor without any more material awards. It is a certainty that some more material recognition should be given.

It is my advice that military leaders, like the coaches and captains of athletic teams, make much of the stellar work of their men, holding their deeds up as examples for others to follow.

Take the case of Admiral John Paul Jones. He is held up to every embryo naval officer at the United States Naval Academy as a hero and fine leader. It is fitting that this should be for he truly was a great American. Yet the Charles Bargers are also great Americans for when they faced German machine-gun nests alone and captured them single-handed, they could not have done so without thinking of our own United States and realizing all the while that they would perhaps lose their own lives but save those of their comrades.

This bill is not without precedent in the history of the United States. The elevation of Sgt. Alvin York, perhaps the greatest of all of our heroes during the World War, to the rank of captain on retired pay was a form of pension.

The Committee on World War Veterans' Legislation has repeatedly refused to report private bills for the benefit of veterans of the World War. Yet this relief was given to Captain York through the action by Congress upon the recommendations of other committees. Yet no other form of relief can be had individually for these heroes through private bills.

It is my desire to leave this matter before your committee with that reminder that no discriminations should be made and that our great Nation should be as aware as other nations of the needs to reward our heroes whose deeds are a national asset.

This bill would not affect a great many veterans, whose records are the hallowed possessions of the Army and Navy. Only 773 in the Navy and Marine Corps received the Congressional Medal of Honor and only 1,825 received this decoration from the Army. Many of these are now deceased, leaving behind them widows and dependents. I might stop here and cite a letter dated April 13, 1937, from the Bureau of Navigation of the Navy Department, which states that in the Navy and the Naval Reserve during the World War, 65 officers received the Medal of Honor and 594 enlisted men received the Medal of Honor. In the Marine Corps 18 officers and 96 enlisted men received the Medal of Honor. Five enlisted men of the Marine Corps, included in these figures, have been awarded the Army Medal of Honor also on account of services in the World War.

As I look over the list I find the name of Congressman Izac, lieutenant, United States Navy, retired.

Also, I should like to refer to a letter from the Adjutant General of the Army dated April 6, 1937, stating that the records of that office