Mr. THOMAS. That is right.

Mr. BRICKFIELD. That is all I have, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. FORRESTER. We will adjourn this meeting subject to reconvening on next Monday morning, 10 a. m.

(Thereupon, at 12:08 p. m., the subcommittee adjourned until Monday morning, 10 a. m., April 28, 1952.)

EMERGENCY POWERS CONTINUATION ACT

MONDAY, APRIL 28, 1952

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 4,

Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:20 a. m., in room 346, Old House Office Building, the Honorable E. L. Forrester presiding.

Subcommittee members present: Representatives Forrester (presiding), Pickett, and Boggs.

Also present: Miss Velma Smedley, assistant chief clerk; Cyril Brickfield, committee counsel.

Mr. FORRESTER. We have a quorum now, so the committee will come to order. Our legal counsel has a question that he would like to ask Mr. Burrus at this time.

Mr. BRICKFIELD. Mr. Burrus, as I understand it, today President Truman is going to proclaim the peace treaty with Japan, and at the same time or simultaneously therewith he is also going to terminate the national emergency of 1939 and 1941. In connection with that, in House Document 368, which is the document submitted with the bill now before this committee, on page 2, next to the last paragraph, he speaks of those two national emergencies and in the last sentence of that next to the last paragraph he says, and I quote:

It is my intention in order to eliminate any doubt on this latter point that the proclamation of the treaty of peace with Japan after its coming into forceand I believe that is today

shall expressly terminate those emergencies.

I wonder if you have any information for the committee as to whether or not the President is in fact terminating those national emergencies today?

Mr. BURRUS. Yes. The treaty has already come into force. It is our understanding that the proclamation, if it has not already been signed terminating the 1939 and 1941 emergencies, will be signed today. I do not know that it has been done yet but that was the intention and that is the recommendation.

Mr. BRICKFIELD. One other question. This temporary extension until June 1, which this committee secured in this House a few weeks ago, will that in any way affect the termination of the national emergencies of 1939 and 1941?

Mr. BURRUS. It affects it only to the extent that the emergency is continued for the termination of the Lanham Housing Act item. That is item 1 (a) (18).

Mr. BRICKFIELD. That is the only one that bases its authority on the emergency of 1939 or 1941?

Mr. BURRUS. That is the only one that will continue to be based to some extent on an emergency. There are two other items. Of all the items in this bill, there were two others that did depend on the 1939 or 1941 emergency, in addition to 1 (a) (18). 1 (c), that having to do with appointments, depended on it. There is one other item, 1 (a) (32), on page 23, which has to do with the entry and departure in the United States of aliens and citizens, restrictions on entry and departure. Those are the only three.

Mr. BRICKFIELD. I would like to bring up, Mr. Chairman, in order that it be in the record, that the national emergency of 1950, as declared by the President, was necessary because certain of the statutory provisions which were dependent upon the emergencies of 1939 and 1941 were terminated sometime in 1946. Is that not so?

Mr. BURRUS. I think it is July 1947.

Mr. BRICKFIELD. That is the primary cause of the national emergency declared in 1950.

Mr. BURRUS. Yes, the need for continuing certain statutory provisions that gave war authority.

Mr. FORRESTER. Mr. Burrus, I believe you said it was your understanding that you think the President will issue the proclamation or statement that this proclamation shall expressly terminate those emergencies that counsel was talking about. Is that your understanding, or do you know?

Mr. BURRUS. I know the proclamation was prepared and it has been recommended that it be signed. It was the intention of the White House to sign it. That is as far as I know.

Mr. FORRESTER. In other words, you do know that that express statement was in the proclamation?

Mr. BURRUS. Oh, yes.

Mr. FORRESTER. So now it will remain in there unless the President takes it out. Is that right?

Mr. BURRUS. It is a separate proclamation. There were two proclamations to be issued today. One is a formal proclamation announcing the termination of the war and the entry into force of the Japanese treaty. There is a separate proclamation specifically terminating the 1939 and 1941 emergencies.

Mr. FORRESTER. I have another question. I am somewhat like Will Rogers in that what I know I get from the papers or over the radio or television. If I am not mistaken I heard something in the last night or two that maybe there is going to be a supplement or adjustment with the railroads concerning their wages and so forth. What do you know about that?

Mr. BURRUS. I am in the same position as the chairman on that. I really know nothing more about it than you have indicated that you know.

Mr. FORRESTER. I think this subcommittee naturally would be interested in that. We heard voluminous testimony on that question. As I remember it, the railroads were taken over in 1950. If that be true, as I understand it, nothing was done from 1950 until a few days ago, at least, about effecting any adjustments or settlements with them. I was wondering what you knew about it or what information

you could give this subcommittee. As I remember the testimony, the testimony on the part of the Government and on the part of the representatives of the various brotherhoods was that when difficulties of that kind came up, they would say "You go to the Government."

When you would go to the Government the Government would say: "You go to the railroads." I am wondering if a solution had been found here in the last few days since we were examining this matter. Mr. BURRUS. I am being just 100 percent candid when I say that I really don't know any more about it than you have indicated that you know. I do not know if any of my colleagues know otherwise. I have not heard a word about the proposed settlement.

Mr. FORRESTER. I believe this committee should be briefed and told what is going on and what is being contemplated because the question naturally arises, if the Government has jurisdiction or power to do that now, then that same power has been vested in them from 1950 to

date.

The next question arises as to whether if any power is going to be exercised, whether that power is going to be exercised under authority granted by the Constitution or by the statute or whether that comes within the inherent power group.

I do not know whether you gentleman heard my observations or not. I do not know whether you gentlemen concur with me or not but I do feel that that is information that should be brought to this subcommittee.

Mr. PICKETT. I got the tenor of the chairman's statement and I agree with it.

Mr. FORRESTER. Do you suppose that you could get that information for us?

Mr. BURRUS. The Department of the Army, of course, operating the railroads would have that. I just have not had any contact with them on that subject. Certainly we could ask the Army to produce a witness. That is the only way that I know that we could get the information, unless I could gather it informally and transmit it to the committee. Which would you prefer?

Mr. FORRESTER. It does not matter to me how we get it, just so we get it. But it seems to me that all the information on every subject before us should be brought to this subcommittee. I do not think this subcommittee can deal with anything unless it has full information. As I said, I was interested in knowing if there is anything on foot now where they are going to work out some adjustment with the railroads, and if so, why it is not on there instead of say from 1950 up to date, and if it is, whether they now say they have power under the Constitution or any statute or whether it comes within the inherent power doctrine.

Mr. BURRUS. I will certainly make an inquiry. Frankly, I would be reluctant to admit that I did not know about it, but I did not.

Mr. FORRESTER. I appreciate your position on it but we not only want an inquiry, we would like to have some evidence on it. No matter who it is that has that information, we would like to have them come before us and we would like to have the full information on it so that when we go into executive session and discuss these matters that we can have all the knowledge on the matter, because we are the ones who are asked to pass upon these matters.

Does any member care to elaborate on that?

Mr. BOGGS. No, sir.

Mr. FORRESTER. That being true, I think the preliminaries are out of the way, Mr. Burrus, and such witnesses as you have we will be glad to take up in the order that you prefer.

Mr. BURRUS. We have two remaining items. They both involve criminal penalities. Both the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice have witnesses. The first one is section 1 (a) (17) of the bill. It will be found on page 17. It is the item that prohibits the photographing, sketching, mapping, and so forth of military and naval reservations, properties, and equipment.

The significant point about this statute, because it is similar to another that exists, is that you do not have to prove an intent to injure the security of the United States in order to have a successful prosecution. That is the principal reason that they want this statute continued even though there is a similar statute in existence. Colonel Pickard will testify on this.

STATEMENTS OF LT. COL. ANDREW D. PICKARD; AND GEORGE F. KNEIP, CHIEF, RESEARCH UNIT, CRIMINAL DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

1 (a) (17), Item 229

Prohibiting Photographing, Sketching, Mapping, Etc., Military and Naval Reservations, Properties, Equipment, Etc. (50 U. S. C., appendix 781-785). "For the duration of the present war as determined by proclamation of the President," photographing, sketching, mapping, etc., of military and naval installations and equipment, except as authorized by Secretaries of the military departments, is prohibited and penalized.

Termination of this provision would impede the ability of the Armed Forces to protect their installations and equipment from unauthorized analysis.

Although the provisions of title 18, United States Code, section 793, are permanent legislation covering generally the same subject matter, it should be noted that intent to injure the security of the United States or to help some foreign nation is an element of the offense defined therein, whereas no such intent is required in the provision sought to be extended.

50 U. S. C. App. Item 781

Photographing, sketching, mapping, etc., military or naval reservations, properties, equipment, etc., as unlawful.

Whoever, except in performance of duty or employment in connection with the national defense, shall knowingly and willfully make any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, copy, or other representation of any navy yard, naval station, or of any military post, fort, camp, station. arsenal, airfield, or other military or naval reservation, or place used for national defense purposes by the Deprtment of the Army or the Navy, or of any vessel, aircraft, installation, equipment, or other property whatsoever, located within any such post, fort, camp, arsenal, airfield, yard, station, reservation, or place or in the waters adjacent thereto, or in any defensive sea area established in accordance with law; or whoever, except in performance of duty or employment in connection with the national defense, shall knowingly and willfully make any sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, copy, or other representation of any vessel, aircraft, installation equipment, or other property relating to the national defense being manufactured or under construction or repair for or awaiting delivey to the Departments of the Army or the Navy or the government of any country whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States under any contract or agreement with the United States or such country or otherwise on behalf of the United States or such country, located at the factory, plant, yard, storehouse, or other place of business of any contractor, subcontractor, or other person, or in the waters