ican zone that had belonged to I. G. Farben, All that has happened since then is that the Germans who had been affiliated with the original controlling group gradually became the trusteees of those separate operating units, and more recently, German stockholders of the former I. G. Farben company have brought suits in the German courts trying to upset the original seizure; so that the result of those two trends of events will, I think, be the easy reconstitution of the I. G. Farben industrie into a single compact organization.

The CHAIRMAN. All these documents that you have submitted to us, some of which you have read from, some of which you have placed in the record, were all public documents, were they not?

Mr. MARTIN. They were I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I did not hear your question.

The CHAIRMAN. All these documents to which you have made reference today, many of which are still on the table before you, are all public records?

Mr. MARTIN. I am not sure that I understand the sense. All of these documents which are here, became, in one sense, public records because representatives of our Government came into legitimate possession of them, and transmitted them back here.

Until the present time they were not actually public in the sense that they were known to the public.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, they are now in the files of the committee, and anybody who wishes to see them has the right to see them. Facts are facts, are they not?

Mr. MARTIN. That is correct, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. It should not make too much difference as to the funnel through which those facts are poured into our ears; is that not correct?

Mr. MARTIN. I would agree with that, Mr. Chairman, wholeheartedly.

The CHAIRMAN. Your primary interest in this matter is to submit these facts to this committee, is that not correct?

Mr. MARTIN. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Any member, of course, now will have the privilege and the right to examine all these records, and if any conclusions or inferences you have made are in error, they could be corrected; is that correct?

Mr. MARTIN. That is certainly correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, do you know Mr. Delbert Clark?

Mr. MARTIN. Yes; I do. He was a correspondent for the New York Times. He was head of their Berlin bureau, and was in Berlin during the time that I was there.

The CHAIRMAN. I happen to know that Delbert Clark, who recently published a book Again the Goose Step, in 1949, published by BobbsMerrill Co., was formerly chief correspondent for the New York Times in Germany, and presently is senior member of the staff of the New York Times.

He makes reference to you, Mr. Martin, in his book, and I am going to read a portion of it. On page 51 he says:

A dramatic illustration of this technique came when James Stewart Martin Chief of the Decartelization Branch, and a man of unimpeachable integrity and lofty ideals, fell into a bitter feud with his superior, Brig. Gen. William H. Draper, Jr., Director of the Economics Division. Martin accused Draper of blocking and sabotaging the execution of the decartelization program.

Aside from the laudatory reference to you, is that correct? Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Chairman, the essential facts there are correct. The CHAIRMAN. Would you say that you were always friendly and held in good esteem or even high esteem by General Člay?

Mr. MARTIN. Yes, sir.

I should like to say that if I had any quarrel at all with the statement that Mr. Clark made about my relations with General Draper, it is that I never had a feud with General Draper in the sense of its being a matter of personal recrimination or exchange of personalities. I would have preferred to have said that I had a struggle with General Draper over a question of policy.

I remained on extremely friendly terms with General Clay throughout the time that I was in military government. I reached my deeision to resign my position and return to the United States in the spring of 1947 after I had been to the United States for a little over a month for consultations with the State Department and with the Attorney General on the probable future of any attempts to carry out a decartelization program in Germany.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it true, Mr. Martin, that you were replaced by General Draper's son-in-law?

Mr. MARTIN. That is correct. The man who had been my deputy and who, so long as he was my deputy, had faithfully performed his duties, so far as I know, did marry General Draper's daughter in the same week that I left Berlin, and he did become my successor.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any other questions? If there are no other questions, the chairman wishes to compliment you on your statement, Mr. Martin. It has been very painstaking work on your part to assemble all this data, and I am very grateful that you have come before us and given us this enlightening testimony.

Mr. MARTIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I am very glad to have been of service to you.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, these documents will be kept under lock and key, and will be submitted to anybody who wishes to view them. Thank you very much.

Our next witness is Mr. Ramseyer.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES F. RAMSEYER, MEMBER OF THE FIRM OF RAMSEYER & MILLER

Mr. LEVI. Mr. Ramseyer, do you have a statement, a prepared statement?

Mr. RAMSEYER. NO.

Mr. LEVI. Would you state your name and your present business or occupation for the record?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Charles F. Ramseyer.

Mr. LEVI. What is your present occupation?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Consulting engineer.

Mr. LEVI. What firm?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Ramseyer & Miller.

Mr. LEVI. How long has that firm been in existence?

Mr. RAMSEYER. About 7 weeks.

Mr. LEVI. Would you tell us, Mr. Ramseyer, something about your

prior experience?

Mr. RAMSEYER. When I finished my education at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, I went into the steel mills in the Chicago area, and worked there for 6 years. Then, I was with one of the large power companies in Chicago as a research engineer, and since the first of 1943, until the first of March of this year, I was with H. A. Brassert & Co., consulting engineers to the iron and steel industry in New York. Mr. LEVI. Would you say that the H. A. Brassert firm has been used by many of the large steel companies for consulting work. Mr. RAMSEYER. That is true.

Mr. LEVI. Did you personally participate in any such work?
Mr. RAMSEYER. Yes; I did.

Mr. LEVI. Could you tell us, Mr. Ramseyer, what you believe to be the greatest engineering scientific developments in the making of steel over the last 30 years, if you are picking out the important steps, important changes? What things would you pick out?

Mr. RAMSEYER. The continuous strip mill undoubtedly had the greatest impact on the industry.

Mr. LEVI. When was the continuous strip mill developed?

Mr. RAMSEYER. The first one went in around 1928 or 1929.

Mr. LEVI. Could you state briefly what change the continuous strip mill made?

Mr. RAMSEYER. It reduced the cost of making sheet steel very markedly. In other words, the cost above materials on a big continuous strip mill would be not more than one-fourth as much as the cost above materials in converting semifinished steel into sheets in the old-fashioned hot-sheet mill.

Mr. LEVI. Could you state what company or companies were responsible for the development of the continuous strip mill initially? Mr. RAMSEYER. I think the American Rolling Mill Co., as I remember it, was the prime mover in the beginning of that development. Mr. LEVI. And then other companies participated in the latter development?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Yes; the whole industry participated in it.

Mr. LEVI. So that when you say "other companies or the whole industry" you have in mind what firms, for example?

Mr. RAMSEYER. I was trying to remember what firm put in the next mill. It was either the Steel Corp or National Steel, and all the large companies now have such mills. There are some 30 of them.

Mr. LEVI. So your testimony is that the American Rolling Mill did the first work, and then United States Steel Corp. or National or really all of the steel companies

Mr. RAMSEYER. Really all of the steel companies.

Mr. LEVI (continuing). Continued the development.

Can you tell us of any other significant contribution which you think has been made in the making of steel from an engineering technological point of view since 1928, we will say?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Nothing as significant as that. There has been no change except in degree.

Mr. LEVI. Well, you are not suggesting that no technological improvement of any importance has been advanced.

Mr. RAMSEYER. Oh, there have been many of them, but they have been small compared with the tremendous revolution

Mr. LEVI. Made by the continuous strip mill?

Mr. RAMSEYER (continuing). That the strip mill made. Mr. LEVI. Could you name some of these other small ones? Mr. RAMSEYER. Well, they have increased the size and capacity of blast furnaces and of open-hearth furnaces.

Mr. LEVI. The increase in the size of furnaces. Could you tell us what company or companies were responsible for that development? Mr. RAMSEYER. That was quite general throughout the industry. Mr. LEVI. This was general throughout the industry? Is there some other contribution that you can name?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Well, there is the electrolytic tin plate that was developed largely during the war, and saved a great deal of tin for the war effort.

Mr. LEVI. What company was responsible for the electrolytic tin plating?

Mr. RAMSEYER. I think both the Steel Corp. and Republic Steel and Youngstown Sheet & Tube, and National, all of them worked together. Mr. LEVI. Do you know which firms

Mr. RAMSEYER. And Inland Steel, also.

Mr. LEVI (continuing). Do you know which firm originated the idea, or was responsible for the first developmental work? Mr. RAMSEYER. No; I do not.

Mr. LEVI. Are there any other developments?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Well, at the present time there is a lot of work being done on continuous galvanizing, to make galvanized sheets.

Mr. LEVI. What firm is engaged in that work, do you know? Mr. RAMSEYER. There are-well, the one that I know most about is American Rolling Mill, because I recently saw that installation.

Mr. LEVI. And is there some progress being made on the use of Oxygen in furnaces?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Yes, there is quite a lot of interest in the industry, and it is used quite widely in open-hearth furnaces, and there are plants now building for its use in blast furnaces.

Mr. LEVI. Do you know what firms are participating in that development?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Bethlehem ran the first blast furnace experiments.
Mr. LEVI. And is there a development called direct casting?
Mr. RAMSEYER. Yes.

Mr. LEVI. What firm would you say was responsible for that?

Mr. RAMSEYER. That is Republic Steel Corp. and Babcock and Wilcox Co., jointly.

Mr. LEVI. Now, would it be fair to summarize your testimony in this way: that you believe that many of the steel companies have participated in these developments, and that these developments cannot be said to be the work of only one company?

Mr. RAMSEYER. That is correct.

Mr. LEVI. And there is nothing to show that research and engineering work in the steel industry is limited to one, two, or three companies?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Oh, no; they all do it.

Mr. LEVI. They all do it.

It would also be fair to say that in some of these developments, or perhaps all, United States Steel Corp. has participated somewhat? Mr. RAMSEYER. I would think that was a fair statement.

Mr. LEVI. But they were not the first to develop the continuous strip mill?

Mr. RAMSEYER. I do not believe they were, no.

Mr. LEVI. They do not appear to be the first on direct casting.
Mr. RAMSEYER. No; I do not think so.

Mr. LEVI. Would it be fair to say that the development, perhaps, in which they participated most was on the increase in the size of the furnaces?

Mr. RAMSEYER. They certainly were leaders in that.

Mr. LEVI. They were leaders in that, so this would be the one development where you could say they were the leaders.

Are there any others of these developments where you could say that they were the leaders?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Not in the ones mentioned. In the metallurgy of steel for the formation of auto body sheets, the Steel Corp. was one of the leaders in making a steel suitable for automobile manufacturers. Mr. LEVI. Were there any other steel companies that were also leaders in that?

Mr. RAMSEYER. American Rolling Mill, and Inland Steel.

Mr. LEVI. Now, you have mentioned this last development after you had stated what you thought were some of the developments.

Are there any other developments which you would like to mention now which, perhaps, the United States Steel Corp. was the leader or one of the leaders in?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Well, in its search for raw materials, the Steel Corp. has certainly led the field recently.

Mr. LEVI. Any other developments? You can think of no other significant development?

Mr. RAMSEYER. No; I cannot off-hand, no.

Mr. LEVI. Can you tell us, Mr. Ramseyer, how large a capacity ought to be for an efficient steel ingot plant?

Mr. RAMSEYER. It has to be about a million tons a year as a minimum, to keep a blooming mill going three full shifts a day.

Mr. LEVI. Does that mean then that as a minimum it must have a million tons, or does it mean that a million tons is the most efficient size?

Mr. RAMSEYER. No; that is the minimum efficient size.

Mr. LEVI. That is the minimum. In other words, you think that a plant would be larger than that if it were going to be more efficient? Mr. RAMSEYER. Some additional saving in increasing the tonnage beyond that point due to spreading of plant services over a larger output.

Mr. LEVI. How much more do you think the plant should be increased, that is, the ingot plant?

Mr. RAMSEYER. I think the minimum cost can be reached between 3 and 4 million tons per year from a given plant.

Mr. LEVI. And if it were above 4,000,000 tons, then the increased size would make for inefficiency, would it?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Well, it is more difficult to control and operate one larger than that. It gets so large that it is difficult to coordinate the personalities involved, as well as the physical parts of the plant. Mr. LEVI. Now, the United States Steel Corp. has a plant at Gary which is larger than 4,000,000 tons, is it not?