Mr. KIRWAN. Here is Ohio, who claims you have not. Mr. Weichel, the Congressman from Sandusky, told me that there is not a fisherman in his district who ever heard of it. They may have been consulting somebody who is not a fisherman, and you may have him recorded in that blue book, but Congressman Weichel says the people he spoke to, the real fishermen, are not in on it.

Dr. FLORY. We did not consult with the fishermen themselves during the drafting of the proposed treaty. We did consult with each of the State conservation departments. We have had them down in Washington. They have had meetings independently.

Mr. KIRWAN. Is Dr. Langlois for this?

Dr. FLORY. Dr. Langlois has come to Washington.
Mr. KIRWAN. Is he for it?

Dr. FLORY. I cannot speak for Mr. Langlois, but I believe Mr. Langlois has taken a different biological approach from the other State men, and I would doubt very much that he would be wholeheartedly for it.

Mr. KIRWAN. Dr. Langlois is heading the State of Ohio fishery research program.

Dr. FLORY. That is right.

Mr. KIRWAN. Governor Cooper took him from the University of Michigan to Ohio State University back in '29, and he is opposing this treaty. If the governor and the head of the fisheries department are opposed to it, who is there in Ohio favoring it?

Dr. FLORY. We have received communications from six of the other States, from scientists, I should say, in six of the other States, stating that while they recognize that siltation and pollution are important factors in a fishery, they do not agree with Dr. Langlois in stating that it is the sole factor.

After all, I am just a layman in this biological field, but it seems to me that whether siltation and pollution are the whole story or are only part of the story is a biological guess that can be proved or disproved, and it seems to me if all the Great Lakes biologists set their minds to it on a coordinated program they can find out whether, for example, the ciscoes disappeared because of overfishing or because of pollution, or what part each of those factors played.

You may be interested in a portion of the report of the board of inquiry. The percentages of the United States commercial fishermen on Lake Erie who favored the various types of control are given in the following tabulation:

1. Any organization that would make possible uniformity in laws, 14 percent.

2. An international commission, 27 percent.

3. The United States Government, 25 percent.

4. An interstate commission developed by compact, 2 percent. 5. The State department of conservation, 33 percent.

6. Other methods of control, zero.

Sixty-six percent of these fishermen reported they would not oppose control by an international commission established by treaty with Canada if that were the only method of obtaining uniform regulation on the Lakes. Thirty-four percent would oppose such control. The statistics are all set forth in this report.

Mr. KIRWAN. I think two-thirds of Lake Erie borders on Ohio. Dr. FLORY. I would think that might be a rough guess.

Mr. KIRWAN. I can tell you right now that the head of conservation and the Governor are opposed, and I have not seen a man, a head of any conservation club in Ohio, who is for it. The fishermen are not for it, and I again say that two-thirds of Lake Erie borders on Ohio. Who is for it in Ohio? And Ohio, I again say, produces, I think, almost 60 percent of the fish of the Great Lakes.

Dr. FLORY. They are a considerable producer.

Mr. KIRWAN. So I think if anybody had a voice, Ohio should have a voice, yet there is nobody in Ohio for it. Speaking quite personally, and also as an Ohioan, I think that many who are opposing the idea of a treaty either have some misconception as to what it may do, or are not working in the long run in the interests of the Great Lakes fisheries. I personally am looking forward to the time when there may be free public discussion of the proposed treaty.

Mr. KIRWAN. So far as Canada and the way I look at it are concerned, I would just love to see the treaty-let the Canadians stay on their own side and let the Americans stay on their side-and Canada will not last long in the fishing game, because there are not a great many fish over on the Canadian side. They are on our side. And we do not have to worry about Canada doing any damage to the fishing industry of the United States so long as her boats keep on her own side, in her own fishing waters. Keep the Canadians over where they belong and you will find the Americans will not be over in Canada, because there are no fish over there. So let the American boats keep the Canadians over on their side and they won't have to apologize to Canada.

I hope the agreement is brought up in such a way that there are no powers taken away from the State of Ohio.

(Discussion off the record.)

I hope, when you draft this treaty, if Ohio is not able to stop it, that you will at least leave Ohio what privileges it now has, and that you are not going to give away everything in the State of Ohio on Lake Erie.

Dr. FLORY. I hope you understand, Mr. Kirwan, that we have approached this question from the conservation point of view. We are looking only toward preservation of the fisheries of the Great Lakes there, and an increase in the abundance of the valuable species. That is all we are aiming at.

Mr. KIRWAN. As soon as the treaty is released I think you will have Ohio down here in open discussion.

Dr. DEASON. Mr. Kirwan, I have a good many personal friends among Ohio fishermen, and I think when they come to understand what is contained in the proposed treaty they will be for it.

DIVISION OF TERRITORIES AND ISLAND POSSESSIONS [Editor's note: For detailed justification of the estimates for the Division of Territories and Island Possessions, see p. 94]

STATEMENT OF EDWIN G. ARNOLD

Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. Mr. Arnold, I believe that you are the new Director of the Division of Territories and Island Possessions. Do you wish to make a general statement?

GENERAL STATEMENT

Mr. ARNOLD. The justification which I have already submitted, and which I should like to make part of the record, explains in considerable detail the functions and operations of our Division. Therefore, I shall make my introductory statement as brief as possible.

As you gentlemen know, our Division is the Federal bureau which is charged with the principal responsibility over matters pertaining to civil government in the Territories and possessions, whose job it is to advise and assist the President, the Secretary of the Interior, and Congress on all aspects of territorial problems and policy, to act as a coordinating agency in all relationships between these detached areas and the Federal Government and the public, to develop the territorial interests where they are not in conflict with Federal interests, to act as an informational clearinghouse for voluminous government and private inquiries, and to supervise the operations of a number of enterprises in these areas.

Although I have been director of this Division for only a short period, it is obvious to me that our most acute problem is our small staff. I am seriously concerned over the fact that we are unable to perform satisfactorily the responsibilities with which we are charged. The British Colonial office has twice as many employees in its West Indian Department alone as we have in our whole Division. This is a situation which speaks for itself.

Now that the war is over the attention of the world is focused on the administration of detached areas by countries like the United States. The President in his recent message to Congress on the State of the Union stated that "The major governments of the world face few problems as important and as perplexing as those relating to dependent peoples." The United Nations Organization is giving a great deal of attention to their problems, and the United States will undoubtedly be called upon to supervise widespread areas, particularly in the Pacific. From an international standpoint, the work of the Division of Territories and Island Possessions has increased tremendously in importance, and we must be properly equipped to carry out our functions. Therefore, we feel fully justified, gentlemen, in requesting a modest increase of 7 new positions, of which 4 are clerical. The increase requested for new positions is only a little more than $25,000, of which approximately $15,000 is for the Pacific branch.

One of our most pressing problems is the future political status of our possessions. As the President stated in his recent message to Congress on Puerto Rican political status, "it is this Government's settled policy to promote the political, social, and economic development of people who have not yet attained full self-government and eventually to make it possible for them to determine their own form of goverment." Just before the war, the people of Hawaii voted two-to-one in favor of becoming a State; at its last session, the Legislature of Alaska authorized a plebiscite on statehood to be held at the next general election this year., Three committees of Congress have visited Alaska in the past year, and the Division did a great deal of work in connection with hearings pertaining to the Territory's social, political, and economic problems. A House subcommittee recently visited Hawaii to hold hearings on the statehood bill before Congress

and requested that the Division's chief counsel go along as committee counsel. It is, of course, part of our job to assist such committees and supply all the information we can on the many matters affecting the welfare of our territories and island possessions. We have also done a good deal of work in connection with the plebiscite bill offering the Puerto Ricans a choice among several types of status, a bill which is now before Congress. These questions of political status were of concern to the Division before the war, but could not be given serious congressional consideration until the war was over; now our task in that respect is being greatly intensified. The United States, particularly because of its world leadership, must be able to point with pride to the administration of its possessions.

The matter of the economic development of the territories is also of great concern to us. These areas canont hope to achieve and maintain any substantial degree of self-government unless they are capable of managing their own fiscal affairs. We are trying to assist them in developing their own resources, so that Federal financial assistance may gradually be withdrawn. We have worked with Alaskan officials on drafts of an income-tax law and a bill providing for license fees and taxes on the business of fishing with traps, so that the territorial treasury may derive income from this tremendous industry, the profits of which are now largely utilized outside Alaska; we have worked on plans to develop the mineral, timber, fishing, and agricultural resources of the Territory, and for the encouragement of locally owned business enterprises and the discouragement of monopoly holdings. The Division has given its support to industrialization for Puerto Rico, because of the employment it will provide and the increased income and purchasing power it will bring to the island. We are well aware that the island's future welfare depends on the establishment of diversified industries making the most of the few indigenous materials and the abundant labor supply. The Division has performed informational services for mainland capital, pointing out the nearness of the South American market, the specialized skills of the island's workers, and the size of the local market. In the Virgin Islands, the Division's chief activity along economic lines has been through the operation of the Virgin Islands Co., a government-controlled corporation which operates federally owned properties under an agreement with the Federal Government. In line with the policy of withdrawal of Federal operation when practicable we have arranged for a lease by the Company of one of its properties, a market in St. Thomas, to the municipality of St. Thomas and St. John, and for the lease of an abbatoir in St. Croix to a livestock association.

The most important request we are making is for a very small Pacific branch: a chief with an assistant, one secretary, and a clerk. As you gentlemen know, the Division, for simplicity of administration, is organied into separate branches corresponding to the territorial areas. Because we have no branch responsible for Hawaiian and other Pacific matters, we are unable to meet our responsibilities for that area. We are constantly receiving requests for assistance in Pacific problems that we are unable to satisfy, a situation which gives us great concern, particularly in view of the fact that the Pacific area has emerged from the war as an area of tremendous importance. The Governor of Hawaii feels so strongly about this that he has come all

84378-46-pt. 1-46

the way from the islands in order to urge upon this committee the establishment of a Pacific branch. Besides Hawaii, we shall have to give increased attention to the islands of Baker, Howland, Jarvis, Canton, and Enderbury. As I mentioned earlier in my statement, the United States will undoubtedly be called upon to supervise widespread areas in the Pacific. Civil administration will have to be assigned to some agency of the Federal Government; and the Department of the Interior, because of its related responsibilities, will probably be assigned functions to be performed by the Pacific branch. The Department is already represented on a committee of the Secretaries of State, Navy, War, and Interior, set up by the President to submit proposals for the administration of the Pacific islands.

In the Alaska branch, we are asking for one additional clerkstenographer, because the present staff is unable to handle the volume of mail and telephonic requests for information on Alaska, many of which come from veterans. Now that the war is over and it is possible to settle in Alaska again, we have been flooded with inquiries on climatic conditions, small business opportunities, communication and transportation facilities, methods of obtaining land and on the cost of living. The job of collecting and sending out accurate information on colonization possibilities is one of our most important tasks. I am happy to report to this committee that we have just recently employed an outstanding Alaskan, a veteran of World War II, to be chief of our Alaska branch, Joe Flakne.

We are also asking for a business management advisor, to be attached to the director's office. As you gentlemen know, the Division supervises the operation of a number of business enterprises such as the Alaska Railroad, the Virgin Islands Co., the Puerto Rico Reconstruction Administration, and the Alaska Rural Rehabilitation Corporation. We are certain that economies in operating these agencies could be effected if we had an expert in business management who could devote full time to assuring that maximum operating efficiency is established and maintained. At the present time we are unable to perform this function, a situation which gives me great concern, because the Federal investment in operating properties under our supervision amounts to many millions of dollars. The problem has become particularly pressing now that Congress has enacted the Government Corporation Act (Public Law 248, Dec. 6, 1945), which requires that business-type budgets for government corporations be submitted to Congress for approval each year.

And finally, we have asked for one clerical assistant in the Financial and Administrative Branch, which supervises administrative operations in the territories and islands, reviews the budgets of the Division and the field activities, does personnel work in connection with about 3,600 positions and reviews all accounts of certifying and disbursing officers handling money appropriated by Congress to "Government in the Territories.” At present we are unable to keep current on our personnel work, a situation which is serious but can be corrected, we hope, by the employment of an additional clerk.

In conclusion, may I repeat our strong conviction that the tremendously increased importance of our territories and possessions as a result of the war more than justifies our request for a very modest increase. But, even though it is small, it is extremely important to us because of our meager staff.