[No. 176] AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO PRESENT, IN THE NAME OF CONGRESS, A DISTINGUISHED SERVICE MEDAL TO LT. GEN. THOMAS HOLCOMB, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS (H. R. 3760). MR. VINSON OF GEORGIA Hon. CARL VINSON, NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 2, 1944. Chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs, House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 3760) authorizing the President to present, in the name of Congress, a Distinguished Service Medal to Lt. Gen. Thomas Holcomb, United States Marine Corps, was referred by your committee to the Navy Department with request for report thereon. The purpose of the bill is indicated by the title. Recognition of the exceptionally meritorious and distinguished service rendered to the Government by Lt. Gen. Thomas Holcomb, United States Marine Corps, as Commandant of the Marine Corps, in the awarding of the Distinguished Service Medal by the Congress to the general would be most fitting. Accordingly, the Navy Department recommends enactment of the bill H. R. 3760. The Navy Department has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this report. Sincerely yours, ARTEMUS L. GATES, Acting. [No. 177] TO AMEND ARTICLE 61 OF THE ARTICLES FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NAVY (H. R. 3452). MR. COLE OF NEW YORK NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 15, 1944. Hon. CARL VINSON, House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The bill (H. R. 3452) to amend article 61 of the Articles for the Government of the Navy, was referred to the Navy Department by your committee with request for views thereon. The purpose of the proposed bill is to amend article 61 of the Articles for the Government of the Navy so as to prohibit defendants in courtmartial proceedings from waiving the 2-year limitation prescribed by the article. This article, which has been in effect for almost 50 years, is designed to protect defendants against unreasonable delay by providing them an absolute defense against alleged offenses committed more than 2 years before the issuance of the order for trial, except where by reason of having absented themselves, or of some other manifest impediment, they have not been amenable to justice within the 2-year period. The protection thus afforded the accused would be affected by the proposed amendment only to the extent that he would no longer have the opportunity of deciding whether it would be to his best interest to plead or waive the statute. Under some circumstances the right of election of a person to waive the statute of limitations may be of great importance to him. By waiving the statute he may induce delay in issuance of the order for trial until he can secure evidence or the presence of witnesess whose evidence would enable him to avoid the stigma of a order being issued. There are also instances where an accused who could plead the statute in bar to further proceedings, might wish to insist, for the sake of his record and reputation, that he be absolved by an acquittal on the merits of his case. Further, it is not clear what effect it is intended that H. R. 3452 would have on cases where the 2-year period has run, but where waivers were given and accepted in good faith as a mutually desired alternative to issuance of orders of trial in the 2-year period. The Navy Department is of the opinion that the amendment proposed by the bill, H. R. 3452, would be against the interest of individuals who would be affected and against the national interest. Accordingly, the Navy Department recommends that the proposed legislation be not enacted. The Navy Department has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this recommendation. Respectfully, RALPH A. BARD, Acting. 94266-44-No. 177 (1295) о [No. 178] RECOMMENDING TO THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY THAT HE GIVE IMMEDIATE, FULL, AND THOROUGH CONSIDERATION TO THE SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM OF IN-PLANT FEEDING AT SHIPYARDS AND SHIPBUILDING PLANTS UNDER HIS JURISDICTION (H. RES. 337). MR. WELCH Hon. CARL VINSON, NAVY DEPARTMENT, Washington, February 16, 1944. Chairman of the Committee on Naval Affairs, House of Representatives. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: House Resolution 337, recommending to the Secretary of the Navy that he give immediate, full, and thorough consideration to the solution of the problem of in-plant feeding at shipyards and shipbuilding plants under his jurisdiction, was referred by your committee to the Navy Department with request for views and recommendations. The purpose of the resolution is to recommend to the Secretary of the Navy that consideration be given to the problem of providing hot meals for employees of shipyards and shipbuilding plants under his cognizance and that the necessary steps be taken to provide for in-plant feeding where it is found that out-of-plant feeding facilities are not adequate. By a letter dated December 22, 1943, a copy of which is enclosed, the President of the United States informed the Secretary of the Navy of the necessity for action in the field of in-plant feeding and requested that the Secretary do what might be necessary in connection with the plants under his jurisdiction. To implement this directive from the President, the Secretary of the Navy on December 27, 1943, addressed a letter to the chiefs of the bureaus and offices concerned directing that the necessary action be taken to assure that proper facilities were installed in the plants under their cognizance. A copy of that letter is enclosed. During the past 3 years the Bureau of Ships which has cognizance of activities at shipyards and shipbuilding plants has given financial and priority assistance to several hundred of such plants and is currently reviewing the need for facilities for in-plant feeding and kindred purposes. In view of the close attention being given to this matter by the Navy Department, it is felt that the purpose of the resolution has has been fully attained and there now is no necessity for its adoption. Accordingly, the Navy Department recommends against the adoption of House Resolution 337. The Navy Department has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this recommendation. Respectfully, RALPH A. BARD, Acting. 94266-44-No. 178 (1297) |