methods and equipment developed by the Marine Corps and the Navy. In some cases they were even trained by the Marine Corps. At the present time the marines are continuing their devotion to the study and perfection of their specialty-standing ready again to impart their knowledge, whenever needed, to any other element of the armed forces. So, if at this time the War Department undertakes to set up the mechanism to enter the amphibious field, a source of duplication will indeed exist, but the responsibility for that duplication will rest not with the marines but with the War Department.

And as a final element of the cost to the Nation, hidden in the pages of S. 2044, I feel it in point to observe that in sacrificing its Marine Corps the country would lose more than highly trained and thoroughly proven body of fighting men. It would lost a symbol of real democracy-a truly American form of expression of military service. Military service is an honorable thing; in the marines men and officers believe in it. And the relationship between officers and men of the Marine Corps have long rested on a sound basis. Reforms which elsewhere are only talked of today were carried into effect in the Marine Corps at the close of the last war-27 years ago. Our discipline is strict but it has been humane and based on understanding. I am proud to be able to report to you that the marine of World War II had the same regular character and steadiness in battle that distinguished his predecessors from the Revolution onward. He was the average of all American boys, but in him our system was able to develop, rather than suppress, his native American character, courage and faith. It is a notable fact that few men have ever left the Marine Corps without a feeling of undying loyalty toward it. I think these things are proof that our system is good and that it is worthy of preservation.

I realize that the observations which I have made today are of a thoroughly unequivocal nature, but I can assure this committee that my expressions are based on fact and not on conjecture. In making these statements I feel that I have acted in a dual capacity-as a professional military specialist who by experience is qualified to advise the committee in his specialty, and at the same time as a citizen of the United States who should not stand unheard while ill befalls his country.

The Congress has always been the Nation's traditional safeguard against any precipitate action calculated to lead the country into trouble. In its capacity as a balance wheel this Congress has on five occasions since the year 1829 reflected the voice of the people in examining and casting aside a motion which would damage or destroy the United States Marine Corps. In each instance, on the basis of its demonstrated value and usefulness alone Congress has perpetuated the Marine Corps as a purely American investment in continued security. Now I believe that the cycle has again repeated itself, and that the fate of the Marine Corps lies solely and entirely with the President and the Congress.

In placing its case in your hands the Marine Corps remembers that it was this same Congress which, in 1798, called it into a long and useful service to the Nation. The Marine Corps feels that the question of its continued existence is likewise a matter for determination by the Congress and not one to be resolved by departmental legerdemain or

a quasi-legislative process enforced by the War Department General Staff.

The Marine Corps, then, believes that it has earned this right-to have its future decided by the legislative body which created itnothing more. Sentiment is not a valid consideration in determining questions of national security. We have pride in ourselves and in our past but we do not rest our case on any presumed ground of gratitude owing us from the Nation. The bended knee is not a tradition of our corps. If the Marine as a fighting man has not made a case for himself after 170 years of service, he must go. But I think you will agree with me that he has earned the right to depart with dignity and honor, not by subjugation to the status of uselessness and servility planned for him by the War Department.

That is the end of my statement, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. It was a very well prepared statement.

Are there any questions?

Senator ROBERTSON. I would like to ask the general a question.
The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

Senator ROBERTSON. You fear, and I think rightly, as to the future of the Marine Corps. General, have you any suggestions to make which would protect the present status of the Marine Corps?

General VANDEGRIFT. Yes, sir. I would like to suggest, sir, that in the consideration of this bill or any other bill that comes before the Congress, that there be included in such legislation a proviso protecting the functional missions of the Marine Corps and its being kept for the Nation, whether it is this bill or some other bill, because, without that, we will die of strangulation.

The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions?

Senator SALTONSTALL. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to ask this question:

As I said to Admiral Nimitz when he was here, you do not have to answer this question, unless you please.

Have you

shown your statement to the President?

General VANDEGRIFT. Well, I am not on that echelon. I sent my papers over to the Secretary of the Navy. What the Navy Department does with my papers――

Senator SALTONSTALL. The Secretary of the Navy has seen your statement?

General VANDEGRIFT. The Secretary of the Navy has read my state

ment.

Senator SALTONSTALL. And you are making a constructive criticism to aid the security of the country and not a destructive criticism in any way?

General VANDEGRIFT. That is my intention, sir. I feel that the Marine Corps is worth something to the country.

The CHAIRMAN. Any other questions?

Senator BROOKS. I would like to emphasize what this General has already pointed out, that the entire amphibious operations of this last war were based on the techniques and training established by the Marine Corps; and the Army applied the principles and techniques developed by the Marine Corps and the Navy prior to this war.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, General, thank you very much.
Now, Admiral, will you please come forward?

STATEMENT OF REAR ADM. OSWALD S. COLCLOUGH, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL OF THE NAVY

The CHAIRMAN. You are the Judge Advocate General of the Navy? Admiral COLCLOUGH. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What phase of this problem have we asked you to present, Admiral?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. It is my understanding, Mr. Chairman, that the committee would like to have pointed out to them certain legal aspects of the bill, particularly those which bear relation to other statutes, as, for instance, the Reorganization Act, which is mentioned in section 112 of the bill, sir, and certain aspects with respect to appropriations and one or two constitutional aspects which I believe are worthy of consideration.

The CHAIRMAN. You may proceed, Admiral Colclough.

Admiral COLCLOUGH. I do not have a prepared statement, but I would rather be allowed to talk from the bill, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Admiral COLCLOUGH. As the committee is aware, section 112 of the bill provides:

(a) The Department of Common Defense, the United States Army, the United States Navy, and the United States Air Force established by this act, each is respectively declared to be an agency which may be reorganized under the provisions of the Reorganization Act of 1945:

This is on page 17 of the bill:

Provided, however, That no action taken pursuant to the provisions of this section under the Reorganization Act of 1945 shall have the effect of abolishing any of said agencies.

Now, under the provisions of section 112, it appears to me that any agency which is now a part of the military or naval forces may be abolished.

The Reorganization Act of 1945 permits the President to present a reorganization plan to Congress, but it saves from the Reorganization Act any new or existing executive departments.

The language of section 112 (a) means that the Army, the Navy and the Air Forces become agencies, under the Reorganization Act, and, but for the saving clause, could be abolished.

This allows them to be transferred, which will be the same as abolishing them, as well as any of the agencies within those depart

ments.

Senator MCCLELLAN. In other words, you differentiate between an executive department and the Navy?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. Yes, sir. The Marine Corps may be abolished, as it is not part of the Navy, it is a part of the naval service.

The Marine Corps has been held for years to be a separate service, although it operates with the Navy and under the Secretary of the Navy. It is, therefore, a part of the naval service. It is, therefore, an agency, in my opinion, and could be abolished under the terms of this bill, or it could be consolidated with the Army.

Senator RORERTSON. Now, speaking not as a lawyer, on the second line of section 112, how about having it read, "The United States Navy, the Marine Corps," and so forth?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. And "the Marine Corps," yes, sir.

Senator ROBERTSON. Would that help solve that problem?
Admiral COLCLOUGH. Yes, sir.

But there are other agencies of which I would like to speak. One is, for instance, Naval Aviation, which is an agency, a function which could be transferred at will under the bill.

Then, there is the Medical Department of the Navy. I believe that could be abolished, and the services now performed by that agency could be required to be performed by the Medical Department of the Army.

Also, I believe that our Construction Battalions, known all over the world as Seabees, could be abolished, and their functions transferred. Senator MCCLELLAN. In other words, if I might interrupt, as the bill exists at present, almost any function that is now performed under the Navy could be transferred or abolished, just as long as the Navy itself was not abolished?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. That is right.

Senator ROBERTSON. Maybe this has nothing to do with the bill, Admiral, but you mentioned the Seabees. Let me ask you this question: Are the Seabees still being maintained by the Navy?

sir.

Admiral COLCLOUGH. At the present time in a very reduced status,

Senator ROBERTSON. Is it contemplated to abolish them, or, rather, abandon them?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. I cannot answer that.

Senator ROBERTSON. I am under the impression it is.

Admiral COLCLOUGH. Well, they may be greatly reduced as to numbers; I am sure that they will not be abolished as a planned function of the Navy in future wars, sir.

Senator GERRY. You speak about the naval aviation there. There could be suggested an amendment with regard to the marine aviation and naval aviation.

If that were put in, would it or not be effective, if a separate air force were created for the Army?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. You would have to have saving language. Senator GERRY. You would have to have saving language in that. Admiral COLCLOUGH. Not only here, but in other sections of the bill which I would like to allude to in a minute.

By a rather strange coincidence, great power in the same field is also contained in section 108 (b) of the bill.

Senator ROBERTSON. What page is that?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. That is pages 11 and 12, sir, beginning at the bottom of page 11:

Each of such separate and coordinate arms shall consist of such personnel, officers, offices

and so forth. That permits

The CHAIRMAN. Will you read that from the beginning again?
Admiral COLCLOUGH. Yes, sir.

(b) Each of such separate and coordinate arms shall consist of such personnel, officers, offices, agencies, organizations, installations matériel, property, records, and projects, as may hereafter be assigned or transferred to it from time to time by law or by Executive order of the President.

Thus, it seems to me that under that provision, without resort to the Reorganization Act, and without reference to Congress, by Executive

order, there might be accomplished all the transfers previously referred to, and many others by assigning or transferring, for example, the Marine Corps to the Army; the flying forces of the Navy to the Air Force, and so forth.

To put it another way, the only difference between section 108 (b) and section 112, which we have just discussed, is that under section 108 (b) there cannot be abolishments; whereas under section 112, because of the adoption of the language of the Reorganization Act, there can be abolishments.

I think that is the distinction between those provisions, sir.

Senator MCCLELLAN. Also the language in that last section that you read from would give continuing authority, even after the Reorganization Act powers had expired; it gives continuing authority to make these transfers and so forth.

Admiral COLCLOUGH. That is right, Senator.

As a matter of fact, except for the fact that the use of the statutory authority of the Reorganization Act is provided for, there would be no point in the section.

Everything could be done down here in this section, and they would only resort to the Reorganization Act for abolishments. That is the point I am trying to make, because the transfers could be made under section 108 if this bill becomes law.

Senator MCCLELLAN. But this could be continuous, whereas the Reorganization Act is limited, as to time, as to the powers.

Senator BROOKS. Well, what is your suggestion, Admiral?

Admiral COLCLOUGH. My suggestion, sir, is that the scope and detail of this bill should not be left to be settled in the future, but should be settled in the legislation when it is enacted.

I would just like to point out, sir, something that you perhaps would be aware of; that there is a constitutional question of the delegation of the powers of Congress to the President, to the Executive, rather, under language such as this, which has arisen in the past in many

matters.

One of them which I think we all remember was in connection with the National Industrial Recovery Act.

I would like to point up that question in much better language than I can think of by quoting Mr. Chief Justice Hughes, in the National Industrial Recovery Act case. May I quote him, sir?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir.

Admiral COLCLOUGH. The Constitution provides that:

All legislative powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

It says:

The Congress shall have power * * * to make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers

that is the general authority.

Now, Mr. Justice Hughes said:

*

The Congress is not permitted to transfer to others the essential functions with which it is thus vested.

I think that answers your question better than I could.

In other words, the Reorganization Act provides a special legislative process approved by the Congress.