Mr. BRADLEY of California. You mentioned $100 for travel as being an expense which you considered entirely legitimate. Where does that come in?

Mr. Nozão. We came into New Orleans and I went home for 5 days. Mr. BRADLEY of California. Where is that any different than anyone else? Others would have to pay for that.

Mr. Nozão. I don't believe that others paid the full rate. We were not entitled to half fare on the train, and so on.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. What I am driving at is, this trip was on your own volition and your own willingness, you were not ordered to make it?

Mr. Nozão. Oh, no; I was not ordered to make it.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. I am trying simply to show that there is no particular discrimination in this. You also bring out the $100 for clothing. Wherein does that discriminate materially?

Mr. Nozкo. I only used those figures to try to bring down the earnings.

Mr. BROPHY. At least he is honest about it.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. The implication of the testimony would be that those were necessary expenses which would not be incurred by one in the naval or military service.

Mr. Nozкo. Yes.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. I appreciate a certain small allowance is made at the beginning of the first enlistment to naval personnel, but not thereafter.

Mr. Nozкo. I didn't know that.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. I don't know the exact amount of the allowance at the present time. It is somewhere around $65, as I recall it. You very carefully gave your total earnings in this year in which you were partly in training but you failed to give them in any year in which you served afterward.

Mr. Nozкo. I am sorry, I meant to.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. I think you should put that in.

Mr. Nozкo. I meant to-I skipped that but not intentionally. My earnings were $3,200 per year for the balance of the war,

Mr. BROPHY. Plus bonuses?

Mr. Nozкo. That is right, sir..

Mr. BRADLEY of California. You indicated at another point you found it necessary to travel around the United States in order to find a job. Why should that be the case?

Mr. Nozкo. I don't think I said around the United States.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. As I recall it you said you went to New Orleans or somewhere like that for the purpose of finding a job.

Mr. Nozão. Yes, due to my color blindness I went to different ports, hat is, I went to Boston and they refused to give me a purser's license, o I went to New York and there they refused to give me a purser's icense; I went to Baltimore and there the same. I think I finally got t in Norfolk, Va.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. As I understand it, then, this jaunt was or the purpose of obtaining some kind of a position you wanted? Mr. Nozko. Yes, to better myself.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. You bring out in your testimony the esire to veterans' preference in particular. That is not covered in this ill. You appreciate that, do you not?

Mr. Nozão. Yes. I think some of the things that are in the bill some of the items there would take care of all cases. I only brought my case in to give you a true picture of what was going on with many thousands in the merchant marine, excluding the bad eggs.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. We are not interested in the bad eggs we have bad eggs everywhere.

Mr. Nozão. That is right.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. In every case you will find some.

Mr. Nozão. I think this bill would take care of many of the item: where thousands of merchant seamen today are suffering through no fault of their own.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. You realize, do you not, that the action of the board at Lynn, Mass., are not controlled by the Government in any way?

Mr. Nozão. That is right, but I can cite cases throughout the coun try in different States where the same thing is going on. My case i one which is very minutely small. We are trying to help, I would say 200,000 men that are probably in straits such as mine. I am not ba off, but I know of men who are, through no fault of their own at all Mr. BRADLEY of California. You would bring out, though, tha municipalities and States have regulations which they have mad which do allow veterans preference to seamen?

Mr. Nozкo. Yes, sir, I definitely would.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Havenner, do you want to ask question?

Mr. HAVENNER. What is the membership of the organization which you represent?

Mr. Nozão. We do not have a count right now. I was only ap pointed national adjutant a month ago. I am bringing the files up to date now and I will be able to give you a figure in probably a weel to 10 days, if that would not be too late. I can give you an approximat figure.

Mr. HAVENNER. What is the approximate figure?

Mr. Nozкo. I think it is about 15,000.

Mr. HAVENNER. That is all.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Brophy?

Mr. BROPHY. When you were at Salem looking for your police of ficer's job, did you ask the council there to include that in their civi service move?

Mr. Nozко. The council in Salem?

Mr. BROPHY. That is correct.

Mr. Nozão. No, the mayor there told me that was not possible. H said it was strictly State legislation and there was nothing that coul be done about it. I was closed out cold. He was not open to discus sion on it at all. He said it just could not be done, Washington i the place to fight those things.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. It must have been done in that case by State action, isn't that right?

Mr. Nozкo. Yes, I think he did mention State action.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Tollefson?

Mr. TOLLEFSON. I have no questions.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Any other questions? (No response.)

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Thank you very much for your kindness and testimony. We appreciate it very much.

We have Mr. Lauman, the State commander. Is he present?
Mr. LAUMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Will you state your position, affiliation and so on, to the reporter?

STATEMENT OF ARTHUR LAUMAN, STATE COMMANDER, MERCHANT MARINE VETERANS' ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK

Mr. LAUMAN. My name is Arthur Lauman. I am representing the Marine Veterans' Association, State commander, New York.

I did not come down with any prepared statement because I didn't know I was going to testify. I came down to act as a delegation, so to speak, and I will give you a brief summary of my background as a merchant seaman.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Lauman, will you proceed with whatever statement you wish to make? We are getting a little pressed for time.

Mr. LAUMAN. I will give it to you from the starting of the war. I was a merchant seaman in World War I; I was a merchant seaman in World War II. At the outbreak of the war I was a maintenance man in the National Maritime Union.

When war broke out I felt I belonged aboard ship. I immediately gave up my job in union hall and went to sea. I went to sea on the S. S. Manhattan and brought back all the Americans that were over there and was then off the ship for a little while through sickness.

I went to sea again in 1940 and stayed right on through it and only through my vacations and things like that did I have time off. During my time I was on the S. S. Bolivar. Everybody here in Washington knows it. I was decorated by the President of the United States. I got the Distinguished Service Medal for service above and beyond the call of duty.

I stayed at sea until 1944, then I went to work in the Standard Oil office and have been there ever since. I will make my statement short.

I want to see if you can do something for the old seamen, the present and young seamen when they get as old as I am when they will need help. That is all I ask this committee to do if they can do it. I wish you would excuse me.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Lauman, when you say all you ask is that we take care of the old seamen and the young seamen, you mean all of them, don't you?

Mr. LAUMAN. Yes. When they get old they need care taken of them.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. I appreciate that, but you are including all ages, are you not, from young to old?

Mr. LAUMAN. Yes, from young to old, the merchant seamen that served in this war. When the day comes when they need physical help, any help they can give him in the hospitals, or anything, I would like to see him get the benefit of it.

I did not come here with a chip on my shoulder and I don't want anybody to think that. I came merely to witness this but they asked

me if I would take the stand for a little while, and that is what I did.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Have you finished your statement? Mr. LAUMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Havenner, have you any questions?

Mr. HAVENNER. No questions.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. Mr. Brophy?

Mr. BROPHY. The point you were bringing out when you said the young people, you meant to give them security when they reach old age, isn't that what you had reference to?

Mr. LAUMAN. That is what I mean.

Mr. BROPHY. Not to the young seamen at the present time but when they get to be old then they have to have security?

Mr. LAUMAN. That is right, then they have to be taken care of. Mr. BRADLEY of California. I am glad to have that brought out. Mr. BROPHY. He told me that yesterday after the meeting. Mr. BRADLEY of California. Any questions, Mr. Jackson? Mr. JACKSON. You are particularly concerned, Mr. Lauman, about the disability benefits which, at the present time, you feel are not adequate, is that it?

Mr. LAUMAN. Yes. Now I am working but if I was not I would want that disability grant now, and those that cannot go to sea, I would like to see them taken care of.

Mr. JACKSON. You mean if the disability was incurred in line of service?

Mr. LAUMAN. In line of service; as long as he went to sea during this war or World War I.

Mr. JACKSON. Were you at sea between World War I and World War II?

Mr. LAUMAN. Yes. I left the sea in 1937 to go to work in Union Hall and when war broke out I thought I belonged aboard ship. My only intention was to get out there and win that war and that is what we did.

Mr. JACKSON. That is all, Mr. Witness.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. How many years altogether were you at sea, Mr. Lauman?

Mr. LAUMAN. I would say over 25 years.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. That is a very, very good long time to be serving and we greatly appreciate your coming down and appearing before us.

Mr. LAUMAN. Thank you, sir.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. We appreciate it very much indeed. Thank you for coming.

I think we can go one step further. Is Captain Norton present? Mr. NORTON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRADLEY of California. We might be able to get all the way through with your testimony this morning, but at any rate we will go as far as we can. Will you kindly give your name, position, and so on, and then make whatever statement you wish before we ask any questions?

STATEMENT OF JOHN J. NORTON, REPRESENTING NATHANIEL BOWDITCH POST OF MERCHANT MARINE VETERANS' ASSOCIATION

Mr. NORTON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, my name is John J. Norton. I am a master mariner and until 6 months ago commanded various merchant vessels of American registry in the foreign trade. I represent Nathaniel Bowditch Post of the Merchant Marine Veterans' Association and I speak in favor of H. R. 476. Mr. Chairman, before I start this statement, yesterday you showed great concern about the finances of the country and the extent to which benefits were being extended to different classes of people. I too have thought a great deal of that. I am a firm believer in the theory that the people should support the Government and not the Government the people.

I have never in my life received a dollar that I didn't earn and I am not now looking for one, that is, with the exception of adjusted service compensation after the first war.

I have disagreed with a great deal of legislation that has been passed here in that respect and it is with great regeret that I come here to support this or any other bill which favors any class.

However, the precedent has been established in this country of extending these benefits and I see no reason why men who have voluntarily risked their lives in the service of this Nation should be excluded from the benefits which have been extended from 1932 to the present date.

I was at the opening of this hearing yesterday and it seemed to me that I detected a feeling of doubt on the part of some of the committee that men who had not donned the uniform of one of the armed services were worthy of consideration for benefits under the above numbered bill.

I believe a little quiet soul searching on the part of you gentlemen will convince you that it is not the color of the cloth a seaman wears but rather the service to the republic which he performs that is important in judging his worthiness for any benefit within the gift of the Nation.

I have never met a man, however prejudiced, who could deny the irreplaceable and valiant service performed by the merchantmen in all our wars. In the Revolution when we had no Navy the merchantman manned his frail ship and put to sea to harass and to harry the then greatest Navy in the world."

How different our history might have been had the civilian seaman stayed ashore and waited to be drafted into service, I think you all can imagine.

Your predecessors of the First Congress showed their appreciation and trust in our seamen by passing a law which forever exempted them from liability to military service while in the performance of their calling. In every war the seaman has responded promptly and valiantly to the call. His is a purely voluntary service. He operates best that way. He needs no draft board to compel him to the path of duty.