Section 40 creates an Enemy Property Commission consisting of three persons appointed by the President. The setting up of a special tribunal to hear and determine claims of this character is the most economical and practical solution which Congress has heretofore approved of on numerous occasions dealing with a special subject matter such as this one. Subsection (b) page 2, lines 19 to 21, directs the Commission to adjudicate all claims "according to the principles of equity and law." That phrase is similar to the one used in text of the Special Claims Convention between the United States and Mexico of 1923 which determined claims of American citizens against Mexico for damages during the period 1910 to 1920, which included those who were imprisoned, maltreated, and suffered loss of wages. Substantial amounts were awarded claimants. I am directing the attention of the committee to this particular phrase used in the special claims convention, that all claims shall be adjudicated "according to the principles of justice and equity" because there is a possibility that the matter of limiting recovery, so far as these people are concerned, might be based upon the violations of the provisions of the Geneva War Prisoners' Convention, 1929. I do not know of a single case involving a civilian internee that has ever been considered by any tribunal based upon any violation of the Geneva Prisoners' War Convention. There is some question in the minds of many who have studied the provisions of the Geneva War Prisoners' Convention if it applies to civilian internees. In the Special Claims Convention of 1923 the phrase "In accordance with the principles of justice and equity" was construed to mean in determining the measure of damages to be recovered, American citizens shall be compensated for mental suffering, the loss of their wages, income, impairment of health and earning capacity resulting from imprisonment by Mexican authorities between 1910 and 1920. I now quote from the report submitted to our Secretary of State in 1938 by the Special Mexican Claims Commission, which sets forth on page 21 as follows: THE MEASURE OF DAMAGES In determining the amounts which would constitute full indemnification as provided in the convention of September 10, 1923, for the awardable losses and damages of claimants or their predecessors in interest, the Commissioners, according to the best of their judgment and the applicable principles of justice and equity, have given due weight in each case to such factors, wherever pertinent, as the following: In death claims: The decedent's age, position, and earning capacity at the time of death; the degree of relationship between the decedent and the claimant or claimants upon the decedent; the life expectancy of the decedent and the claimant or claimants at the time of the decedent's death; and the mental suffering of the claimant or claimants as a result of the decedent's death. In personal injury claims: The nature and the seriousness of the injury, the extent of the impairment of the claimant's health and earning capacity, the proved expenses and loss of time incident to the injury, and any aggravation of the injury by unusual cruelty. In claims for loss or damage of property: The quantity and value of property of various kinds owned by the claimant as shown by inventories filed prior to the origin of the claim; the market value, orginal cost, and depreciation of the property; and deterioration through lack of attention directly attributable to acts of forces. In this connection the Commission has applied the principle that, where the evidence does not satisfactorily establish a high or unusual value for property, an award should be made on the basis of the value of common or ordinary property of that class. Similarly, in the case of loss of personal effects, in the absence of clear proof of exceptional values, awards have been made on the basis of the value of personal belongings which the claimant, from his occupation and condition in life, might reasonably be expected to have in his possession. It has been estimated by the American Internees Committee that in the application of pertinent factors such as those above mentioned. to each claimant's case against Japan the following recoveries will result-I am now referring to the Hinshaw bill, H. R. 1823: Estimated loss of wages_- Estimated loss of household goods and personal effects- Personal injury claims___ Total 1 $10,000 each average. The above figures are calculated upon the basis of 6,000 American civilian citizens in American territory invaded by the Japanese. If interest is added at the rate of 5 percent per annum since the date of liberation it would amount as of this date to $8,100,000, making a total of $89,100,000 to be paid out of Japanese property valued at $100,000,000 now vested in the United States. General MacArthur has under his control at least another $300,000,000 of property taken from the Japanese. Section 41 describes the claimants entitled to the payment of just compensation for loss, damage, or injury to their person and personal property. The nature of the personal property is not mentioned, but it is suggested it be limited to household goods and personal effects because if real estate is included, which is now, insofar as the Philippines are concerned, a part of a foreign country, may give rise to certain complications we desire to avoid in this bill. Let the matter of real-estate losses be taken care of in a peace treaty between the United States and Japan. The use of the words "personal property" in the text may be explained to mean household goods and personal effects. The repatriated American returned to this country with little, if any, household goods and personal effects, as the Japanese destroyed them in enemy-occupied American territory. Repatriated Americans are entitled to be rehabilitated by their Government and desire to make their contribution to the economic life of their own country. Any narrow conception of what compensation these American citizens should receive results in Japan escaping financial responsibility to whatever extent adequate and just compensation is withheld from them. The claims which are to be paid under the bill are those of American civilian citizens of the United States who are the victims of the Japanese in Alaska, Guam, Philippine Islands, and Wake, occupied American soil where they suffered (1) Deprivation of liberty, arrest, imprisonment, and internment. (2) Evacuation from their homes. (3) Maltreatment, cruelty, or violence during capture. (4) Impairment of earning capacity prior to and since liberation. Provision in the bill has been made to compensate the dependents of those Americans who died as a result of war crimes. Subsection (b) of section 41 directs the Commission to order the payment of claims out of Japanese property described in section 39. I have set forth one of the most important parts of my statement at the end. Acting Secretary of State Grew, on August 4, 1945, made this statement which was released to the press on that date: American residents in the Philippine Islands, a territory under United States sovereignty, were not publicly warned to leave before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. In view of the steps taken by the War and Navy Departments to evacuate from the Philippines all of their nonessential personnel, including families of officers and enlisted men, the United States nationals who remained in the Philippine Islands were presumably aware of the danger that threatened. However, they could not, with due regard to the national interest, be advised to leave for the mainland. Therefore those United States nationals who fell into the hands of the Japanese in the Philippines may well believe that, not having been apprised of the imminent danger, they are entitled to more consideration than United States nationals who remained in foreign countries in the Far East or in Europe despite repeated advice from their Government and its officials to return to the United States while commercial transportation facilities were available. * * * American citizens from Wake and Guam, as well as from the Philippine Islands, might be given preferential treatment in relation to those from other areas (a) because it is obvious that for political reasons they could not be warned officially to return to the United States, as were citizens in Europe and Asia; (b) because these citizens in the Philippine Islands, Wake, and Guam, not having official warning to depart and having been captured on American soil, are entitled to protection and assistance. In connection with the unconditional surrender of Japan, it accepted the Potsdam Declaration which results in making Japanese assets in the United States available for payment of our reparation. claims. It is the earnest request of the American Internees Committee that H. R. 1823 receive the unanimous support of the members of this Honorable Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. The CHAIRMAN. Any questions, gentlemen? Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hinshaw. Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. McGowan, will you state for the benefit of the committee, as nearly as you can, the numbers of American citizens who were in the Philippine Islands, Wake, and Guam, and that portion of Alaska which was occupied? Mr. MCGOWAN. About 7,000. Mr. HINSHAW. How many in each of these places? Do you know? Mr. McGOWAN. In the neighborhood of 6,000 in the Philippines, and the balance, Wake and Guam, Alaska, the Aleutian Islands-we only know of one case in Alaska where a school teacher in the employ of the Department of Interior was captured by the Japs. Mr. HINSHAW. What class of persons were these who were in these various places at the time? What were their general undertakings? Mr. MCGOWAN. Occupation? Mr. HINSHAW. Yes. Mr. McGOWAN. Developing Philippine economy and inculcating American doctrines. Furthering the interests of the American business. Many were representatives of the most substantial corporations located within the Continental United States fostering their foreign trade which means so much to American labor in this country. A number of them were school teachers; others, highly skilled mechanics, engineers who had been sent over there by the United States, since the Philippines received their independence from Spain. There developed between the Philippine Islands and, the United States, a tremendous amount of export and import trade, more than between any other two peoples in the world. Mr. HINSHAW. I understand that many of these people who were liberated from Japanese internment camps or prisons, upon their return to the United States have suffered materially because of lack of occupation, income, disease, and so forth. Mr. McGowan. They have. They have, indeed. Mr. HINSHAW. Will you describe the present conditions? Mr. McGowan. If I may, Congressman Hinshaw, we have a witness who follows me, a doctor who was in the camp over there, an American citizen who is familiar with the subject. He is more capable and able than I am to describe the physical conditions of those people which results in a certain degree of suffering on their part. Some are unable to work. Certainly, no one is in as good a condition now as they were in the Philippines before the war. Every internee provided for in your bill, Mr. Hinshaw, has a just claim. The CHAIRMAN. Do you refer to Dr. Stevenson? Mr. McGOWAN. Yes. Mr. HINSHAW. Do you desire to represent to the committee the emergent need of this legislation to take care of such people particularly? Mr. MCGOWAN. Yes; I do, especially in the light of the fact that little, if anything, has been done for them by Congress. They were liberated in February 1945. It is now March 1947. Other groups, civilian employees in the Philippines of the United States Government, have been compensated for wages accruing during their capture and have received other benefits. Army and Navy contractor employees, civilians, have been compensated. A bill was put through Congress as late as the last session of Congress providing additional compensation for them. There were 196 laws passed by Congress during the Seventy-seventh, Seventy-eighth and Seventy-ninth Congresses taking care of members of our armed services. Congress has not passed a law to take care of this group that I represent. Mr. HINSHAW. You heard the statements presented by the Treasury Department, State Department, War Department, and the Department of Justice referring to other claims and claimants that would normally arise that would be subject to any such Commission as was proposed in these bills. Do you believe, and for reasons which you may state, that regardless of these other claimants and their claims that it is absolutely essential to the Congress to take emergency action to relieve this distress Mr. McGowAN. I do. Mr. HINSHAW. Just a moment. To relieve the distress of those who have been returned to the United States particularly, and who find themselves in distressed conditions in the United States through no fault of their own? Mr. McGOWAN. Yes; I do. But I would not circumscribe their right to recover their losses to being in distress, or being almost on the verge of becoming public charges. I do believe all these civilian internees should be accorded the same rights, advantages, and benefits that the armed forces and preferred groups like Government employees and civilian employees of the Army and Navy contractors have received from Congress. Mr. HINSHAW. You can see from the reports of the Department, which I have mentioned, and which you have heard, that if we go ahead and set up the Commission with all the legislative directives that such legislation must contain for the over-all coverage of the entire war damage picture, that the difficulties of these people, at least many of them, will not be immediately relieved. It would take some time for this Commission to get into action and list the cases that are filed with it. It might be several years. Mr. McGowAN. Yes. Mr. HINSHAW. In fact, it might be a number of years before any relief could be given to these internees if they proceed to cover the over-all situation at this time. Consequently, are you representing here that it is important for the Congress to pass emergency legislation which may be later supplemented by other legislation to cover the whole broad picture? Mr. McGOWAN. I am in sympathy with having something done as quickly as possible for these people because of their unfortunate condition. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Beckworth? Mr. BECKWORTH. I want to ask the witness this one question. Do you think that there would be any violation of what might be termed rights of people by the utilizing of this property to help take care of this group that have suffered? In other words, is there any precedent for doing this, in your opinion? Mr. McGowAN. Yes. The Settlement of War Claims Act of 1928 which provided for the payment of awards handed down by the United States German Mixed Claims Commission provided for the retention of 20 percent of that German property which we had seized during World War I, and we still hold it. Every nation engaged in World War I on the side of the Allies withheld German property to pay claims of their nationals against Germany. Mr. BECKWORTH. It was used to satisfy claims of American citizens? Mr. McGOWAN. In a way. It is being held as security for the payment of those awards that the Commission handed down against Germany. That was 20 years ago. Mr. BECKWORTH. So in your opinion it certainly would not be a new policy? Mr. MCGOWAN. No, it would not. I have here a copy of the treaty between the United States and Italy which is now pending in the Senate. This treaty was published in the New York Times. It contains comprehensive possibilities for recovery of real and personal property damage claims against Italy but absolutely no mention is made about personal injury and death claims. The CHAIRMAN. Will you give the date of the edition and the page? Mr. McGowan. The date, Saturday, January 18, 1947. |