That agreement was made a temporary one largely because it was felt that after the war the two countries might want to reconsider its terms. The act implementing the agreement, or, rather, I should say those provisions of the act which implement that agreement, are to stay in force for the duration of the present hostilities and 12 months thereafter unless either government enacts legislation contrary thereto, or unless either Government gives the other Government 12 months' notice of its intention to terminate the agreement.

From the point of view of the Interior Department we would have no objection to the declaration of the termination of hostilities for the purposes of this statute, because the year's period prescribed therein would give adequate time for negotiating any supplemental arrangement.

Mr. HOBBS. You spell that (spelling) s-e-a-l-i-n-g?

Mr. SLAUGHTER. S-e-a-l-i-n-g (spelling).

Mr. HOBBS. Not (spelling) c-e-i-l-i-n-g?

Mr. SLAUGHTER. No, sir. This has to do with animals.

The next statute on the list is Public Law 349 of the Seventy-eighth Congress, providing for the suspension of certain requirements relating to work on tunnel sites.

This statute is somewhat similar to the first one I mentioned. It relieves holders of mining claims from the obligation of performing certain work during the wartime period and for 6 months thereafter. And, subject to that 6 months' provision, there would be no objection to allowing it to expire immediately because the holders of the claims involved would have the 6 months prescribed in this statute to resume work.

Public Law 429 of the seventy-eighth Congress, to provide for the disposition of miscellaneous materials and resources on the public lands under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior, one of the three I spoke to your committee about yesterday. The Department of the Interior asks that this statute be excluded from any declaration of the termination of hostilities at this time because it is one of those statutes which would cease to exist immediately upon the cessation of hostilities, as determined by the Congress, and because there is now pending in the Congress legislation to supersede it by permanent statute.

The next statute is Public Law 39 of the seventy-ninth Congress. Most of the provisions of this statute constitute permanent legislation, but it contains one temporary provision which relates to the renegotiation of certain repayment contracts under the Federal reclamation laws. The period here prescribed is five calendar years after the cessation of hostilities in the present war. In reality, this provision is not an authorization to do a wartime job, but a provision which was intended to provide that there should be 5 years after the war in order to do a peacetime job. Therefore, this provision of the statute was written in terms of five calendar years after the cessation of hostilities. There would, of course, be no objection to a declaration of the cessation of hostilities for the purpose of starting the 5-year period running.

Another reclamation statute somewhat similar is Public Law 152 of the seventy-eighth Congress, which authorized the emergency prosecution of certain wartime reclamation projects, and contained a provision that new projects should not be initiated under this emer

gency authorization after 6 months from the termination of hostilities. Here again there would be no objection to the dropping out of that authorization in accordance with its terms, which would permit the projects that have been initiated to be completed notwithstanding the termination of the authorization itself.

The next statute, Public Law 241, Seventy-eighth Congress, is one of the three I spoke to you about yesterday. It provides for the appointment of a Third Assistant Secretary of the Interior. The Department believes that there is an urgent need for this additional officer, and legislation to make the position permanent is under consideration.

The second group of statutes listed by the Office of War Reconversion and Mobilization comprises those that are dependent upon the termination of an emergency. There are not many statutes in this group that affect the Interior Department.

Public Law 832, Seventy-seventh Congress, provides for certain special privileges with respect to the royalty obligations for new discoveries made under public land oil leases during the period of the war, and we think the need for that has substantially passed.

Public Law 394, Seventy-seventh Congress, authorizes the employment of nationals of the United States on any public work of the United States in the Territory of Hawaii. It was enacted primarily for the benefit of the people of the Philippines, who are nationals, but not citizens, of the United States.

On July 4 of this year the Philippines will become independent, and when they do become independent their people will cease to be nationals of the United States. So, in any event, the real effectiveness of this statute will terminate on July 4.

Public Law 197 of the Seventy-seventh Congress, to facilitate the construction of interstate petroleum pipe lines, is a statute under which the so-called Big Inch and Little Inch pipe lines were constructed. Most of the statute is legislation which is effective until a definite termination date.

There is one provision, permitting the use of the pipe lines by the Government of the United States which is so written as to continue only until 1 year after the termination of the unlimited national emergency.

The pipe lines are now under the jurisdiction of the War Assets Corporation as surplus property. They have been declared to be surplus property. From the standpoint of the Interior Department, which initiated the pipe lines through its Petroleum Administration for War, there would not be objection to the termination of the authority for use by the United States in accordance with its terms. As a matter of fact, the pipe lines are not being used by the United States at this time, but are in the hands of a disposal agency.

Mr. FEIGHAN. How long were those pipe lines in operation by the Government?

Mr. SLAUGHTER. I cannot tell you exactly how many months. The Big Inch I think was in operation for a period of about 2 years, the Little Inch for a somewhat shorter period.

The pipe lines have been cleaned by putting water through them, and then they have had pumped into them an inert mixture of gas to prevent corrosion, and that is their present situation.

Mr. SPRINGER. Both of those lines were completed in 1943, were they not?

Mr. SLAUGHTER. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. Thank you.

Mr. SLAUGHTER. In the third group of statutes there are several measures which are permanent legislation, operative only in time of war. That is to say these are statutes which, in the unhappy event of a future war, would automatically become effective, but which are intended to remain in abeyance during peacetime.

With respect to the statutes of this type there are none of them which we think need to be continued now, but we believe they should be left on the books so that they could become operative, in accordance with their terms, should a future emergency arise.

The most notable of these statutes is the act relating to the regulation of explosives in time of war. That act was prepared during the First World War, became inoperative upon the end of that war, was revived at the beginning of this war, and the time has now come when it can go into abeyance again. As a matter of fact, since last fall nothing has been done by the Department of Interior in the way of making or enforcing regulatory controls under that statute. The period of its utility for this war has ceased, and there would be every reason for the Congress to say that the war is over insofar as it is concerned. The effect of saying that the war is over would not repeal the statute; it would remain on the books and would become operative in the unhappy event of a future conflict.

Also included in this third group is a statute authorizing the agencies of the Government to pay for the use of wharves belonging to the Territory of Hawaii, Public Law 826, Seventy-seventh Congress. I explained to your committee yesterday the need for continuance of that statute.

I have not mentioned in this discussion the statutes which have been receiving special consideration by your committee, such as title III of the Second War Powers Act. Title III is very important to the Department of the Interior from two aspects the coal aspect and the fisheries aspect. In both of those fields, while we had hoped we would be able to get out of the allocation business several months ago, neverthless, for reasons that are well known, we have unfortunately been forced back into it. Moreover, so long as we are compelled to operate the coal mines, and how long that will be no one knows, our authority to do so, in large part, rests upon the Selective Service Act and the War Labor Disputes Act. I mention those matters because they have been receiving the consideration of your committee in other connections.

If there are any questions I would be glad to answer them.

Mr. HOBBS. Any questions? If not we are very much obliged to you, Mr. Slaughter, for your presence and your testimony.

Mr. EMERSON. Mr. Chairman, there are three other agencies here, none of which will probably take much time. The Commerce Department I believe has a representative here. No, I guess not.

Mr. HOBBS. We would like to have them file a statement.
Mr. EMERSON. All right; we will suggest that to them.
Next is the Civilian Production Administration.

STATEMENT OF J. F. DAVISON, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL, CIVILIAN PRODUCTION ADMINISTRATION

Mr. DAVISON. Mr. Chairman, my name is J. F. Davison, assistant general counsel, Civilian Production Administration.

Mr. HOBBS. We are glad to hear you, Mr. Davison.

Mr. DAVISON. We would like to emphasize the position taken by Mr. Snyder in his statement yesterday that we think any general resolution proclaiming the end of hostilities or the termination of the war would be very unfortunate at this time, and we would prefer to have these terminations handled with respect to the particular legislation.

Our principal concern, however, is with the extension of title III of the Second War Powers Act, because that is not only our foundation of our source of authority, but certain other powers for which we are responsible as successors to the Chairman of the War Production Board would be affected by the extension or nonextension of the Second War Powers Act. That is presently before a Senate committee, a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. I understand we are expecting hearings to be commenced. If the Act is not extended it will present serious problems for us in other fields.

We also have an interest in the extension of the Selective Service Act because the Chairman of the War Production Board now the Administrator of the CPA has certain functions under section 9 that may become of importance if the title III of the Second War Powers Act is not extended.

We have certain powers under the Executive orders with respect to the requisitioning of export materials. The two Requisitioning Acts expire June 30, 1946. We have no desire to recommend their continuance. It is a matter perhaps of concern to various other agencies of the Government; that is, the War and Navy Departments and the Department of Agriculture and we would not, therefore, say that they need not be extended. We simply have no desire to recommend their extension at this time.

The Chairman of the War Production Board had authority under section 12 of the Small Business Mobilization Act to issue certificates suspending antitrust laws and the Federal Trade Commission Act. Some 215 of those certificates were issued. A great number of them have since been revoked. Some of them will expire June 30, 1946. Some others have no expiration date, but will expire at the expiration date of the section, which, as presently written, would be 6 months after the termination of the present war or such earlier time as the Congress by concurrent resolution or the President may designate. Also, whoever has the power has to certify that a continuance is "requisite to the prosecution of the war." A number of the certificates issued, have been recommended by the Chairman of the War Production Board alone, but the greater number have been recommended at the request of other agencies.

So far as the Civilian Production Administration is concerned we believe these certificates could be revoked and we could make suitable arrangements with the Attorney General for any understanding that is necessary, provided the Second War Powers Act is extended. Our understanding with the Attorney General with respect to various in

dustrial advisory committees is dependent upon the continuance of the Second War Powers Act.

Mr. Silver, of the Office of Defense Transportation, I believe, expressed another idea. He said to you this morning he believed some provision should be made to extend one of these certificates. I believe the Office of Price Administration would also recommend that several certificates should be continued.

But so far as we are concerned ourselves, we do not recommend that the act be extended any longer than it is presently provided for, and if the Congress should see fit to terminate it earlier we think we could get along without it.

We also had authority under the Silver Act to recommend to the Secretary of the Treasury the release of Treasury silver. That expired December 31, 1945. Our only interest there is with respect to leases outstanding which are to continue "6 months after the cessation of hostilities in the present war."

Mr. Snyder pointed out yesterday the interest in leased silver with reference to atomic-bomb plants. We know of no other use which would require longer use for any period.

I may say in that connection, however, we feel that any provision or any resolution providing for termination of the emergency or the termination of war should have present or future date rather than a past date.

That brings up a difficult question with respect to the Second War Powers Act itself as well as with respect to some of these other acts, because we feel, as a practical matter, it would be very difficult to get any enforcement of the Second War Powers Act as well as some of these other wartime acts after the end of the war had been proclaimed. We feel in addition there might be some legal difficulties after the end of the emergency should be proclaimed, but our principal concern, I think, is with the practical application of the act.

We also have certain winding-up functions, one of which has actually been brought about by proclamation of the termination of the emergency. Acting on the recommendation of the Chairman of the War Production Board the President proclaimed the end of the emergency last September, under which tax amortization certificates were granted under section 124 of the Internal Revenue Code. We have been carrying that out. As a practical matter you have a certain amount of business you have to wind up, and that is one of the reasons why you should have a termination at the present or a future date rather than a past date, because if not the confusion will be very great.

There are certain other powers in which we have an interest, only two of which I think are of much importance. One is the authority under title II of the First War Powers Act. That is a somewhat vague authority, but I believe it is considered necessary by the Reconstruction Finance Corporation in acting on certain recommendations for financing projects requested by the Civilian Production Administration. The one in which I think we ourselves are mostly concerned is a provision in the First Supplemental National Defense Appropriation Act for 1941 (act of June 26, 1940, 54 Stat. 599), which authorizes the head of any department to employ dollar-a-year men until such time as the President shall declare the present emergency at an end. We have from time to time, just as the Office of Defense Trans

85413-46-ser. 17, pt. 27