portation has, had to call back former personnel to take care of these current emergencies, particularly in the field of public utilities because whenever there is a great shut-down there is the problem of getting sufficient fuel to these public utilities. We have had to call back dollar-a-year men to do that, to take that over. At the present time we have some difficult problems that can only be handled by these dollar-a-year men as to the public utilities in order to prepare regulations in connection with the brown-out and many other things if the coal strike is extended for any period of time.

I understand your committee is also interested in recommendations for permanent legislation based upon any of these War Powers Acts. As a temporary agency, we have no interest in any continuing operations which will require permanent legislation. But we are interested in safeguarding of information which was obtained from industry and business for the purpose of war activities. Titles 13 and 14 of the Second War Powers Act have certain provisions for getting information from war contractors and others and for having the Bureau of the Census give information to certain of the war agencies. I do not think it is clear from either of those titles that that information is to be safeguarded after the emergency period. We believe it should be. Your committee has already recommended, and the House has passed, a similar bill giving the Civilian Production Administration, as successor to the Chairman of the War Production Board, authority to safeguard confidential business information. That bill is also before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. So that our position in that has been made quite clear and I think was understood by this committee when you recommended the adoption of the bill which the House of Representatives passed.

Apart from that, we have no general recommendations.

We might point out certain acts provide for priority assistance to special groups, to people injured by floods in 1944 and 1945, and veterans who desire to build their own houses. Those two acts, we assume, are dependent upon the extension of the Second War Powers Act. They are more or less declarations of policy which was being carried out in effect or would have been carried out if they had not been enacted.

I do not think there are any other provisions I can usefully call your attention to.

There are certain incidental references in the statutes to functions of the Chairman of the War Production Board, some of which have now ceased, and with which we have no general concern. We can provide those in a statement to be filed with your committee.

Mr. HOBBS. We will appreciate it if you would, if there is no objection.

We are very grateful for your presence and to have heard your testimony.

SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CIVILIAN PRODUCTION ADMINISTRATION TO HOUSE COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY CONCERNING WARTIME STATUTES

The Chairman of the War Production Board, the predecessor of the Civilian Production Administration, is mentioned in a number of statutes as was pointed out at the hearing before your subcommittee on Tuesday, May 28. These are some of the provisions:

(1) Under the Small Business Mobilization Act, Public Law 603, Seventyseventh Congress (56 Stat. 351), the Chairman of the WPB had functions of supervision and mobilization of small business under sections 1 and 2.

(2) Under the Surplus Property Act of 1944, section 22 (b), Public Law 457, Seventy-eighth Congress (58 Stat. 765), the Chairman of the WPB must estimate the deficiency, if any, in metals and minerals needed to meet the requirements of industry for a period of 6 months for purposes other than war production. By section 34 (b) of that act, title III of the Second War Powers Act is stated to be not impaired or affected by any provisions of the act. This act expires 3 years after the cessation of hostilities.

(3) Under the Contract Settlement Act of 1944, Public Law 395, Seventyeighth Congress (58 Stat. 649), the WPB is made a contracting agency. This act contains no expiration date.

(4) Under the Defense Highway Act of 1941, Public Law 295, Seventy-seventh Congress (55 Stat. 765), amended by Public Law 646, Seventy-seventh Congress (56 Stat. 562), access roads to sources of raw materials or industrial sites may be constructed upon recommendation of the Chairman of the WPB. The funds appropriated for this purpose have, we believe, been all used up.

(5) First Supplemental National Defense Appropriation Act of 1944, Public Law 216, Seventy-eighth Congress (57 Stat. 611-621), makes appropriations available until expended for development of civil landing areas by the Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, subject to the approval of the Chairman of the WPB as to the availability of critical materials. The appropriations in this field remain available until June 30, 1946.

Mr. HOBBS. Who is your next witness?

Mr. EMERSON. Mr. Bergson, special assistant to the Attorney General in charge of legislation.

STATEMENT OF HERBERT A. BERGSON, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL IN CHARGE OF LEGISLATION

Mr. BERGSON. My name is Herbert A. Bergson, special assistant to the Attorney General in charge of legislation.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I should like to state at the outset that the Deparement of Justice is in general accord with Mr. Snyder's statement of yesterday that the more desirable way of handling this situation would be to repeal the individual statutes, the need for which has expired, rather than to have a general declaration of the termination of hostilities or of the war or of the emergency.

So far as the Department of Justice is concerned there are very few statutes with which we are primarily interested that would be affected by any action that you might take.

So far as a declaration of the termination of hostilities is concerned there is one statute, the act of August 24, 1942, which has been twice amended, once by the Contract Settlement Act, and again by the Surplus Property Act, which suspends for 3 years after the termination of hostilities the statute of limitations with respect to criminal cases involving frauds against the United States or offenses committed in connection with the War Surplus Property Act. We would very much like to see that act continued in force at least until we can get some permanent legislation on the subject.

As you are well aware frauds against the United States are pretty difficult to detect. They are not like crimes of violence or other crimes which are committed openly and we know immediately when they are committed. Many times we do not discover them until after the statute of limitations has run and we cannot do anything about it. We would like to protect that situation.

There is also a provision in the Contract Settlement, section 19 (a) of that act, which makes it a criminal offense for a war contractor or a purchaser under a war contract to destroy or secrete certain records for a period of 5 years after the termination of hostilities or after the termination of the contract or after the disposition of the inventory involved. That is a very necessary provision, we feel, and we would like to see that continued in force.

Mr. Silver and the gentleman from the Civilian Production Administration mentioned section 12 of the Small Business Mobilization law, which provides for the suspension of the antitrust laws when necessary for the prosecution of the war. We believe that should be continued only so long as they actually need it, but no longer.

There are several general statutes of permanent force which are applicable only in time of war. In respect to some of them we would be adversely affected by a declaration of the end of the war. A particular one relates to the deportation of alien enemies. They can only be deported, if they are not deportable on some other ground under the immigration laws, only during a time of declared war or in time of a threatened invasion. At the present time many Japanese and Germans are being deported under this provision, and if the war were declared at an end we would have to stop deporting those particular individuals.

Mr. HANCOCK. Were those people here legally?

Mr. BERGSON. Well, they were here legally originally; yes, sir; and then when the war was declared they became alien enemies. They are not citizens of course, and as enemy aliens they are deportable if found to be dangerous to the interests of the United States. We could not send them back to Germany and Japan during the war. The Attorney General's hearings boards have found them to be dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States and we are now deporting them. If the war should be declared at an end we would have to put an end to that program.

Mr. HANCOCK. These are people who have not committed any crime except that they happen to be born of a certain nationality?

Mr. BERGSON. No. They were people whom the alien enemy hearing boards found were dangerous to the interests of the United States. They probably did not commit any crimes because they were caught and interned before they had the opportunity to commit a crime. Others showed by their acts or utterances that their allegiance was with Germany and Japan. We see no reason why we should give such persons the protection of our laws if they like their homelands better than they do ours.

There is a provision in the Nationality Act which provides for the expatriation of persons who leave the country to avoid service in the armed forces of the United States during time of war. The Selective Service people are much more concerned with that than we are, but I would like to invite your attention to it now. That would apply to citizens. If a citizen of the United States during the time of war to evade the draft leaves the country he expatriates himself and loses his citizenship.

There is also a provision of the Nationality Act which permits United States citizens in time of war to renounce their United States citizenship by a formal declaration of renunciation. Many persons

did that. That would be affected by a declaration declaring the war at an end, but there would be very few people affected, so it would not hinder us at all.

Mr. FEIGHAN. May I ask a question?

Mr. HOBBS. Certainly.

Mr. FEIGHAN. Dual citizenship or dual allegiance still obtains, does it not?

Mr. BERGSON. In some countries.

Mr. FEIGHAN. Was it just with reference to the Japanese?

Mr. BERGSON. No. I think the Dutch claim that if a Dutch citizen has a child in the United States the child becomes a citizen of Holland as well as the United States. I think that theory obtains in several countries.

By the act of July 13, 1943, the Attorney General was authorized to deport deportable aliens to countries allied with the United States when the United States is at war. In peacetime deportable aliens can be deported only to the country of their nationality or the country whence they came, the country the left on their way over here.

During the war it was found impossible to deport Frenchmen to France when France was occupied by the Germans, or deport Norwegians to Norway.

So the Attorney General asked for authority to deport such aliens to the countries in which the government in exile of the particular individual was located or to the country nearest the country of the particular individual.

We do not need that legislation now, so we would not be adversely affected by a declaration of the end of the war so far as that act is concerned.

Under the general espionage statute the offense of espionage is punishable by death in time of war or by 30 years' imprisonment; in peacetime the offenrse is punishable by 20 years' imprisonment. A declaration of the end of the war would affect that statute. We just want to call it to the committee's attention. We have no recommendation to make as to it.

The seditious-utterance statute is effective only in time of war. That statute makes it a criminal offense punishable by 20 years' imprisonment to obstruct recruiting or encourage disloyalty in the armed forces. We are still recruiting, and I think the encouragement of disloyalty in the armed forces at the present time would have a very adverse and unhappy effect. The declaration of the end of the war would affect that statute.

Those are the only statutes we would be affected by.

I have no further statement.

Mr. FELLOWS. Rather than suggesting a statute proposed here, it would be better to repeal the statutes?

Mr. BERGSON. Yes, sir; definitely.

Mr. FELLOWS. Let me ask you a question on those fraud statute When does the statute commence to operate?

cases.

Mr. BERGSON. When the offense is committed in fraud cases, not when we discover it.

Mr. HOBBS. Is it a general rule of law taht the fraud cases are to be prosecutable upon the discovery of the fraud?

Mr. BERGSON. That applies only in respect to concealment of assets in bankruptcy cases.

The rule so far as fraud cases are concerned generally is that the statute begins to run when the fraud is committed.

Mr. SPRINGER. Do you mean the statute begins to run regardless of its concealment?

Mr. BERGSON. Yes, sir, except in bankruptcy cases.

Mr. HOBBS. Has that been declared by the Supreme Court to be the law?

Mr. BERGSON. I do not know whether there is a Supreme Court decision on that or not, sir.

Mr. SPRINGER. The reason I asked the question a while ago is that I know in my own State of Indiana, in these cases where fraud intervenes, the statute does not begin until the fraud is discovered, after reasonable diligence has been exercised to make the discovery. Mr. BERGSON. That is what we would like to have.

(Discussion off the record, after which the following occurred :) Mr. HOBBS. We are very much obliged to you, sir, and appreciate your testimony.

Are there any others?

Mr. EMERSON. No, Mr. Chairman, that completes all the witnesses. There are one or two other agencies who have an interest in one or two statutes here, but those have been covered in our material, and they do not wish to present testimony on them.

Mr. HOBBS. All right, sir. Thank you so much. We appreciate your coming here, and we will stand in recess.

(Thereupon, at 12: 45 p. m. the subcommittee stood in recess.) (The following was submitted for the record :)

VETERANS' ADMINISTRATION

The Veterans' Administration was established by Executive Order No. 5398, dated July 21, 1930, under act of July 3, 1930 (46 Stat. 1016), which authorized the President by Executive order to consolidate, into one Federal establishment, any hospitals, bureaus, agencies, or offices, especially created for or concerned in the administration of the laws relating to the relief and other benefits provided by law for former members of the Military and Naval Establishments of the United States, including the Bureau of Pensions, the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers, and the United States Veterans' Bureau, to be known as the Veterans' Administration.

Certain war powers have been conferred upon the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs to facilitate the services rendered by the Administration. These powers are set forth below:

POWERS

1. Transfer or detail of personnel from armed forces to Veterans' Administration A. Character.-"Nothing in the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, as amended, or any other Act, shall be construed to prevent the transfer or detail of any commissioned, appointed or enlisted personnel from the armed forces to the Veterans' Administration subject to agreements between the Secretary of War or the Secretary of the Navy and the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs: Provided, That no such detail shall be made or extend beyond six months after the termination of the war."

B. Source of power.-Section 102, Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, June 22, 1944 (Public Law 346, 78th Cong.; 58 Stat. 284; 38 U. S. C. A. 693b).

C. Circumstances of termination.-No such detail shall be made or extend beyond six months after termination of the war.

D. Comment.-None.