Senator GORE. Yes.

Mr. PETERSON. I do not know about those. As far as I know, we have one, and I do not think anyonse else has any.

Senator MARTIN. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could ask a question and make an observation to Senator Case's query.

Senator GORE. Yes.

Senator MARTIN. Governor, the greatest defense is a good offense. That is in football and it is in the military; and I think the fact of our superiority in the producing of the bombs gives us that great offense.

Then there is another thing in this. The bomb has become so terrible, would not any Nation hesitate to use it? You take in World War I we used gas. Then at the beginning of World War II, the German scientists-and they are among the finest scientists in the world-had perfected gas, and so had we here in the United States and so had Great Britain, and gas was not used at all in World War II. It was because we feared the use of it. I have kind of come to the conclusion that everybody would fear the use of the bomb.

Of course, as you know, I have never been so terribly worried over what we call the terrible thing in military operations.

It finally gets down to the man who carries the rifle and bayonet. I have been worried for a long while about the submarine.

I was up against this problem of civilian defense as war Governor of Pennsylvania. They landed near Philadelphia and along in Delaware, but the counterend of it that we had, we were so much superior to them, that it didn't do much damage.

That is where I think our strength is, but I am very much-and this is what I wanted to tell all of you here concerned about this, and I wanted as many of us to give it consideration as possible.

I would like to see just as careful a study as you can make relative to civilian defense. You know it has only been about 4 or 5 years ago that we felt that shelters was the answer. I mean in our big cities.

Now we have gotten away from that, and I do not think there is any danger of war for quite some time. You know the greatness, the No. 1 attribute of a soldier is not physique, it is not intellect, but it is willingness, and that is the case so far as war is concerned.

I do not think there is any Nation in the world now willing to go to war, because the people have had too many casualties in their families, but I think it gives us time to make a very careful study, and I think we are very fortunate to have a man like you to head up this civilian defense.

Therefore, I would like to see a very careful study, and I would like to see the money appropriated. Then before we start to spend enormous amounts of money for certain kinds of construction, that we feel positive we have the right answer.

Does that sound reasonable to you?

I think we ought to have plenty of money to make this study, because it is an important thing. It would help the morale of our people, if our people feel we have something to fall back on.

Senator Saltonstall did not think he would want to stay. You know in World War I—I did not get into the active part in World War II so much-but in World War I we did not have any trouble with keeping the fellows in the trenches and in the dugouts.

Senator GORE. Do you think under certain circumstances Senator Saltonstall would be glad to stay?

Senator MARTIN. Yes, sir.

Senator GORE. Maybe we should have Senator Saltonstall here to defend himself.

Senator MARTIN. I do think we ought to make a very careful survey of this and under your direction, and I think you ought to have sufficient funds to do it.

I wanted, Mr. Chairman, Senator Case and Governor Peterson here when I made that statement so we would have something to think over. Senator CASE. Mr. Chairman, if I might interrupt, I think there was a psychology in World War I which was illustrated by a cartoon: if you know of a better hole, go to it.

Mr. PETERSON. Mr. Chairman, if I might be permitted to make an observation in connection with Senator Martin's statement, obviously I would favor the statement about a fund, where I sit.

I have had a little amusing but very natural experience in the last 60 days. For 2 years I have been trying to alert the people of America to the necessity for a stepped-up program in this field, and I must say with some little difficulty.

Now that Admiral Strauss has made the statement about the fallout, it has been quite interesting how some of the people have been getting me off in a corner and telling me how we must do something about this situation.

It reminds me of Saul on the road to Damascus. He had an immediate conversion, and I, of course, am in favor of it.

I think we need to pay attention in this area immediately, not on a historical basis. I think the more attention we give to this business of nuclear warfare, and fallout, the better off we will be.

Mankind just simply cannot afford nuclear war today. It is just something that we must try to develop enough social consciousness to overcome; but dealing with people like the Communists, I am not ready to sit back in my chair and feel that there is no possibility of them using these weapons, because they have shown pretty clearly by their actions that they may do most anything when it suits their purposes.

Senator GORE. Governor, this subcommittee, and certainly its chairman, is not schooled in the problems of civilian defense. We are faced with a highway bill.

Senator Kefauver and Senator Saltonstall testified yesterday. Senator Kefauver particularly made the point that neither bill before this committee had very much bearing upon civil defense, pointing out that there was but one interstate road leading or connecting Baltimore and Washington.

I think there is but one interstate road leading out of Washington across the Potomac. He pointed out that maximization of the interstate roads would not solve the problem, that in his opinion-and he made a suggestion that the committee consider-we should add a different category of roads, having the primary objective of developing evacuation routes.

It was his opinion that the evacuation of Washington should not be toward Baltimore, but rather out into the open spaces, that we

should develop some exit roads from our target areas that would lead to the secondary road systems of the surrounding countryside.

Had you given some thought to that?

Mr. PETERSON. Yes, and that is the reason why I asked for the inclusion of this chapter, because that is essentially what is proposed in this chapter, the pages of which you included as part of the record. I think the Senator broadly is right, and I think my testimony so indicates and is consistent with that. However, I do not feel that as of today I am competent to make a specific proposal in terms of money or the cost of these roads.

I think that we need to complete the surveys that we propose to undertake in my agency that would give us information of this type on every great city in America, and then I would believe that the orderly way to handle it from there, Mr. Chairman, would be for the Bureau of Public Roads, to whom we have made a delegation in this field, to pick up this material.

Then each year, as they come before the Congress, in connection with this program, assuming that the language is drawn up-I appreciate that it would have to be the committee-they would then present specific programs in terms of dollars and roads, so that we could begin to make some improvements.

This may appear to be off the subject, but with the approval of the chairman, I would like to mention it, because I do think it bears on this subject matter.

It is an experience I had a little over a year ago, in Darmstadt, Germany. I visited this city, which was a city of 110,000 before the war, and consulted with the mayor and the civil defense people and with the city fathers.

Darmstadt was attacked one night by the British when the wind was blowing briskly, and thousands of people burned to death. They couldn't even get their firetrucks out in time, and the people couldn't get out of their houses, many of them.

In rebuilding their city these people have built fire alleys through their streets, and a fire alley is nothing but a great big street, of the type of the Los Angeles freeways. The fire alleys are so wide that no matter what catastrophe occurred, you would always be able to get in and out of that town.

However, they did something else in Darmstadt that I think this committee should know about, and the American people should know about.

They provided along those fire alleys or freeways that any private property owner who constructs a building on his own property must build it far enough back from the street line so that if his building collapses, it collapses on his own property.

In other words, he is not permitted to let his building collapse into the street. They only do that on the freeways. Obviously that would be a foolish proposal if you were going to do it on every street, but that makes sense on the freeways.

I would like to suggest that this is the only city in the world that is building in terms of the requirements of the Atomic Age.

I believe sincerely that in our American cities when these freeways are built, some such requirement should be in the law, that the roads should be so wide that it would be impossible for these roads to be clogged.

I do not believe I am proposing anything that is economically impossible. If the impoverished people of Darmstadt, Germany, could do it, I believe the people of America could do it.

Senator MARTIN. Mr. Chairman, in reference to what Mr. Peterson said about this city, this city needs something of that kind so we can get out.

I have always thought we needed a parkway for that purpose. You take in the city of Philadelphia, to get down to Independence Hall we have made a parkway, and that will get you onto your highway system, and it is about eight lanes wide, I think, and that comes into this civilian defense.

I worked it out while I was Governor of the Commonwealth. This city of Washington needs that, but I think there are seven magnificent highways that lead out from the city of Washington. Then you get out a little ways and run into so many connecting roads that have developed, and it is to the north and to the west of the city.

Of course, we have three bridges over here now and of course they are figuring on a tunnel, but to get out of the center of the city is a thing that has worried me as far as the city of Washington is concerned.

Between here and Baltimore, I think we have got three highways, and they are magnificent highways. As a matter of fact, one highway goes clear to Philadelphia, but to get out of the city, I think, Governor, you have got something there that ought to be given a whole lot of study.

I kind of felt it might be a parkway. I do not mean trees but shrubs and so on. It will have the beauty during peacetime and will be useful as an exit in wartime.

Of course, you know the intention was to have the magnificent parks in this city, but this city, instead of being a city of 500,000 has gotten up to a million and a half. Our Founding Fathers thought that about 500,000 people would be about the size, and I am sorry it did not stay that size, but I think you have something, Mr. Chairman, and I think the governor has; but I would like to urge all of you to give a lot of study to this.

Let us not get our people too badly excited about all those things. We are going through floods and different things right now. Our people stand up under them in grand shape, and I do not want to get Americans too jittery about it.

I had an argument with a lot of fellows in the Finance Committee yesterday because they thought there was going to be a war right away. I cannot see it. I may be wrong, but I just cannot see it. It is too horrible to think about.

I like this preventive stuff, Mr. Chairman and Governor. On invitation the Philadelphia Orchestra is making a tour of Europe, and that is to get understanding and good feelings.

In our Finance Committee on the Reciprocal Trade Act, that is the whole purpose of this whole thing: to make good feelings. And, a lot of American industries are getting hurt in order to get good feelings. The fellows in the Finance Committee will be considering mat ́ers of people, which I think we all have to do, to think of what a wonderful world we can have with the knowledge we now have, and let us confine it to borrowing facts instead of a big knock out in the field. Mr. PETERSON. That will we fine if the Russians will agree.

61030-35 --39

Senator MARTIN. I do not think we can invade Russia. We cannot invade China. We should keep our feet on the ground, and keep the pistols greased up and plenty of ammunition for them, and some fellows that know how to shoot them-I am for that. I think that is preventive war. And I am in favor of that.

Senator GORE. Governor Peterson, to come to the problem before this committee, can you agree with Senator Kefauver that neither bill before this committee gives proper emphasis to the problem of evacuation?

Mr. PETERSON. I think that that is broadly correct, and I think that the reason for it, as I am sure Senator Kefauver would also say, is simply that we are just beginning to appreciate the complexities of civil defense, and the breadth of it and how it touches upon every phase of our life.

It has been my opinion-and I do not mean to get off the subject here, and I do not think I am-that civil defense will never work until at every level of the government, in the occupational segments of our society, and with citizens individually there is consideration of the possibility of a nuclear war. As they perform their routine duties they should project their thinking to include what must be done in that eventuality. In this business of roadbuilding, I had some little part in that for 6 years in my own State, and it certainly did not ever occur to me then that we should build roads for civil defense, even after I had set up a civil defense organization in my own State.

It is only as time goes on that we understand these things, so I would agree with the Senator; and I would think that as time goes on we must give much more consideration to these civil defense needs.

I would like to see, in whatever bill eventually comes from the committee, language broad enough to permit further work in this field, but I am not prepared today, as I indicated earlier, to suggest the number of dollars that should be placed in the bill or should be appropriated later.

My plea here today is to give consideration to the civil defense needs. Senator GORE. Just at that point if I may ask.

Mr. PETERSON. Yes, sir.

Senator GORE. I doubt if either bill-let us leave out the doubtneither bill does maximize the problems of evacuation. They are highway bills, not civil defense bills.

The choice that this subcommittee will have, it seems to me, is to decide whether to undertake in this bill to give proper recognition to the problem and undertake to deal with the problem of evacuation routes or whether we should direct the Bureau of Public Roads and Civil Defense Administration to make a careful study and report to the committee next year for its consideration then.

Of course, we did last year direct them--and I will read section 9 to you:

In order to assure that adequate consideration is given to civil-defense aspects in the planning and construction of highways constructed or reconstructed with the aid of Federal funds, the Secretary of Commerce is authorized and directed to consult, from time to time, with the Federal Civil Defense Administrator relative to the civil-defense aspects of highways so constructed or reconstructed. We put this provision into the law last year, and the law required that studies be presented to this committee by February 1. From time to time during these hearings, it has been indicated they would be here,