The failure to heretofore appreciate this new concept of civil liability, as well as criminal liability, must be attributed to the mass thinking of enlightened nations which submerges the individual in the world state though tending to dignify him in the national state.

The Forty-seventh National Encampment, Veterans of Foreign Wars, in September 1946 sought for the first time to attach the right of the individual, as well as nations, in the enforcement of international treaties. This then is the basis for the VFW's bill relating to prisoners-of-war claims, which without precedent, yet supported by the fundamental precepts of Anglo-Saxon and Roman law, seeks to create a right for individual damages arising out of treaty violations. The exacting of a penalty in criminis from individuals has materally strengthened the position of exacting a penalty in civilis from the states as principals to the "agent" individual violators.

The June 30, 1944, Annual Report of the Alien Property Custodian reveals that the total value of enemy property in the United States is $567,000,000 and the value of property vested in the Alien Property Custodian is approximately $200,000,000. The VFW bill would set up a Claims Commission to which this property would be transferred and deposited in German or Japanese special deposit accounts. The Commission would adjudicate and render final decisions on claims of former prisoners of war based on violations of the Geneva Con vention respecting prisoner-of-war treatment. The figures of the War and Navy Departments reveal that a total of approximately 32,000 prisoners were in the hands of the Japanese, about 12,000 of whom died in captivity; and approximately 100,000 prisoners in the hands of the Germans, about 1,000 of whom died in captivity. Many of the deaths resulted from wounds received previously in action, while, on the other hand, many deaths resulted from brutal and inhumane treatment at the hands of the captors. Certain limited survivors of those dying as a result of inhumane treatment would be permitted to file a claim before the Commission in behalf of the deceased. This distinction is necessary because the damages sought rests on treaty violations, which would not serve the cases of the survivors of those who died as the result of action against the enemy. latter's remedy must continue to rest with the nation the deceased served. An agent would be appointed by the President through whom all claims would be processed. The evidence already on file in the War and Navy Departments which was used as the basis for criminal indictments against the war criminals would be available to the Commission in adjudicating the claims. The Veterans of Foreign Wars, should this bill be enacted, proposes setting up a special bureau in its national rehabilitation service under Director George E. Ijams to handle claims on behalf of all former prisoners of war who institute claims for damages against the offending nations.

The

The administrative costs, as well as the awards approved by the Commission, would be borne by the special deposit accounts established with enemy property in possession of the United States. The bill provides that damages awarded by the Commission would have preference over the claims of nationals and corporate interests for damages due to property damage. Should these special deposit accounts be insufficient to pay these claims, then the bill provides that the deficit shall constitute a lien on reparations from the nation concerned.

Should the Congress enact this legislation a great and notable step will have been made in the recognition of the dignity of the individual in the world-state. Such a law would strengthen the foundation of international common law-a corpus juris for the individual in our one world, the cornerstone of which foundation was so dramatically laid at Nuremberg in October 1946.

STATEMENT OF MR. LEWIS E. STARR, PORTLAND, OREG. COMMANDER IN CHIEF OF THE VETERANS OF FOREIRN WARS

Mr. KETCHUM. Now, Mr. Chairman, with your permission I would like to present Lewis É. Starr, Portland, Oreg., commander in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, who will present our viewpoint on the bill.

Then I will be able with my assistants to answer the technical questions as to the bill. Mr. Starr.

Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Starr will be recognized. Will you state your

name.

Mr. STARR. My name is Lewis E. Starr, and I am commander in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, residence, Portland, Oreg.; temporarily in Washington, D. C.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am very grateful for this opportunity to appear before this committee and present to you the views of the Veterans of Foreign Wars with respect to H. R. 1000, by Representative Van Zandt.

The Forty-Seventh National Encampment, Veterans of Foreign Wars, meeting in Boston in September 1946, gave considerable thought to the human aftermath of the atrocities committed by our former enemies, particularly the Japanese, in gross violation of the Geneva International Convention relating to treatment of prisoners of war, as well as the unwritten laws of humanity.

This bill, H. R. 1000, would establish a Claims Commission which would adjudicate claims and render awards in behalf of former prisoners of war who were subjected to inhumane treatment by their captors. We recognize that what we ask here is without precedent because heretofore nations in determining reparations to their citizens have concerned themselves largely with reimbursement for property damage.

However, a new concept has arisen as a result of the agony of World War II. The United States, in conjunction with the other Allied Powers, without legal precedent, or at most on shaky precedent, has laid the foundation for an international common criminal law. In the past 18 months and for some time to come the functionaries of the German and Japanese Governments have been brought to the bar of justice to answer for the maltreatment and inhumane treatment of prisoners of war.

We are sincere in the belief that such inhumane treatment has given rise to an international civil liability as well as an international criminal liability. They are distinct one from the other. No system of jurisprudence recognizes an identity as between criminal and civil liability.

On July 27, 1929, the plenipotentiaries for the Imperial Government of Japan fixed their signatures to an international convention relating to treatment of prisoners of war, commonly referred to as the Geneva Convention of 1929. This convention was not to be binding until the same had been ratified by the signatory powers.

Japan failed to ratify. Shortly after the outbreak of World War II the United States inquired of the Japanese Government through the Swiss Government as to whether Japan would abide by the convention. The Japanese Government replied in January 1942 that Japan would apply the Geneva Convention for treatment of prisoners of war insofar as the convention shall be applicable and on condition of reciprocity.

There is no denying that the United States did abide by the convention to the fullest possible extent. In our opinion the flagrant violations of the functionaries of the Japanese Government have rendered that Government liable to a suit for damages in behalf of those persons who were the objects of these violations.

Germany both signed and ratified the Geneva Convention and is similarly liable for such violations as occurred through its func

tionaries.

In our opinion, the property vested in the Alien Property Custodian and enemy property in custody of other agencies of the Federal Government should be utilized in the payment of these claims, and should such funds not be sufficient, then the deficit should constitute a lien on reparations from the nations concerned.

Should the Congress enact this legislation, a great and notable step will have been made in the recognization of the dignity of the human individual. Such a law as is proposed in H. R. 1000 would materially strengthen the foundation of international law, a cornerstone of which was so dramatically laid at Nuremberg in October 1946.

I have not attempted to discuss personal cases of mistreatment, and the mental and physical damage resulting therefrom. We have here this morning many witnesses present or available who can give thecommittee first-hand knowledge, based on personal experiences, of the inhuman brutality imposed upon them by their captors in violation, not only of the Geneva International Convention agreement, but of the fundamental concepts of civilization.

It is our earnest hope that the committee will report this bill favorably.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that is the position of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. If there are any questions of any members of the committee or the chairman would like to ask, Mr. Ketchum and his assistants on the legislative staff of the Washington office of the Veterans of Foreign Wars are here to answer any questions you wish to direct to them.

Mr. BECKWORTH. Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HINSHAW. First, Mr. Starr, may I say that the committee appreciates your appearance before it as national commander of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States. I do not know whether questions should be directed to Mr. Starr or Mr. Ketchum. Do you desire to direct your question, Mr. Beckworth, to Mr. Starr or Mr. Ketchum ?

Mr. BECKWORTH. It is immaterial.

Mr. HINSHAW. Then I suggest that it be addressed to Mr. Ketchum. Mr. BECKWORTH. All right.

Mr. STARR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee.

Mr. HINSHAW. We will ask Mr. Ketchum to resume the stand.

STATEMENT OF OMAR B. KETCHUM (Resumed) AND STATEMENT OF JOHN C. WILLIAMSON

Mr. KETCHUM. Mr. Chairman, I would like to have Mr. Williamson, my legal assistant, to be present with me.

Mr. HINSHAW. He may sit by your side and advise you aṣ you desire.

Mr. Williamson, will you give your name and address to the reporter, Mr. WILLIAMSON, John C. Williamson, assistant legislative director, Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Beckworth.

Mr. BECKWORTH. I assure you, Mr. Ketchum, I will take only a moment of your time. I would like to hear your comments on what you feel is the urgency of this legislation.

60002-47- -21

The reason I bring that up is that it has been quite some time since the war in both theaters was concluded, and before your group does come on, what is your comment with reference to the urgency of something being done with reference to this particular problem?

Mr. KETCHUM. Well, I think I can best answer that by saying that we believe there is a definite obligation to these men and women who have suffered unduly and unreasonably by reason of their imprisonment. We can see no reason why that obligation should be longer deferred. In other words, we believe it is an obligation and, therefore, it is necessary and essential for the Congress to establish the formula and the procedure whereby these claims can be received, adjudicated, and awards made at the earliest possible opportunity.

Mr. BECKWORTH. With that I surely agree, and I want to go this one step further: Considerable doubt has been raised from time to time with reference to the utilization of this enemy property.

Mr. KETCHUM. That is right; that is one angle.

Mr. BECKWORTH. Some contend that somebody's property may have been taken over when in fact he was not an enemy.

Would you see anything wrong with our Government utilizing this property to pay these people who suffered so very much, then if in the future somebody's property was improperly utilized and we find that to so be the United States Government would reimburse such a person or such people. Our Nation endeavors to do justice to all.

Mr. KETCHUM. That is correct. We agree with you. As a matter of fact, our views on that, our reasoning was, we thought that this procedure should be definitely established to adjudicate the claims of the men and women in the armed forces who have suffered, before disposition had been made of enemy assets that were held in this country.

We are fearful unless this priority and this procedure should be spelled out by the Congress there is a possibility that under some other procedure awards might be made for property damage and loss and for other claims that we do not think should have priority over the claims of these former prisoners of war.

Mr. BECKWORTH. That is exactly right, and I want to make this one further comment. As long as you have $300,000,000 worth of property under the jurisdiction of the Alien Property Custodian, and some enemy's property is included, of course he is going to spend all of his time conjuring up information designed to prove that he was not an enemy. That is just natural. And we can wait and wait and wait years before this issue is settled in such a way that internees who suffered so much are aided.

Mr. KETCHUM. It was my hope, Mr. Chairman, that possibly if you wanted to hear some of these witnesses who are in here and have come quite some distance, that the technical angles of the bill, as to whether it is practical or impracticable, and whether certain things should be done to amend it; if you want to hear these other witnesses who are here and whom we dislike to have sitting around most of the day or staying long in Washington, then we would be glad to make ourselves available to take up any technical questions on the bill, because we are here, and we are in no hurry, and we can spend all of the time the committee wants on any of the technical angles of the bill.

I would like to see these witnesses who are here this morning have an opportunity to testify, and then we will be glad to go into any technical angles on the bill you wish.

Mr. HINSHAW. Is it the pleasure of the committee to postpone any questions, further questions, of Mr. Ketchum?

Mr. BENNETT of Missouri. I would like to inquire of the witness. Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Bennett.

Mr. BENNETT of Missouri. My question is, how can we evaluate in money the agony and suffering of those who received maltreatment at the hands of the enemy? What standard does your legislation propose in that regard and what limits as to grants?

Mr. KETCHUM. Mr. Bennett, I may say that we have, after considerable thought, deliberately avoided that particular question in the language of the bill. As you will note, we have more or less conferred that authority upon the Commission to make the determination, and I agree with you that it is difficult to establish a schedule of awards that would adequately compensate for the disabilities, for the agony and suffering which these prisoners have endured.

I would assume that the only thing the Commission can do if the legislation should be enacted in its present form would be to use some form of precedent in the settlement of ordinary damage cases arising out of physical or mental injury and arrive at what they consider a reasonable and fair schedule of awards based upon the assets and ability to pay.

Frankly I would not know what to suggest to the committee here this morning as to what the maximum or the minimum should be.

We do have, of course, the experience of the Veterans' Administration, for example, in adjudicating claims based on, we will say, loss of limbs, or other physical or mental disabilities which occurred to service personnel, but I am not prepared this morning to answer that question.

We could, if the committee wanted it written into the bill, submit to the Congress our recommendations on a schedule of awards. Mr. BENNETT of Missouri. It seems to me that is a very important question and might put the Commission in a very difficult position. For instance, as you know, I have worked for 4 years on the Veterans' Committee and know something of the difficulty of setting up acceptable standards of this sort.

Mr. KETCHUM. That is right, and you did a fine job. I want to say that.

Mr. BENNETT of Missouri, Thank you, Mr. Ketchum.

Now, take a veteran who is now receiving compensation from our Government for his service-connected disabilities. As I understand it, your legislation is not to give him the same amount from the Japanese Government, but it is to compensate him in quite a different way and for quite a different purpose. So he would not be likely to get the same amount of compensation from this bill that he is getting from the Veterans' Administration which puts its standard on somewhat of a different basis?

It just seems to me quite a nebulous proposition as to how it can be done. Some citizens are entitled, in my opinion, to a million dollars for the suffering that they have gone through in the hands