in the Security Council of the United Nations in the event of the absence or disability of the representative.

Now, since the Security Council is in continuous session it is necessary to have an officer who can represent the United States at the Security Council at all times. It may be that the chief representative is either ill or comes to Washington to confer with the Secretary or the President, in which event he should have a substitute.

This provides for a substitute, also appointed with the advice and consent of the Senate, with the rank of minister, instead of that of ambassador, at a salary of $12,000.

Mr. KEE. And may I ask, Mr. Secretary, is it permissible under the charter for a deputy to act in the place of the principal on the Security Council? In other words, would they recognize a deputy?

Mr. ACHESON. Yes. Under the charter the only provision is that there shall be one representative of each nation which is on the Security Council. It makes no difference to the Security Council who that representative is. He may be chosen in any way that the nation on the Security Council wishes to choose him, so long as there is only one. There can only be one at a time.

Therefore, if the principal representative is sick or absent, it is perfectly permissible under the charter for his place to be taken by a substitute.

in

Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman BLOOM. Yes, Mr. Flood.

CITIZENSHIP QUALIFICATIONS

Mr. FLOOD. I do not know whether it would be necessary or not, your opinion, in a piece of legislation like this in connection with appointment of these personalities, both the principal and the substitute is it necessary, do you think it is advisable-to include that they shall be citizens of the United States? Or is that just taken for granted? Mr. EATON. Include what?

Mr. FLOOD. That they shall be citizens of the United States.

Mr. ACHESON. That is taken for granted. I do not think it occurs in any legislation I know of. They have to be confirmed, and I imagine the Senate

Mrs. ROGERS. Why not write it in there? It would not do any harm. Mr. ACHESON. You have not written it into any other statute. Mr. FLOOD. I am not as well acquainted with this sort of thing as you people are, but I was wondering why, out of an abundance of caution or whatever you might call it-it might be redundant, of course. I do not know.

Mr. JARMAN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield to me a minute?

Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Jarman.

Mr. JARMAN. I think the answer to that is the Constitution prevents a noncitizen of the United States becoming a member of the Senate and there is no danger of the Senate confirming anybody without careful analysis-unless he is a member of the Senate.

Mr. FLOOD. I was sure of that. I merely raised it in case anybody wished to develop it any further. I do not see why it should be pressed, myself.

Mr. ACHESON. We have a great deal of legislation on the part of ambassadors and judges and also officers of the civil government and it has not been considered necessary to state that they shall be citizens or that they shall be sane.

Mr. FLOOD. No.

Chairman BLOOM. May I state here for the benefit of all of them, we have five delegates to the Assembly, and every other nation has the same number. It is limited to five. There is only one vote in the Assembly for each nation. It does not matter how many there are. Each country can only have one vote, so the five vote as a unit.

Mr. FLOOD. I was concerned not so much with these higher persons, but later on, where there is a group or several others to be appointed, perhaps overseas, they might wish to acquire some specialist or some outstanding personality. And I thought in that category it might be advisable to state that even these too shall be citizens.

Mr. ACHESON. You might get into a troublesome situation in case the headquarters of the Organization is not in the United States. It might be necessary under your language to have chauffeurs and doormen and stenographers and everything else citizens of the United States, which might be rather difficult.

Mr. FLOOD. I am aware of that. Those employees I do not mean. In the bill I think there are two or three paragraphs

Chairman BLOOM. Suppose we wait until we come to that.
Mr. FLOOD. Yes.

Chairman BLOOM. Proceed.

SENATE AMENDMENT PROVIDING FOR COMPENSATION OF U.S.
REPRESENTATIVE TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Mr. ACHESON. The next section raises a number of difficult points. That is 2(c) as passed by the Senate, and reads [reading]:

The President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate may appoint from time to time to attend a designated session or designated sessions of the General Assembly of the United Nations not to exceed five representatives of the United States, one of whom shall be designated as the senior representative. Such representatives shall each be entitled to receive compensation at the rate of $12,000 per annum for such period of appointment as the President may specify. Now, as the bill was introduced in the Senate it read as follows: The President may appoint from time to time to attend a designated session or designated sessions of the General Assembly of the United Nations not to exceed five representatives of the United States, one of whom shall be designated as the senior representative.

You will note that as introduced the bill did not require a confirmation by the Senate and it did not require any compensation for the representative.

As passed by the Senate both of these requirements have been added. Mrs. ROGERS. Is that important, Mr. Under Secretary?

Mr. ACHESON. What?

Mrs. ROGERS. Is it important, the compensation?

Mr. ACHESON. May I just finish?

Mrs. ROGERS. Yes.

Mr. ACHESON. I wish to call the attention of the committee to article I, section 6, of the Constitution of the United States, which says:

No Senator or Representative shall during the time for which he was elected be appointed to any civil office under authority of the United States which shall

have been created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been increased during such time; and no person holding any office of the United States shall be a Member of either House during his continuance in office.

Therefore, if as passed by the Senate there has been created an office under the authority of the United States, or if an office so created has had its emoluments increased, no Member of the House or Senate may be appointed to it during the period for which he was elected to office. The question therefore is entirely one for the Congress.

In drawing their attention to this I do not want it to be understood that the Department of State is expressing any view on the wisdom of either the Senate confirmation or the addition of a salary. I merely wish to point out that if by doing so you have created a civil office under the authority of the United States, then during the term of any Member of the present House or Senate, he may not under the Constitution become a delegate to the General Assembly of the United Nations.

Mr. JOHNSON. Question, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Johnson.

Mr. JOHNSON. As written originally and introduced that condition would not have prevailed because it would not have created an office or fixed the emoluments. Is that right?

Mr. ACHESON. It would seem to me, Mr. Johnson, that when you merely say that the President may appoint five persons to go to the international conference and those people have no office and no salary-the United States, of course, would transport them and would maintain them while they were at the meeting-you have not created an office. You have certainly not created an office with any emoluments of any sort. And I should think that you would not have encountered this provision of the Constitution.

Mr. JOHNSON. Did the Senate discuss that or was their attention. called to that, Mr. Secretary?

Mr. ACHESON. These amendments were made on the floor. The debates do not show any reference to the Constitution.

Chairman BLOOM. The Chair would like to state off the record

[Discussion off the record.]

Chairman BLOOM. Mrs. Rogers.

MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AS U.S. REPRESENTATIVE TO THE

UNITED NATIONS

Mrs. ROGERS. Under the provisions of the bill as written by the Senate there would be no objection to a Member of Congress attending one of the conferences as an observer. Is that correct?

Mr. ACHESON. The bill would have no bearing on that point.

Mrs. ROGERS. Or as an adviser?

Mr. ACHESON. We are only talking about offices created by the bill. Mrs. ROGERS. And will you give the reference to the Constitution on that?

Mr. ACHESON. The reference is to article I, section 6, paragraph 2. Mr. EATON. I just wanted to ask-I understand if this were passed in this session of Congress, in the next session of course the prohibition would not apply.

Mr. ACHESON. It does not have anything to do with sessions of Congress. It is the period for which the Members of Congress were elected. Therefore, so far as Members of the House are concerned, this prohibition would run until the meeting of Congress in January 1947. Mr. EATON. Then it is off.

Mr. ACHESON. For the Senate it would run until any Senator who had voted for this had come to the end of his present term. That might run for 4 years in some cases or 6 years in some cases.

Mr. EATON. Until that time we would have to deprive this organization of the advantages of having a Member of the House or Senate. Mr. ACHESON. If I am right, this is an office under the authority of the United States, and that would follow.

Mr. KEE. The only way, I take it then, that a Member of the Senate or Congress could be appointed would be to resign from Congress if an appointment is made.

Mr. ACHESON. I do not think that would be effective. The prohibition is against the time for which he was elected.

Chairman BLOOM. That is right.

Mrs. BOLTON. Mr. Chairman.

Chairman BLOOM. Mrs. Bolton.

Mrs. BOLTON. I am sorry I do not get this perfectly clear. If the point of this is that no appointment could be made by the President from this committee, for instance

Chairman BLOOM. Or from the House.

Mrs. BOLTON. None of us could go to the Assembly.

Chairman BLOOM. No Members of Congress. No members of this committee, either.

Mrs. BOLTON. No Member of Congress. Now, would that stop when this Congress is over-the 79th Congress?

Mr. ACHESON. With respect to the House, it would stop when this particular Congress came to an end. In respect to the Senate

Mrs. BOLTON. Then after that, any Member of the Congress could be appointed. Is that correct?

Mr. ACHESON. That is correct.

Mrs. BOLTON. So it merely has to do with a year and a half of time. Is that it?

Mr. ACHESON. That is right.

Mr. JOHNSON. As far as the House.

Mr. JONKMAN. Mr. Chairman, I think I can clear that up.

Mr. JOHNSON. I will yield to you.

Mr. JONKMAN. One of the underlying purposes is that no one can vote himself into office.

Mr. ACHESON. That was the purpose of the constitutional provision.

SENATE DISCUSSION OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS AS DELEGATES TO

THE UNITED NATIONS

Mrs. BOLTON. Do you know what the discussion was on the floor of the Senate in the matter? Could you give us any light on that at this point, or shall we refer to it ourselves later?

Mr. ACHESON. Yes, I can give you a certain amount of information about it. The chief discussion, I think, on the floor of the Senate was the desirability of putting in "by and with the advice and consent of the Senate." That is the area around which most of the discussion is centered.

The addition of the salary was put in because it was thonght that the President might send to the United Nations General Assembly a person who was not either a Member of the Congress or an officer of the United States, and if that happened, this person ought to be paid at some rate.

That is the only person who would be affected by this salary provision, because you have already enacted legislation which makes it impossible for any Member of the Congress or any civil officer of the United States to receive two salaries so that if Dr. Pasvolsky or I or you were made a delegate this provision would do us no good. We would get no pay at all. We would get our own salary and that is all we would get.

However, if Mr. X or Mrs. X, who is not an employee of the United States or a Member of Congress, were appointed, he or she would be paid at this rate during attendance at the meetings.

Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Secretary, will you yield there?

Mrs. BOLTON. Yes. I want to thank Mr. Acheson for his clarifying

sentences.

Chairman BLOOM. If this amendment is inserted by the Senate, then if the President should appoint a Member of Congress or a member of this committee, then that member would have to go before the Senate and be confirmed.

Mr. ACHESON. That is this language.

Chairman BLOOM. Well, is that not unconstitutional? The Constitution provides that the House shall be the judge of its own Members and what they shall do. I think that is about as unconstitutional as the paragraph you read there.

In other words, if they appoint a Member of the House-if the President should delegate a Member of the House-that appointee, although he is a Member of the House, would have to go to the Senate to be confirmed.

Mr. ACHESON. Well, I do not know of any provision of the Constitution which would prevent it.

Chairman BLOOM. The Constitution says the House shall be the judge of its own Members.

Mrs. BOLTON. Mr. Chairman, am I right that this has reference to the service of a Member of the House quite outside of the services of the individual to the House over which the House has control? If it is outside the services to the House, then it does not necessarily come under the suggestion made.

Mr. EATON. May I ask a question?

Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Eaton.

Mr. EATON. Suppose the President were to fix the maintenance rate so it would use up $12,000, would that disqualify the recipient? Mr. ACHESON. I do not think I quite follow you.

Chairman BLOOM. Well, either more or less.