to that, I think. That is, it should be acted upon by the Senate and the House.

Mr. RICHARDS. It won't be.

Chairman BLOOM. But we will have done our duty.

Mr. RICHARDS. I know, but if they will act on anything, they will act on something else. I was just talking about the advantage of just having it a simple House resolution.

Chairman BLOOM. Then it does not make up "the Congress." The idea of having it as Mr. Wadsworth suggested the other day, a concurrent resolution, was to allow it to go over to the Senate and allow the Senate to act upon it.

Mr. KEE. I offer as an amendment that the resolution be a joint resolution instead of concurrent.

Chairman BLOOм. All those in favor of the amendment offered to the amendment offered by Mr. Kee-that it be a joint resolution

PROPOSES JOINT RESOLUTION, PROVIDED STATE DEPARTMENT APPROVES

Mr. VORYS. Just one word. I do not know whether you are allowed to amend Judge Kee's, but I feel sure he would agree to this, accepting this amendment, that unless the State Department would disapprove, we make it a joint resolution. For this reason: a joint resolution will require the signature of the President.

Chairman BLOOM. Right.

Mr. VORYS. My guess and my hope is that the President and the State Department have sufficiently expressed their views. The advantage is, if the President would be willing to have it a joint resolution, that we follow the pattern of the Monroe Doctrine, a joint resolution, on which we have already acted; 12 that we have it the action of the Government instead of merely of the Congress; and that it has more dignity as a statement of principle of our government.

The one disadvantage would be that it would put the President on the spot if he did not want to be put on the spot. On the other hand, if we would adopt a concurrent resolution it might be interpreted as a slap in the face at the President in that we were not willing to ask for his approval of it. As to which we would have, I would certainly prefer joint unless they indicate that they would prefer something else.

Mr. KEE. The letter to Mr. Fulbright from Sumner Welles indicates that the President approves this resolution, so a joint resolution would be my idea about it.

Chairman BLOOM. The Chair wishes to state that, of course, if you make it a joint resolution then it becomes a public law, If you make it a concurrent resolution you make it merely an expression of Congress. The Chair would also like to state: I am anxious to have this resolution go through.

[Discussion off the record.]

12 H.J. Res. 446 and S.J. Res. 271, 76th Cong., 3d sess., reconciled as S.J. Res. 7, 77th Cong., 1st sess., Joint Resolution affirming and approving nonrecognition of the transfer of a geographic region in this hemisphere from one non-American power to another nonAmerican power, and providing for consultation with other American republics in the event that such transfer should appear likely, Public Law 32, Apr 10, 1941 (55 Stat. 133).

A CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Chairman BLOOM. Motion made by Judge Kee and seconded by Mr. Vorys was that it should be a joint resolution. All those in favor raise their hands.

Six in favor; 9 opposed.

Your amendment is not agreed to, Judge Kee.

All those in favor of making it a concurrent resolution, raise their hand. That is unanimous then-a concurrent resolution.

MR. SCHIFFLER'S SUBSTITUTE FOR MR. VORYS'S MOTION

Mr. SCHIFFLER. I want to offer as a substitute the language of House Resolution 200, as introduced by Mr. Fulbright, in substitution of the proposal by Mr. Vorys on the amended resolution House Concurrent Resolution 24-I think it has been amended by subsequent motionChairman BLOOM. It has not been amended yet at all.

on.

Mr. VORYS. I offer the amendment to his motion.

Chairman BLOOM. It has not been voted on. Nothing has been voted

Mr. WADSWORTH. It is true, but he is offering a substitute to Mr. Vory's amendment.

Mr. SCHIFFLER. Using the language of House Resolution 200 as a substitute for the language of House Concurrent Resolution 24 as proposed here, and which has been amended, which brings us back to the original proposition, and it would be:

The House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) hereby expresses itself as favoring the creation of appropriate international machinery with power adequate to prevent future aggression and to maintain lasting peace, and as favoring participation by the United States therein.

Mr. VORYS. Question.

Mr. KEE. I would like to say a word on that. I thought we discussed that pretty fully. Mr. Vorys in offering his amendment, moved to strike out the words "to prevent future aggression," and I think that is a very wise thing to strike out, because it indicates the machinery we establish would be to set up a brain trust to decide which was the aggressor and that is a subject we have debated here for 10 or 12 years. Mr. VORYS. Shades of Jim Shanley.

Mr. KEE. So I am in favor of striking that out. I believe the phraseology should be changed so that those words, "favoring participation of the United States therein," should be transposed and put up at the beginning of the resolution: that we favor the participation of the United States in it.

And I also believe we ought to declare at the bottom of the resolution or somewhere in the resolution where we expect to maintain this lasting peace. We do not want to get into trouble by someone raising the question, "Do we expect to maintain peace inside the boundaries of our own country alone or try to go over and maintain peace within the boundaries of any particular country?" But we want to maintain peace among the nations of the world-among the several nations of the world-and not to go in and maintain peace within the boundaries of some other country, which might be construed as what we mean in the original resolution. So I think the changes that have been sug

gested here are very wise. And really it does not make any difference in our announcement of the principle.

Chairman BLOOM. The motion is on the amendment made by Mr. Schiffler-practically substituting the House Resolution 200, leaving it worded as a concurrent resolution-to the amendment offered by Mr. Vorys as amended by Mr. Chiperfield.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. A parliamentiary inquiry. If this substitute is adopted can that substitute be later amended?

Chairman BLOOM. NO.

Mr. ROGERS. Can we have a formal show of hands?

Chairman BLOOM. All those in favor of the amendment offered by Mr. Schiffler raise their hands.

Six in favor; all those opposed-eight.
The amendment is not agreed to.

MR. JONKMAN'S SUBSTITUTE FOR MR. VORYS'S MOTION

Mr. JONKMAN. I want to offer a substitute. In the place of House Concurrent Resolution 24, take House Resolution 200 and insert the words, after the word "creation" in the second line, "by the United Nations and such other nations which may become affiliated with them.” That is Mr. Kee's.

Chairman BLOOM. And to leave "to prevent future aggression" in. there?

Mr. JONKMAN. Yes. In other words, it would then read:

That the House of Representatives hereby expresses itself as favoring the creation by the United Nations and such other nations which may become affiliated with them of appropriate international machinery with power adequate to prevent future aggression and to maintain lasting peace, and as favoring participation by the United States therein.

I think it does that thing in the very first instance, but very negatively at the end it puts "as favoring participation by the United States therein," so as not to take the aggressor nations in it

Chairman BLOOM. Leaving it a concurrent resolution, to be worded according to a concurrent resolution?

Mr. JONKMAN. In other words, that last clause, "as favoring participation by the United States therein" might almost be redundant. It makes clear we favor participation without accentuating it.

Mr. KEE. If you add that amendment to Mr. Vorys's amendment, I would be in favor of it.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. To leave out the word "aggression?"

Mr. VORYS. "Affiliated with them."

Mr. JONKMAN. "Become affiliated with them."

Mr. VORYS. "Which may become affiliated with them." If that language has any particular meaning, I don't see what it is-as "may become affiliated with them."

Mr. SCHIFFLER. There may be other nations joining.

Mr. WADSWORTH. It will always be with their consent.

Mr.VORYS. There is nothing in here about consent.
Mr. JONKMAN. It does raise a question.

Mr. SCHIFFLER. Question.

Chairman BLOOM. All right, Mr. Jonkman, will you repeat your

substitute?

Mr. JONKMAN. Going back to House Resolution 200, make it a concurrent resolution and, changing it by inserting after the words, "That the House of Representatives hereby expresses itself as favoring the creation," insert the words "by the United Nations and such other nations as may become affiliated with them."

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. Of course "House of Representatives" will be changed to "The Congress".

Chairman BLOOM. Yes; to the concurrent form. Yes, it will be changed to the form of a concurrent resolution.

Mr. KEE. I beg your pardon, but that strikes out "law and order”— and also, the object is to maintain peace among the nations of the world.

Mr. JONKMAN. "To maintain lasting peace" takes care of that.
Mr. VORYS. And leaves in "future aggression."

Chairman BLOOM. Leaving in "as favoring participation by the United States therein"?

Mr. JONKMAN. Yes.

Chairman BLOOM. Are you ready for the question?

All those in favor of the substitute offered by Mr. Jonkman to the amendment offered by Mr. Vorys and Mr. Chiperfield kindly raise their hands and be counted.

Seven in favor; seven opposed.

The substitute is not agreed to-seven to seven.

PROCEDURAL DISCUSSION QUESTION UNRESOLVED

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Wouldn't it be simpler to proceed on House Concurrent Resolution 24?

Chairman BLOOM. I am very sorry, Mr. Burgin made a point of order.

Mr. KEE. Then the unsettled question is Mr. Vory's motion.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. And the amendment I offered.

Chairman BLOOM. Mr. Fulbright, you cannot introduce this.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I do not understand. Is it necessary I ask you when I can introduce a bill?

Chairman BLOOM. How is that?

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I do not understand your point.

Chairman BLOOM. Well, the point is that the committee decided the subcommittee was to report back to the full committee, and then what they decided on, that resolution should be printed without anything on it at all-whether it was concurrent or joint or anything else—a confidential print that the committee could study. Now, of course, we have nothing. We have this resolution, House Concurrent Resolution 24, so whatever is suggested here today, no further resolution should be introduced.

Mr. FULBRIGHT. I was not introducing another resolution.

Chairman BLOOM. I was just saying we have this before us and the committee is adjourning now, or recessing rather I would rather make it a recess for this reason Mr. Wadsworth, I think you will agree with me on this. It will be just one legislative day and we would not have

71-567-76—————6

days intervening so we could ask for reconsideration at any time if we wanted to, so if we will say we will recess until next Tuesday and then get a report from the State Department, telling them of the few suggestions made here of course, the sense of the resolution will be just the same as House Concurrent Resolution 24 or House Resolution 200, and then we can adopt whatever amendment we want to.

Mr. SCHIFFLER. I move to recess until Tuesday at 10.

Chairman BLOOM. Tuesday at 10 o'clock, all right.13 I will try to have a report from the State Department by that time.

[Whereupon the hearing transcript ceases and the committee apparently adjourned.]

13 A meeting of the committee was held on June 15, 1943, in executive session, at which the final language was determined for a resolution favoring U.S. participation in a postwar international organization for the maintenance of peace. Mr. Fulbright then introduced this version, the same day, as H. Con. Res. 25 (for text, see appendix II, p. 277). The committee approved H. Con. Res. 25 the following day and order it reported favorably to the House (H. Rept. 553, appendix II, p. 280). A slightly amended version of H. Con. Res. 25 passed the House on Sept. 21, 1943.