made over the radio. I think if Mr. Berle had an opportunity to express himself, he would express himself at length and probably would make a different or qualifying statement. Mr. GOSSETT. There is no doubt but what he would express himself at length. I have not finished, Mr. Chairman. Mr. FELLOWs. Go ahead. Mr. GOSSETT. Judge, in 1945, the War Department did make a recommendation that these camps be closed up, did it not? Secretary PATTERSON. I do not think so. I think a recommendation came from the theater in early 1946. If my memory is right, it was about March, or something, of 1946. Mr. GOSSETT. Now, if that recommendation had been followed, we would already be rid of those camps, would we not? Secretary PATTERSON. I am trying to think back. I was familiar with the incident you refer to. I think in March 1946, somewhere in the level of command in the European theater the recommendation was made that a notice be given to the people in displaced persons' camps that by August 1, or some such date, it would be necessary to close the camps. That recommendation was not followed. I discussed it with the Secretary of State at the time. I am not sure whether we discussed it with the President, but I think we did, and we sent back word to them to hold that order in abeyance. That is what you mean, I think. Mr. GOSSETT. You mentioned a bit ago that we were furnishing 2,000 calories, which I have understood from other testimony was the amount of ration. Now, the people in our DP camps are by and large the best-fed people in Europe, are they not? Secretary PATTERSON. I could not say as to that. I will only tell you this: that the normal ration in the DP camps is 2,000 calories. The normal ration in the United States zone in Germany is 1,550 calories. Mr. GOSSETT. 1,550. Secretary PATTERSON. The normal ration. That is the normal official ration. Mr. GOSSETT. So have we not more or less invited people to come into those camps and stay by giving them nearly a fourth more ration? Secretary PATTERSON. If they can make a good living outside, they will not come to the camps. I will guarantee you that. Mr. GOSSETT. Have there not been a lot of them engaged in blackmarket operations in our camps? Secretary PATTERSON. Not a lot. There has been black marketing all over Germany, in and out of the camps. There was plenty in this country, too. There used to be. Mr. GOSSETT. Speaking of the humanity now, there is at least 100,000,000 in the world who are getting less food and who are in as bad circumstances as those in the DP camps, would you say? Secretary PATTERSON. I do not know where you get your figures. Mr. GOSSETT. Well, in India, China, and even in Germany itself? Secretary PATTERSON. Well Mr. GOSSETT. In other words, if we are going to go into the charity business, we would have a hard time stopping, would we not? Secretary PATTERSON. I do not put the support of this bill purely on the grounds of humanity. I think the bill, if passed, would be a strengthening of the country. Mr. GOSSETT. Is this tied in with the Palestine question, in your mind? Secretary PATTERSON. Not a bit. Mr. GOSSETT. I believe Senator Gillette-did he testify that it was or was not? Mr. CELLER. He did, but to my mind most erroneously. Mr. FELLOWS. He testified that this would not solve the question, that it was a question over all for the United Nations, and when we passed the IRO in the House we had taken a step in the right direction but this was inextricably interwoven with the Palestine question. Mr. GOSSETT. I believe so. Judge, you would agree, I am sure, that only such persons should be admitted to this country who would be an asset to the country? Secretary PATTERSON. Yes. Mr. GOSSETT. Thank you, sir. Mr. CELLER. Judge, I have just one question. It has been said that some of the other countries, like Australia and Canada, and so forth, could take a fair portion of these displaced persons and therefore until they act we should not act. Well, that is like having the displaced persons fall between two stools. Somebody must take a wise and humane leadership and it may as well be us; is that correct? Secretary PATTERSON. That is something like this: I remember when I first did some soldiering down in Texas, when I was in the National Guard, and they had to carry a squad tent; they had three of them there to carry it, and everybody wanted the other fellow to pick up the tent first. The tent did not get moved until they all three grabbed the tent. Mr. FELLOWS. Are there any further questions? I want Mr. ROBSION. Mr. Chairman, if the judge will pardon me, to place in the record a petition signed by 450 members of the Junior Order of United American Mechanics. This is not the complete petition. The complete petition is very voluminous. Mr. FELLOWs. That is for the record? Mr. ROBSION. That is for the record, in opposition to H. R. 2910. Mr. FELLOWS. Very well. (The petition referred to is as follows:) A PETITION TO REDUCE AND RESTRICT FOREIGN IMMIGRATION INTO THE Attention Mr. and Mrs. America: UNITED STATES 1. This petition is for the defeat of the notorious Stratton bill, No. 2910. We are asking all Americans to affix their signatures to this petition and help us defeat this bill. 2. This bill would permit the flooding of this country with 400,000 so-called displaced persons of Europe in 4 years. This amount of immigrants will be in addition to our present quotas. 3. These people could enter Great Britain, France, and some of the other countries and help rebuild Europe, but have refused to enter these countries in the hope that the American people will be foolish enough to permit them to come into this country and take homes and employment from our veterans and 1 other Americans. Mr. and Mrs. America, the answer is up to you. aflix your signature to this document? Will you This petition is sponsored by the legislative committee of Garfield Council, No. 34, Junior Order of United American Mechanics, Bellevue, Ky. CARL W. WITTE, Chairman. EDWARD W. FAUSZ. Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to place in the record a communication from the National Organization for Public Health Nursing, Inc., which says that they would welcome the opportunity for coming into this country of the nurses, and that they are needed by this country. I offer a letter by Director General Lowell W. Rooks, Director of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration, sent to Governor Lehman under date of June 28, 1947, in support of this bill. (The communications referred to are as follows:) NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH NURSING, INC., Hon. EMANUEL CELLER, United States House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN CELLER: The executive committee of the board of the National Organization for Public Health Nursing during a meeting held on May 16 discussed bill H. R. 2910 concerning admission of displaced persons to this country. Sympathy was expressed for the plight of these unfortunate people. The committee was informed that about 1,000 of the displaced persons who would come to this country under provisions of the bill might be nurses. Since this is the group for whom the NOPHN would be in a position to give help, they passed the following resolution : "This organization will welcome to the United States the group of approximately 1,000 nurses from the displaced persons, and will, within the limits of organization capacity, assist them in making the adjustment of transfer to life in the United States." Sincerely yours, RUTH W. HUBBARD, President. UNITED NATIONS RELIEF AND REHABILITATION ADMINISTRATION, Hon. HERBERT H. LEHMAN, New York, N. Y. DEAR GOVERNOR LEHMAN: In a recent statement to the press I sought to explain UNRRA's policy in respect of the repatriation of displaced persons as well as the reasons behind that policy. I reiterate my firm belief that for those who are not in political conflict with the Government of their native country, for those who have no valid cause to fear persecution, repatriation offers the best, and certainly the most immediate, chance of rehabilitation. This statement should not be interpreted to mean that I am in any way opposed to the Stratton bill, however. Quite the contrary. I favor the Stratton bill as well as any other resettlement plan. I favor any measure that will get these million unfortunates out of camps and fitted into society as useful and happy citizens. I believe efforts should be continued to induce those who are in a position to do so to accept repatriation. But I feel that there are probably many thousands who have valid cause to fear returning to their homelands and, in my opinion, there are hundreds of thousands more who are determined never to return. The fact that after 2 years of intensive effort to encourage repatriation there are still about a million living in the most unhappy conditions as wards of the world's taxpayers supports this opinion. So I favor both solutions— repatriation and resettlement. There is a tendency to forget the Nazi brutality which brought these people to their present state, to forget the near annihilation by mass murder and starvation which was inflicted upon them as a matter of cold, calculated policy. But they don't forget and we should not. They deserve our pity and our help. My information is that in the main they consist of honest and potentially useful members of society, comprising farmers, laborers, skilled artisans, and representatives of many of the arts and sciences. By careful selection to eliminate the small percentages of undesirables, it would be possible to fill large quotas with good material for future American citizens. Sincerely yours, LOWELL W. ROOKS, Director General. Mr. FELLOWS. I have some material for the record, too. I am submitting for the record a statement by the Secretary of Commerce, Mr. Harriman. At the request of our colleague Mr. Lane of Massachusetts, I am submitting for the record what purports to be a resolution of the legislative department of the city of Chelsea, Mass. I am also submitting a statement of William F. Laukaitis, supreme president of the Lithuanian Alliance of America, on H. R. 2910. I have also a statement of the Russian Bible Society, Inc., submitted by the Reverend Basil A. Malof for the record. (The statements referred to are as follows:) STATEMENT OF SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, W. AVERELL HARRIMAN, SUBMITTED TO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, CONCERNING H. R. 2910, JULY 16, 1947 Mr. CHAIRMAN. Congressman Stratton's bill, H. R. 2910, proposes to admit into the United States as nonquota immigrants, provided they are qualified under all immigration laws of the United States for admission for permanent residence, not more than 100,000 displaced persons in Germany, Austria, and Italy, each year for a period of 4 years. I am wholeheartedly in favor of such a program, and I wish to stress not only my favor for this bill, but also the urgency of final action by both Houses of Congress on the proposal. The procrastination which has so far characterized our national conduct on this problem reflects little credit upon ourselves and suggests a callous neglect of the desperate need for assistance of these victims of the war. In terms of simple Christian responsibility, I believe we have a compelling moral obligation to do something to help them, and to do it now. In economic terms, I believe that giving haven to our share of these refugees will be to our ultimate national advantage. In terms of our hopes for peace, I believe that the United States because of its position among nations must take leadership in all matters in emphasizing the dignity of the individual and his rights to freedom. Prior to my work in the Department of Commerce, I spent 6 years overseas, and I have seen first-hand the hardships of these unfortunate people whom Congressman Stratton proposes to help. We Americans cannot neglect the suffering of these pathetic refugees. If we, our wives and families could see them in their misery and suffering there would soon be such an outery and sense of moral outrage in the country that we would take action immediately to alleviate their condition. We have the means to give help to these unfortunates, and if we do not, our failure must surely rest uncomfortably upon our consciences. I know that some critics of the proposal to admit displaced persons to this country-having consideration for our veterans, our workers, and our national institutions have expressed fears about the consequences of such action. As I have the deepest concern for the health and vigor of our own country. I have repeatedly said on other occasions, I am convinced that the hope of the world to extricate itself from its present difficulties depends upon the continued economic and spiritual strength of the United States. Our immense productivity, plus our national traditions of freedom, have given us the initiative in world affairs. The most disastrous thing which could happen not only to us but to all free men everywhere would be economic exhaustion or idleness in this country. My experience abroad has deepened my determination that our American way of life must be preserved. Because of what I have personally lived through, I am keenly aware of the dangers inherent in any proposal or scheme which might weaken us. I would, therefore, approve of no plan which I felt contained any real possibility of harm to us. Conversely, I think it particularly important at this critical stage in world affairs to take whatever steps are possible to strengthen our economy and our position in the world. It is on this ground that I favor admitting displaced persons to this country according to Congressman Stratton's plan; giving them haven will strengthen us and will raise the United States in the esteem of the world. There are many causes for fear nowadays, but we can overcome our fears only by positive action. So long as fear guides whatever we do, I believe we will never be free of it. Most of the arguments which have been raised in opposition to American leadership in providing asylum for European refugees appear to be rooted basically in fear. Opponents point out our housing shortage, emphasize the potential competition of immigrants for jobs, and stress the danger of unemployment. Each of these points can be, and doubtless already has been, answered by other witnesses before your committee in terms of statistical and historical evidence. In order to avoid duplication of the factual presentations already accumulated in this hearing, I will confine myself to a general statement. If immigrants use houses, they also help build them; if they hold jobs, they also provide markets. The whole history of the United States testifies that our prosperity and standard of living depend not upon shrinking down our labor force nor eliminating competition wherever possible, but rather upon the talents, energy, and skills of our people and the existence of healthy competition. We have seen on innumerable occasions the tireless efforts of immigrants to work and build in order to repay this country for its gift of freedom, and we have all benefited from their effects. These truths are self-evident. If the lessons of our own history and the facts of our everyday experience have not already proven the fallacy of the defensive arguments which have been raised against further immigration, then further collection of mere facts and figures will be of little avail. In reality, the answer to these arguments probably lies deeper than facts and figures can reach. They are symptoms of an underlying lack of confidence in our national political principles and a pessimism regarding the capacity of our economic system to continue to expand and prosper. A basic tenet of the Marxist philosophy is that capitalistic countries must inevitably break down, that they in time must become stagnant and decadent. Believers in the prescience of Marx are pessimistic about our chances for survival, and they are wating expectantly for our downfall. Personally, I categorically reject their assumption. I have complete confidence that we are going to straighten out whatever difficulties we may have and move ahead to ever-increasing levels of productivity and stability. The principles upon which our way of life is built are as relevant and as meaningful for the twentieth century as they were useful and creative in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. I am not unmindful of the immense tasks we face in solving our problems, but I am not fearful. Having confidence in America, I am not afraid of immigration, and I am especially not afraid of immigration in such a trifling volume as that whch would result from the passage of Mr. Stratton's bill. America will be better off the more and better citizens she contains in her population, and many of our finest citizens have always come from the ranks of our immigrants. In formulating our national policies we never have taken a defensive position, nor do I think we ever should. Fundamentally, the decision we face in giving help to European refugees is one of American spirit. We must meet it with characteristic American courage and not with timidity and misgiving. What we do about refugees wll be symbolic to people not only in other countries, but also to our own people. It is a choice between courage and fear. I have been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objection to the submission of this statement to your committee. |