it should be recalled that practically all of these employees are veterans of the World War who have remained in France continuously since the War. Most of them have French wives and have raised families in France. As a consequence, both they and their children, as well as their wives, have many ties in France, the disruption of which would involve serious personal and family problems. The Commission has no activities in the United States to which these employees can be transferred, and even if work should be found for them with other Government agencies in this country, it would require extensive readjustments not only for many of these employees to fit into new positions after their long years of specialized duties in France but also for their families to adapt themselves to the required new environments. Under all the circumstances, I do not feel, if the question is considered solely from the standpoint of the employees themselves, that we would be justified in ordering them to the United States at this time or that such action would be warranted unless their personal safety or freedom should appear to be jeopardized by remaining in France. I recognize the grave responsibilities of the Department of State with respect to questions affecting foreign policies and relationships, particularly under conditions such as exist in Europe at this time, and appreciate how important it is that all agencies of our Government having activities abroad should cooperate fully with your Department in such matters. It is needless to say that the Commission will so cooperate and that if you should determine at any time that the best interests of the United States as a whole would be served by withdrawing our American personnel from Europe, or that the personal safety or freedom of our American officers or employees require their removal from a danger zone, I shold be glad to have your timely advice in order that appropriate action may be taken. I am sending a copy of this letter to Col. T. Bentley Mott, officer in charge of the Commission's European Office at Paris, with the request that he keep in close touch with the officer in charge of the Paris Office of the American Embassy, so, that all concerned may be promptly advised of any change in conditions which may require reconsideration of this question and so that any precautionary or other action which may appear necessary may be taken in due time in accordance with the spirit of this letter. Respectfully, In reply refer to FA. Gen. JOHN J. PERSHING, JOHN J. PERSHING, Chairman. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Chairman, American Battle Monuments Commission, Washington, D. C. My Dear General Pershing: I have received your letter of March 24, 1941, with reference to the personnel of the American Battle Monuments Commission in France and have taken due note of your observations concerning the present duties of the personnel and the possibility of their being compelled to withdraw from France at some future date. The Department has sent copies of your letter to the American Embassies at Vichy, France, and Berlin, Germany, and has requested these offices to take such precautionary measures as may now be deemed advisable in behalf of the personnel of the Commission. The Embassy at Vichy has been asked to communicate with the office at Paris with a view to making such preparatory arrangements in the matter of passports, visas, et cetera, as may now be undertaken in anticipation of the possible evacuation of the personnel and their families at some later date. The Department has endeavored to keep Mr. James E. Mangum, Acting Secretary of the Commission, informed of developments in France, particularly as these relate to officers and employees of this Government serving there, and will be glad to continue to do so. I appreciate the concern which you feel for the personnel of the Commission, and I assure you that the Department will continue to render them every possible assistance. Sincerely yours, SUMNER WELLES, Acting Secretary. The honorable the SECRETARY OF STATE, Washington, D. C. MAY 5, 1941. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: Reference is made to cablegram No. 1275-twentyninth, from the office of the American Embassy in Paris, France, transmitting to me a message from Col. T. Bentley Mott, officer in charge of the Commission's European Office. After considering the recommendation contained in the cablegram, together with information given to me by the Acting Secretary of the Commission after informal conferences with officers of your Department, I concur in the view that our American personnel in France and Belgium who are stationed outside Paris should be brought into Paris as soon as practicable. If you concur, it is requested that the following cablegram be sent to Colonel Mott through the American Embassy: In view of the developments indicated above I should appreciate your advice as to whether, in your opinion, any further steps should be taken by the Commission at this time looking to the repatriation of our American personnel and their families. I have the honor to remain, my dear Mr. Secretary, JOHN J. PERSHING, Chairman. In reply refer to FA. Gen. JOHN J. PERSHING, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Chairman, American Battle Monuments Commission, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR GENERAL PERSHING: I have received your letter of May 5, 1941, with regard to a cablegram dated April 29, which you received through the Department from Colonel Mott, officer in charge of the Paris office of the American Battle Monuments Commission. It is recalled that Colonel Mott referred in the cablegram to the increasing gravity of the situation in France and particularly to the difficulty of evacuating, in the event of a sudden emergency, those American members of the staff of the Commission who are now stationed at outlying cemeteries in occupied France. He recommended that these men and their dependents be ordered to Paris, and his recommendations were concurred in by the First Secretary of the Embassy at Paris and by the American Ambassador at Vichy. You state that you have considered Colonel Mott's recommendatiors together with information and advice given to the Commission by officers of the Department and that you concur in the view that the American personnel should be brought to Paris. You submit in your letter the text of a proposed cablegram to Colonel Mott conveying the necessary orders, and you request the Department, if it concurs, to transmit the message to him. The Department wholly concurs in Colonel Mott's recommendations, as supported by its officers at Paris and Vichy, and on May 5 it cabled your message to the Embassy at Vichy to be relayed at the first possible opportunity to the office at Paris. Your letter concludes with the request that the Department inform you whether, in its opinion, any further steps should be taken by the Commission at this time in anticipation of the possible repatriation from France of its American personnel and their families. In view of the present international situation, of the growing disruption of transportation and communication facilities in France, and of the unpredictability of future developments, the Department considers that the Commission should arrange as soon as possible for the repatriation of its American personnel and their dependents. I am not unmindful of the Commission's responsibility to continue its work in France as long as it can possibly do so. In this regard I recall, for instance, your letter of March 24, 1941. Knowing of your obligation, the Department has hesitated to advise you to withdraw your staff. It would not be a simple matter to bring them to the United States even if they were to start today, however, and as time goes on the difficulties and dangers are likely to multiply. Your men do not have diplomatic status. I am informed that most of them have wives and children residing with them, and it would of course be necessary for the latter to obtain exit permits, visas, and otherwise to undergo tedious and prolonged formalities. I believe you will agree with me that it has now become imperative that the Commission should provide at the earliest possible moment for the return of its American personnel and their dependents to the United States. Sincerely yours, CORDELL HULL. Mr. WOODRUM (continuing.) In other words, the personnel of the Commission has been cut down on account of existing conditions over there? Mr. MANGUM. Yes, sir. Mr. WOODRUM. And a skeleton force maintained pending the clarification of that situation and, when that takes place, you would reasonably expect it to go back to just about what it has been, something around $135,000 to $150,000 a year for the upkeep of those cemeteries and monuments? Mr. MANGUM. That is correct. DAMAGE TO MONUMENT AT BREST Mr. FITZPATRICK. Has any damage been done to the cemeteries since you were before us the last time? Mr. MANGUM. Since I was before you the last time we have received a report that the monument at Brest had been damaged. We do not have the full details and do not know definitely to what extent it was damaged, but one report was that it had been destroyed. Mr. HOUSTON. Are they bringing any bodies back? Mr. MANGUM. No, sir; the bodies are all remaining where they are. Mr. STARNES. Has there been any desecration of the monuments by the German forces? Mr. MANGUM. None that we know of. CHANGE OF LANGUAGE EXPENSES OF TRANSFER OF EMPLOYEES TO STATIONS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES Mr. WOODRUM. Now, this new language on page 4 of the committee print, Mr. Mangum, providing for the temporary transfer of employees by the Commission between places in foreign countries, and so forth: Will you say something about that? Mr. MANGUM. The language as it exists in our present appropriation provides for travel expenses of employees and their dependents and household effects when the employees are transferred from one official station to another on permanent duty or between Washington and Europe under the emergency situation. However, some of our employees, who were brought back and who have been given positions in defense agencies, are now stationed at places outside the continental United States such as Puerto Rico and Jamaica, and some are stationed outside of Washington at Philadelphia, New York, Baltimore, and other places. Under existing law, since they have been transferred from our rolls, we could not pick them up and put them back on our rolls until they had, at their own expense, gotten back either to Washington or to their stations in Europe, at least there may be some question about it. This new language is for the purpose of making certain that, when the emergency is over, we can pick them up and send them from their emergency stations back to their old stations. General Pershing considers this very important and the proposed language has been worked out after the most careful consideration and informal conferences with the Comptroller General's office as well as the Budget Bureau. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You say "between foreign countries." Why the language "between foreign countries"? Mr. MANGUM. This language-that is, the whole provision-is intended to cover several things. Originally, the language was put in so as to permit normal transfers. The original reason for obtaining the language was to cover the following case: Some years ago the superintendent of our cemetery at Romagne, France, died and we had to bring in the superintendent from another cemetery, from Brookwood, England, to take his place. Our appropriation was not specifically available for the payment of the travel of the dependents and household goods of the superintendent whom we transferred from England to France. So a part of this language was obtained for the purpose of permitting such transfers under normal conditions and in accordance with standardized regulations. The new part of the language is to permit sending our people back to their stations in foreign countries-in Europe-when the emergency is over. Mr. WOODRUM. Is this necessary for the emergency; is that the purpose of it? Mr. MANGUM. The part that refers to the temporary transfer of employees and to new appointments is to take care of an emergency situation. Those of our former employees who are in this country, or in Puerto Rico, or places of that sort, would have to be given new appointments by the Commission, because they have been separated from our rolls in order to take their defense positions. And since we have no work stations of our own except in Washington and Europe, we could not give them positions anywhere except in Washington or Europe, and it is possible they would have to come to Washington or go to Europe at their own expense. So this language is for the purpose of allowing us, when the emergency is over, to appoint these old employees at their emergency stations and then transfer them back to Europe. Mr. WOODRUM. You won't need this language after the emergency is over? Mr. MANGUM. We won't need this language which refers to new appointments. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. This does not apply to people, for instance, that General Vincensini may be employing to do work over there now? Mr. MANGUM. No, sir. USE OF ESTIMATE REQUESTED FOR 1943 Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You expect to spend $32,000 and you are asking $50,000 in order to have a margin; is that it? Mr. MANGUM. No; we are going to have a very hard time to get by with the $50,000. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. I thought you said you wanted $30,000 for France and $2,000 for Belgium? Mr. MANGUM. Of course, that amount covers only the directand minimum-operating expenses in those two countries. In addition, we have the regular expense of our cemetery at Brookwood, England, and have the necessary expenses of the office here in Washington, because we have accounts, reports, correspondence, and general administrative duties to take care of. Mr. WOODRUM. You are reducing that staff? Mr. MANGUM. It is being very drastically reduced, as you will see from the detailed estimates here. Mr. HOUSTON. Have any of your men personally lost any equipment through bombing raids, or anything like that? Mr. MANGUM. Yes, sir; they have; they have lost a great deal. Mr. MANGUM. None so far. Mr. HOUSTON. They will probably have to wait until after the war is over and a general bill goes through? Mr. MANGUM. To that end, we have had this preliminary step taken: While the facts were fresh in their minds, we had our employees make lists of what they lost, the cost, and so forth, and to certify to the correctness of these lists. Mr. HOUSTON. I remember one of the employees of the Embassy in Greece had his home bombed and lost his furniture and everything, and there was no provision to take care of that. I think there should be. Mr. MANGUM. I think so, because these people are not high salaried people, and their salaries are about all they have in most cases. Mr. HOUSTON. And, after all, they go where the Government sends them? Mr. MANGUM. Yes. Mr. HOUSTON. Briefly, this reduction is because of the fact you cannot go into these other areas at the present time and look after them? Mr. MANGUM. Yes; we have had to bring out all of our American personnel, leaving only our non-American personnel in France. General Vincensini is looking after this work, without any overhead expense to us at all. In other words, his organization, with the people we had there, non-Americans, are looking after it and we are paying only the direct operating cost. Mr. HOUSTON. But, as the chairman [Mr. Woodrum] pointed out a moment ago, when the emergency is over, you will probably go right back to where you were? Mr. MANGUM. Yes; that is understood. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 5, 1941. OFFICE OF THE BITUMINOUS COAL CONSUMERS' STATEMENT OF DR. LUTHER HARR, CONSUMERS' COUNSEL, ACCOMPANIED BY RAYMOND E. KERR, CHIEF, ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS DIVISION; GEORGE BRONZ, CHIEF LEGAL ADVISER; AND MISS ELIZABETH BROOKER, FISCAL CLERK SALARIES AND EXPENSES Mr. WOODRUM. Dr. Harr, we have an estimate from the Bureau of the Budget for $172,530, for the Office of the Bituminous Coal Consumers' Counsel, as follows: Salaries and expenses: For all necessary expenses of the Office of the Bituminous Coal Consumers' Counsel established by the Act of April 11, 1941 (55 Stat. 134), |