They have never been authorized on the basis of peacetime service. By extending the period of the Philippine Insurrection so as to cover military operations which occurred after the insurrection was legally terminated and after peace was established in the Moro Province, service persiors would be provided for â limited group of persors, their widows, and children on the basis of certain service now recognized as peacetime service which would be impressed with a wartime status by the terms of the bill. These include service persions under the SparishAmerican War service persion laws as reenacted by Public Law 269, Seventyfourth Congress, ranging from $20 to $100 per month on the basis of 90 days' service or more with an hororable discharge, or less than 90 days' service if the veteran was discharged for disability incurred in service in line of duty, and at rates ranging from $12 to $50 per morth on the basis of 70 days or more but less than 90 days with an honorable discharge, but no discharge for line-of-duty disability, as well as death pensions for widows and children of veterans who served 90 days or more, or who, regardless of length of service, were discharged for disability incurred in service in line of duty. The pensions provided in part III, Veterans Regulation No. 1 (a), as amended, at the rate of $40 per month for permanent total disability rot the result of the veterans' own misconduct, or at the rate of not less than $15 per month if the veteran is 50 percent disabled, and is otherwise eligible, would be payable on the basis of 90 days' service with an honorable discharge or less than 90 days if the veteran was discharged for disability incurred in service in line of duty, and to the widows and children of such veterars.

Medical treatment and hospital or domiciliary care for service-connected and nor-service-corrected disabilities, including burial berefits, would be available to veterans who rendered service as set forth in the proposed legislation on & parity with other war veterans, including veterans of World War I and of the war in which we are now engaged. At present medical treatment and hospital or domiciliary care for service-corrected disabilities and subject to certain limitatiors for non-service-conrected disabilities, including burial berefits, are provided for former members of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard who were not war veterans when they were discharged for disability incurred in service in line of duty or are in receipt of pension for service-connected dlsabilities.

It is felt that existing laws are sufficiently liberal and that enactment of the proposed legislation would establish a dangerous precedent not only with respect to demands for similar legislation for others who served in campaigns or expeditions in times of peace, but also for extension of other war dates established in conformity with recognized legal precedents.

There are no records in the Veterans' Administration on which to base an estimate of the cost of the proposed legislation.

For the foregoing reasons, the Veterans' Administration is unable to recommend favorable consideration of H. R. 4099, either in its present form or if amended as suggested above by your committee.

Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection by that office to the submission of this report to your committee.

Very truly yours,

FRANK T. HINES, Administrator.

[H. Doc. No. 804, 78th Cong., 2d sess.]

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES RETURNING WITHOUT HIS APPROVAL THE BILL (H. R. 4099) TO EXTEND THE PERIOD OF THE PHILIPPINE INSURRECTION SO AS TO INCLUDE ACTIVE SERVICE WITH THE UNITED STATES MILITARY OR NAVAL FORCES ENGAGED IN HOSTILITIES IN THE MORO PROVINCE, INCLUDING MINDANAO, OR IN THE ISLANDS OF SAMAR AND LEYTE, BETWEEN JULY 5, 1902, AND DECEMBER 31, 1913

To the House of Representatives:

I am returning herewith, without my approval, H. R. 4099, Seventy-eighth Congress, an act to extend the period of the Philippine Insurrection so as to include active service with the United States military or naval forces engaged in hostilities in the Moro Province, including Mindanao, or in the islands of Samar and Leyte, between July 5, 1902, and December 31, 1913.

The effect of the measure is to confer a wartime status on persons who served in the United States military or naval forces engaged in hostilities in the Moro Province, including Mindanao and the islands of Samar and Leyte between July 5,

1902, and December 31, 1913, and thus afford to such persons and their dependents monetary and other benefits on a parity with persons who served in the Spanish-American War, Boxer Rebellion, or the Philippine Insurrection prior to July 5, 1902.

The ending date of the Philippine Insurrection was established by proclamation of the President dated July 4, 1902, except in territory occupied by the Moro tribes, and the War Department regards July 15, 1903, as the date of termination of the Phillipine Insurrection in the Moro Province, which is the date on which Act No. 787 If the Philippine Commission, approved June 1, 1903, took effect, and has held that such military operations as occurred subsequent to the establishment of civil government in the Moro Province on July 15, 1903, should not be regarded as a continuation of the insurrection.

Pensions at wartime rates are now provided for veterans and the dependents of veterans who suffered disability or death as a direct result of armed conflict or under extrahazardous conditions in the areas described in the bill during the period July 16, 1903, to December 31, 1913, and medical treatment and hospital or domiciliary care is also provided for veterans who so served, discharged for disability incurred in line of duty or who are in receipt of pension for serviceconnected disability. Service pensions would be the principal monetary benefits afforded by the bill and such benefits, consistently, have been confined to war service.

The bill would extend the Philippine Insurrection closing date about 101⁄2 years, from July 5, 1902, to December 31, 1913, thus according recognition to service performed throughout this period as wartime service upon the basis of intermittent military operations or campaigns in the Moro Province and other parts of the Philippine Archipelago against forces hostile to the organized government, which engagements are comparable to other campaigns or expeditions in which the military or naval forces have participated in times of peace.

This measure would grant special benefits to a particular group and exclude other members of the Regular Military and Naval Establishments who similarly have been called upon, on numerous occasions, to engage in similar military operations in times of peace. I believe that it is sound in principle to abide by the official beginning and ending dates of wars in providing benefits, heretofore described, and feel that extension of the period of the Philippine Insurrection, beyond that established in conformity with recognized legal precedents, would constitute sufficient deviation from that principle to invite further exceptions for additional groups with service in military occupations, expeditions, or campaigns other than during a period of war.

DECEMBER 8, 1944.

H. R. 4099.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT.

SEVENTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; AT THE SECOND SESSION, BEGUN AND HELD AT THE CITY OF WASHINGTON ON MONDAY, THE TENTH DAY OF JANUARY, ONE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED AND FO..TY-FOUR AN ACT To extend the period of the Philippine Insurrection so as to include active service with the United States military or naval forces engaged in hostilities in the Moro Province, including Mindanao, or in the islands of Samar and Leyte, between July 5, 1902, and December 31, 1913

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That for the purposes of Public Law Numbered 2, Seventy-third Congress, March 20, 1933, and Veterans Regulations, as amended, or laws reenacted by Public Law Numbered 269, Seventy-fourth Congress, August 13, 1935, as amended, the Philippine Insurrection shall be deemed to have ended July 4, 1902: Provided, That where there was active service with the United States military or naval forces engaged in the hostilities in the Moro Province, including Mindanao, or in the islands of Samar and Leyte, the date herein stated shall extend to December 31, 1913.

SAM RAYBURN, Speaker of the House of Representatives. H. A. WALLACE,

Vice President of the United States and President of the Senate.

[Endorsement on back of bill:]

I certify that this act originated in the House of Representatives.

SOUTH TRIMELE, Clerk.

The CLERK. Mr. Chairman, the representatives of the War Department, owing to prior engagements, have expressed a desire to be heard first.

Mr. BOYKIN. We will be glad to hear them.

STATEMENT OF COL. ROBERT E. CHANDLER, JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL'S DEPARTMENT, MILITARY PERSONNEL DIVISION, ARMY SERVICE FORCES

Colonel CHANDLER. I am Col. Robert E. Chandler, Judge Advocate General's Department, assigned to Military Personnel Division, Army Service Forces.

I am here this morning because the committee has asked us to come up. We feel that so far as the War Department is concerned our views were contained in our written report which was filed with your committee, but they have asked us to come up and present testimony.

As stated in the report from the Secretary of War to the chairman of this committee, the War Department is opposed to the enactment of H. R. 128.

By Act No. 787, which was approved June 1, 1903, and became effective July 15, 1903, the Philippine Commission provided for the establishment of civil government in the Moro Province. The War Department considers that the effective date of Act No. 787, July 15, 1903, consitutes the formal ending date of the insurrection in the Moro Province.

While there was military activity in that Province after July 15, 1903, it was in the nature of policing operations against relatively small bands of outlaws who were defying the civil government which had been set up.

By long-established policy, service pensions (as distinct from pensions for service-connected disability) have been limited to veterans and the dependents of veterans who rendered active service in time of war. The War Department's objection to H. R. 128 rests on the fact that its enactment would open the door to additional departures from that policy and to interminable extensions of wartime status for active service actually performed in times of peace Mr. BOYKIN. That is your statement?

Colonel CHANDLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. BOYKIN. Gentlemen, I have been talking to our clerk of this committee, who has given me some very wonderful information, and I agree with every bit of it, and I believe that we should let him make a statement, because he has been here so long with our chairman, knows it so well, and explained it to me so well. I had to go over to Alexandria, Va., this morning, early. I just came in here 5 minutes ago and read this statement and talked to him a little bit, but he gave me so much information I could not digest it-even pictures, and all that sort of thing. He goes on to tell so many interesting things.

Mr. McGREGOR. Mr. Chairman, if I may interrupt, do you not believe it would be better for us to discuss this with the Colonel, asking some questions relative to his statement, before we hear from the clerk?

Mr. BOYKIN. Yes.

Mr. MCGREGOR. I would like to ask the Colonel a few questions relative to his statement.

Colonel, you made the statement, I believe, that it would be opening the doors, so to speak, for other similar bills. Just how would we open the doors, and with reference to what groups?

Colonel CHANDLER. One group I have in mind would be persons who participated in the Mexican border difficulties in 1916, and perhaps the Vera Cruz Expedition in 1914. There certainly have been other punitive expeditions, or other cases where military personnel were called out and certainly engaged in fighting.

Mr. MCGREGOR. How about the Boxer Rebellion in China? Was that not a similar situation? We have recognized that. Colonel CHANDLER. I have no information on that.

Mr. McGREGOR. That was in so-called peacetime.

I am wondering about this, Colonel: A man can be killed and be dead just as long by being shot by a bullet from a little guerrilla as he is from fighting in the real first line of so-called legitimate war. Now, you are taking exception to that individual and saying that he should not come under this type of legislation.

Mr. HALE. No; those get pensions anyway.

Colonel CHANDLER. We take exception to the distinction between service pensions and service-connected disability and death benefits. Mr. MCGREGOR. You are taking the position that this would not be considered service-connected because there is no official declaration of war covering that period?

Colonel CHANDLER. It is my understanding that the persons who participated in these campaigns are already entitled to serviceconnected pensions, but not to service pensions as such, merely because they participated..

Mr. MCGREGOR. You do not think they are eligible for a service pension?

Colonel CHANDLER. It is our feeling that the line should be drawn some place, and if they were provided for this group then there are certainly other groups who could logically come in and ask to have similar legislation enacted for them.

Mr. BOYKIN. I think if they deserve it they should come in.

Mr. McGREGOR. Going back to the chairman's statement, he states it is a continuation of the Philippine Insurrection, for which the War Department issued a campaign medal. Does that not, at least by inference, indicate by the War Department that it was a definite campaign?

Colonel CHANDLER. Not at all, sir.

Mr. McGREGOR. You do not feel it was a war?

Colonel CHANDLER. War service as such is not a requisite to the issuance of a service or campaign medal. We have examples of that in the Mexican service medal for service between 1911 and 1917; the Mexican Border medal, and this one I have here, the American defense medal. The sole requirement for that is a year's continuous service with the proviso that some service must have been performed between September 1939, and December 7, 1941. So the mere issuance of a campaign medal, or the decision that these persons are eligible to wear a Philippine medal, would not mean that it was considered war service.

Mr. MCGREGOR. When the War Department presented this particular medal the wording "Philippine War" was included in the presentation. Would that not at least by inference say to you, Colonel, that the War Department recognized that there was a war at that particular time?

Colonel CHANDLER. I do not know about that, sir. I do not know the conditions under which the medal was awarded.

I have a list of the service in the Moro Province after July 15, 1903, which entitles one to the Philippine campaign medal, but I could not say how the War Department considered it.

Mr. MCGREGOR. I notice you use the term "Philippine campaign," and the War Department, in connection with the medal, says says "Philippine War." That, to me, is the dividing line between your opinion and that of the War Department. They call it the Philippine war and you call it the Philippine campaign.

Colonel CHANDLER. The information which I have, and I believe it is the official name of the medal, says "The Philippine Campaign Medal."

Mr. McGREGOR. It has just been called to my attention that on the outside of the box sent out in 1909 they called it the Philippine War Medal. I cannot definitely determine the dividing point between a Philippine insurrection and a Philippine war.

Colonel CHANDLER. I cannot either.

Mr. McGREGOR. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SAVAGE. What is the difference between a service pension and a service-connected pension?

Colonel CHANDLER. I am not an expert on that, sir, but it is my distinct understanding that a service pension is one which is given simply for participation in military and naval service between certain dates, without regard to any disability or anything of that nature, whereas a service-connected pension is predicated upon some disability which has connection with the service.

Mr. HALE. Colonel, do you know about these various expeditions, like that of the Marines in Haiti, nad I guess they went down to Nicaraugua at one time?

Colonel CHANDLER. Yes, sir. They went in the early thirties, as I recall. I have no information on that, sir. I would imagine that they would certainly be eligible for the pensions which are provided at peacetime rates for persons who incur disability in the service.

Mr. HALE. Yes; who incurred disability, but I mean pensions just for having served.

Colonel CHANDLER. I have no information in that connection.

Mr. HALE. There is all the difference in the world between compensating a man for injury or wounds incurred in the period of service and giving him a pension just for the service.

Colonel CHANDLER. Yes, sir; there is.

Mr. HALE. These people who served in this Philippine Insurrection get a service-connected pension anyway; just like the Regular Army in time of peace. They get a service-connected pension, do they not? Colonel CHANDLER. Yes, sir. That rate is 75 percent of those provided for war service, and then there are certain conditions under which at the present time, or hereafter, they could get wartime rates under certain conditions of service.