A word needs to be said about the Truman "amnesty" of 1947. Today we hear demands for "case-by-case" treatment of offenders or an amnesty conditioned on alternative service for some period of time. These proposals are embodied in some of the bills currently before this Subcommittee. In 1946 Congress authorized and allowed President Truman to set up an "amnesty board" specifically to consider the cases of 15,000 men convicted of draft evasion in World War II. In over a year's time this committee could process and allow less than ten percent of the cases. Truman had to and did allow general pardons to a vastly greater number of convicted deserters and army men in 1952. It is probably proper for a President in granting pardons to make this on a case-by-case basis and even to attach conditions (as is often done by probation). But the scope and purpose of amnesty is different.

Congress grants amnesty by a broad general law; it is intended to forget the crime, not continue to judge it and exact alternative punishment. One does not forget an offense and further reconciliation by continued requirements of alternate service or penalties. Because amnesty has been so long delayed and such a wide variety of offenses are involved, it becomes impossible as a practical matter either to treat the problem on a case-to-case basis or to devise an alternative service for all instances. Nothing less than a full, unconditional and, complete amnesty will suffice.

Henry Steele Commager and Ramsey Clark have pointed out that the argument for amnesty is historical, practical, and ethical. In my law review article to which I have already alluded is the most complete history of amnesty and, as I have stated here, the current situation is a most pressing demand that this history continue, that Congress not forego its rightful powers and defer to the President's views on pardon (or, as he calls it, "amnesty"). Congress has the power of amnesty and Congress should exercise it by enacting legislation which hopefully the President would support by signing.

On the illuminating question of expediency it has many times been pointed out that those who knew the ropes and consulted draft counselors or had the money to hire a lawyer escaped Vietnam service by deferment as students, by enrollment in the Reserve or National Guard, by medical discharge, or various technicalities. These were the service avoiders. But the young man who was poor and black and who knew of none of these "outlets" often found himself trapped in military service with few if any legal courses of action open to express his opposition. There are many practical reasons for amnesty: the numbers involved, the continuing blot on records preventing full participation in the community, the need for the best brain-power and the most socially alive citizens, the impossibility of case-by-case or alternative-service treatment, and the cost to America of carrying so many second-class citizens.

There is also a strong moral imperative for the grant of amnesty. During the Civil War it was the hawks in Congress who demanded the punishment of all southerners and it was a compassionate president who spoke “with malice toward none, with charity for all" and declared, "No one need expect me to take any part in hanging or killing these men, even the worst of them. . . . Enough lives have been sacrificed." There are particularly strong moral reasons for amnesty now, First, we may note that a large portion of those involved were just prematurely right. Some were opposed to the war on moral-ethical grounds but did not sincerely believe they could meet the then court requirement for conscientious objection of belief in a Divine Being (during the war the Supreme Court reversed this law). Another group argued that Congress had been defrauded into adopting the Tonkin Gulf Resolution, that the bombing of Cambodia and the war itself were illegal (Americans generally have come to accept much of this argument). Many within the services found them racist and stacked against the black and poor, and they rebelled (the services belatedly acknowledged and tried to right some of these wrongs). Many prematurely took the position now accepted by Congress and the public-that the war was a mistake and that we should extricate ourselves as completely as possible. For still others the Nuremberg principles declaring the citizen's obligation to refuse to be involved in war crimes and to violate local law if necessary was a real obligation. For any religious persons (and the Supreme Court has declared we are a religious country) the conflict between his obligation to the state and to his God is central to his life.

He cannot be a fascist and give complete obedience to the state. Whether he be Jewish ("You shall have no other gods before Me") or Catholic ("I am, sire. the king's good servant, but I am God's good servant first") or Protestant ("God alone is lord of conscience"), the religious person must place his religious con

science first. And this is of the most importance ultimately to the state. As I have pointed out in “A Remonstrance for Conscience," 1958 U. of Penna. L. Rev., the whole legal structure of the state is based upon a general moral conscience built by the individual consciences. Ultimately on moral conscience rests law, order, justice, and the abandonment of violence.

It is sometimes argued that we dishonor those who served in the war by granting amnesty. Louise Ransom, President of Americans for Amnesty, who lost a son in Vietnam, has replied adequately (as have also many veterans): "The only way we can dishonor those who died is to learn nothing from them."

America needs to rediscover its own soul. Not to go on with some post-Vietnam coverup that pretends we have done no wrong and continues to punish those who earliest called us to a moral position. Enough of Watergate-like coverups. Only by a complete, unconditional, and universal amnesty can we regain our legal integrity, our intellectual sanity, our political reality, and our national soul.

STATEMENTS OF SOME QUAKER BODIES ON AMNESTY

Friends Committee on National Legislation, Washington, D.C.

Friends have long realized the wounds of war are sustained by both combatants and non-combatants. A nation suffers because of the moral burden warfare thrusts on the individual and his conscience. The moral and religious dilemmas posed by war and conscription result in an additional casualty list. The war in Indochina is increasingly recognized by Americans as immoral, illegal, and unjust, carried on in violation of the United Nations Charter and the United States Constitution. Our first priority remains to stop the killing in Indochina.

The Nuremberg principles, supported by the United States, the U.S.S.R., France, and Great Britain, and subsequently approved by the United Nations, emphasize that final responsibility for participation in morally reprehensivle acts against humanity rests with the individual.

We believe most persons who have refused to participate in military service or have opposed conscription during the course of the war in Indochina have done so on the ground that they were conscientiously opposed to the war or wartime military service. However, proof of conscience is inherently difficult, and experience has proved that efforts to judge conscientiousness have been marked all too often by refusals to recognize sincere beliefs. We therefore urge that all persons who have refused military service or conscription should not be punished for such refusal, whether it took place before, during, or after military service.

We urge the President and Congress, in a spirit of reconciliation, to join in a full and unconditional amnesty for all those who are deemed to have violated U.S. laws in this regard. Thus, the government should: (1) permit the return of those now outside the United States, either to stay or to visit; (2) provide for prompt release of all currently held in civilian or military prisons; (3) drop pending and potential prosecutions; and (4) restore civil rights to all who have completed prison terms or otherwise lost such rights due to their opposition to the war.

(Approved by the General Committee, February 21, 1972)

AFSC POLICY STATEMENT ON AMNESTY

The people of the United States have before them the question of amnesty for those who violated civil or military law in the course of active opposition to the war in Indochina, or in the course of removing themselves from participation in or support of that war.

The American Friends Service Committee urges the United States Government to declare an amnesty for all these persons.

The American Friends Service Committee is opposed to all war and all conscription because of our religious faith. We are opposed to participation in war, preparation for war and civilian support of war. We are opposed to civil war, international war, foreign wars, wars in this country, wars of defense, wars of aggression, popular wars and unpopular wars.

Starting from that position, we identify with those for whom we are asking amnesty. We do this even while rejecting methods, such as evasion and violence, used by some. We believe in confrontation with evil, not evasion, and in nonviolent direct action against evil, not violence. These moral judgments we make for ourselves, not for others.

In one sense, those in need of amnesty are accidential victims. In fairness, they should share the good fortune of all those who missed the draft through the lottery, deferments, etc. Others have already received their “amnesty" through the dropping of many cases of military charges and of criminal charges before civilian courts.

Amnesty does not involve making case by case moral, political or pragmatic judgments. Amnesty is not an ex post facto stamp of approval on a class of offenses formerly seen as illegal or anti-social. A declaration of amnesty is a political act which, like many political acts, may be inspired by a great many different motivations and judgments.

Amnesty does not mean forgiveness, nor is forgiveness being sought. Amnesty comes from a Greek word meaning forgetfulness and a French word meaning forgotten. Amnesty means forgetting a broad classification of offenses, being in a state of amnesia insofar as certain events are concerned.

After World War II so-called amnesty was granted to only 1,500 of approximately 15,000 whose conscience had led them to break the Selective Service law. The fact that their objections were religiously based serves to underscore the continued preferential treatment granted religious objectors. We reject this special privilege for limited kinds of objection. Although the AFSC firmly believes these men should have amnesty, we consider it inappropriate to make a special plea for these persons.

There are others with much greater need, with traditions quite different than ours, many of whom have no objection to war in general but came to have profound objections to the Indochina war. Many of these men left this country to avoid Selective Service or to separate themselves from the armed forces. Many of them would like to return. They and their families are torn by separation, financial difficulties, fear and many other problems resulting from having left the country under these circumstances. Others live in this country, some in apprehension underground, some in prison, some with prison terms completed, but carrying permanent legal disabilities as a result.

The misery in the lives of these people should not be used as a political football. Insofar as the amnesty issue is concerned let us put behind us the controversies of the war in Indochina. Amnesty is neither a justification of the legal offenses committed, nor a judgment on the war giving rise to those offenses.

The uncontested fact is that the war in Indochina has torn the fabric of American society as no other war has done since our own Civil War, now more than 100 years behind us. Out of that war came Lincoln's great call for reconciliation, "with malice toward none."

In the spirit of such reconciliation, let us begin to heal the wounds of this war, even while we recognize that we are still a long way from peace in Indochina. As a simple act of mercy which will help thousands of persons to reclaim their rightful role as American citizens there must be an amnesty. As one small step of many needed to get on with the building of peace, let there be an offical forgetting of offenses growing out of opposition to or personal withdrawal from the war in Indochina.

[Approved by AFSC Board of Directors, Apr. 14, 1973.]

PHILADELPHIA YEARLY MEETING OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS INTRODUCTION

In the conflict between the rights of conscience and the regulations of the Selective Service and military systems, we reaffirm our belief in the Peace Testimony which calls for opposition to all wars and conscription. Although the final burden of decision about the extent of resistance to war rests with each individual, we declare that our first allegiance is to the God of love. If this allegiance is challenged by the demands of the state, we must obey God rather than the state. The violators of Selective Service Regulations or the Universal Code of Military Justice, in exile, in hiding, or in prison, deserters from the military, soldiers released with less than honorable discharges, and resistors with prison records include those who, by reason of conscience, refused to participate in the violence inherent in imposing this nation's will upon an alien culture.

In war there are no victors, only victims. Participants and non-participants alike suffer the emotional damage of disunity and discord. After the most divisive war in our history we must understand that our overriding national need is for reconciliation. Amnesty, we believe, is a first step towards reconciliation. Amnesty is "legal oblivion" as distinct from "pardon." It would erase injustices of the past and thus help us face the future without bitterness.

MINUTES

Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) urges the President and the Congress of the United States

1. To bring about a general and unconditional amnesty for all who disobeyed laws and orders which, if observed, would have involved them in the war system during the Indochina war.

2. To expunge their criminal records.

3. To restore their civil liberties.

4. To drop all present and future prosecutions and to free those currently under legal restraint.

If this nation is to regain a sense of unity and common purpose, nothing less will do.

[Adopted by Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends in annual session, Mar. 30, 1973.]

SOUTHEASTERN YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS

The Southeastern Yearly Meeting, in conference this Easter weekend, urges the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of our government to hold to the teachings of Jesus in any deliberations on amnesty and the wiping out of sanctions against those citizens who refused to take up arms against the Vietnamese. Both those who openly placed their lives against a law they felt violated their conscience, and who suffered prison terms or alternative service and those who simply determined they would not participate in the killing and maiming and the military effort they disagreed with by whatever means came to hand, are deserving of early action on the aprt of their government under the guidance of those principles taught by the Prince of Peace whose banner so many of us assert to follow.

[Approved by Yearly Meeting, Apr. 1973.]

NEW YORK YEARLY MEETING OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS

The anger and hatred engendered by the war in South East Asia must be healed. Our American Society needs a redirection of emphasis towards social and psychological reconciliation and reconstruction. Our energies are most urgently needed in the conservation of all resources, human and environmental. Our love and reconciling spirit must reach out to all who have been involved in this tragic episode in the life of our Nation including those who chose military service as well as those who could not in good conscience accept such service.

Although we believe most persons who refused to participate in military service or have opposed conscription during the course of the war in Indochina have done so on the ground that they were conscientiously opposed to the war or wartime military service, proof of conscience is inherently difficult. Experience has proved that efforts to judge conscientiousness have been marked all too often by refusals to recognize sincere beliefs. We therefore urge that all persons who have refused military service or conscription should not be punished for such refusal, whether it took place before, during, or after military service.

Illegal acts have been committed both in the prosecution of the war in South East Asia and in resistance to the war. We urge friends to join in the call for a universal and unconditional amnesty for all those who are deemed to nave riorated U.S. laws relating to military service. We seek "malice toward none and charity toward all."

[Approved by New York Yearly Meeting Aug. 3, 1973.]

NEW ENGLAND YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS

New England Yearly Meeting of Friends, standing on the historic Quaker peace testimony, denies all war and violence between persons and nations. As we have supported our members who have conscientiously opposed the U.S. war in Indochina, we now support all those who need amnesty because of violations of law in their acts of protest.

We urge the President and Congress to grant full and unconditional amnesty to all those who face or have suffered criminal penalties for evading or resisting the draft or military service, whether under Selective Service or military law: that is

1. to permit the return of those outside the U.S.:

2. to provide for prompt release and restoration of full civil rights of all currently held in civilian or military prisons;

3. to drop pending and potential prosecutions; and

4. to restore full civil rights to all who have completed prison terms or otherwise lost such rights due to their opposition to the war.

[Approved by New England Yearly Meeting of Friends at its annual sessions held July-Aug. 4, 1973.]

BALTIMORE YEARLY MEETING OF THE RELIGIOUS SOCIETY OF FRIENDS

Although the direct participation by United States armed forces in the Indochina conflict appears to be drawing to a close, the wounds of that war will take many years and much effort to heal. Not only Indochina has suffered; many Americans have been killed or wounded, while the moral and religious dilemmas posed by the war and conscription have resulted in still other casualty lists. Americans have been imprisoned for non-cooperation with the selective service act, for nonviolent actions against the war machinery, and for peacefully demonstrating their opposition to the policies of our government. Others have been forced into hiding or exile. Some acquired new insights while in active military service and refused to engage in what they had come to consider crimes against humanity. This often resulted in imprisonment, dishonorable discharge, or desertion.

We realize that complete healing of the wounds of war can come only in a spirit of reconciliation. We remember that the word "amnesty" comes from the same root as "amnesia," meaning the forgetting of past actions, and that it is to be distinguished from the legal term "pardon," which is the forgiving of past actions. We urge the President and the Congress to join in declaring full and unconditional amnesty for all who are deemed by the government to have violated United States laws with respect to the war in Indochina and the draft. Thus, we ask our government to—

1. permit the return of those in exile;

2. provide for the prompt release of all prisoners;

3. drop pending and potential prosecutions;

4. restore civil rights and honorable discharges.

The Baltimore Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends reaffirms its 300 year old testimony against all war, and maintains that war is the greatest crime that can be perpetrated against mankind. We feel compassion for those who have participated in this war, as well as for those who face punishment for obeying a higher law and refusing to participate. We look toward peace and understanding among all men, and ask others to join with us in this move toward reconciliation. [Approved by Baltimore Yearly Meeting in annual session, Aug. 5, 1973.]

WESTERN YEARLY MEETING OF FRIENDS CHURCH

War is abhorrent to all mankind. It is contrary to the teachings of Christ and is inconsistent with productive, happy lives of all men. (See Western Yearly Meeting Friends Peace Testimony, 1868.)

Affirming the brotherhood of all mankind in a spirit of reconciliation and Christian love, and without being judgmental, we recognize our responsibility to all of those affected by the war in Indochina. We urge Western Yearly Meeting of Friends and Friends everywhere to support the F. U. M. Indochina Appeal or other similar aid projects which attempt to alleviate the need and suffering of the people of Indochina.

For those with whom we are more closely associated at home we urge a reconstruction of lives which were significantly and adversely disrupted by our Indochina involvement.

To this end we urge that the government

1. establish policies which will be conducive to a normal re-entry into civilian life for those members of the armed forces who may have been injured mentally, physically, or spiritually and thus are suffering from a lack of the freedoms of life. 2. establish procedures whereby those may return to their normal lives and stature who chose to exercise the alternative of temporarily re-establishing their residence during the period in which armed personnel were engaged in military conflict in Southeast Asia and those who chose to remain in their established residence and were incarcerated as a result of failure to comply with conscription laws.