Mr. HILDRETH. I think the answer is that the Congress has not been permitted to vote on it. Whenever Congress has had the right to vote upon this bill, it has.

It passed the Senate overwhelmingly, but the House never has had the right, it never has been granted the right to express its opinion one way or another, and even though a considerable number of Congressmen signed a petition and asked that the bill reach the floor, they were denied that privilege.

it?

Senator SMITH. It could not be if a sufficient number signed, could

Mr. HILDRETH. All but 13, I think, signed the bill.

Senator SMITH. It sounds to me like they ought to go on the House side, Mr. Chairman, and work on them. I was interested in the real reasons back of it, why the House has not passed on it.

Mr. HILDRETH. We do not understand why the House has not been permitted to vote on it. We certainly have struggled and many Members of the House have asked that it be brought to the floor, but it has never been released so that the Members of the House could vote on it.

May I add one other point. Mr. Chairman, I think you asked a few minutes ago about the number of people voting by absentee baliot. At the headquarters of our committee in the last election we sent cut more than 130,000 absentee voters' ballots. Those were applied for in person. Sometimes the line of voters went clear around the corner and down the block.

Of the 130,000 ballots that were sent out from our headquarters, more than 7,000 went to the State of Ohio. Out of some 2,000,000 votes cast in the State of Ohio, President Truman carried the State by about 7,000, and, therefore, it was with considerable pride that we felt that the voteless District of Columbia had sent out to the State of Ohio from our headquarters where our personnel could not vote, enough votes to carry the State of Ohio for President Truman.

Senator SMITH. Now if that is correct, then if you had not done that, if they had to vote here, the President would have lost Ohio. Mr. HILDRETH. No, sir, because this bill provides you can vote here as well as in Ohio.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hildreth.

Mr. William Fadler representing the Democratic Club of the District of Columbia will please proceed.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM FADLER, REPRESENTING THE DEMOCRATIC CLUB OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. FADLER. Mr. Chairman, my name is William Fadler, Jr. I am an attorney in the District of Columbia and executive vice president of the Democratic Club of the District of Columbia, and a member of the Young Democrats of the District of Columbia.

It is a pleasure, Mr. Chairman, to speak in favor of the home rule before your committee, on behalf of the Democratic Club of the District, as a member of the Young Democratic Club of the District

simply to refer to the historic attitude of our party, and perhaps we can recall one instance which I think is significant, which is a Republican incident. That took place on August 27, 1858, when Mr. Douglas challenged Congressman Lincoln and demanded that he state what he would do in regard to the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia.

Congressman Lincoln replied that while he thought that Congress had all authority to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, that he would refer the matter to the qualified registered voters of the District of Columbia to consider that problem.

I think that is significant because Abraham Lincoln at that time recognized the authority and the power of the voters of the District of Columbia, and while it was unfortunate that it took a very bitter war to solve that problem, I have often wondered if it perhaps could not have been solved if it had been submitted peacefully to the voters of the District of Columbia.

As you recall, it was after that incident that the vote was taken away from the people of the District of Columbia, and I do not know whether or not the question of the attitude of the Northern States and the Southern States in reference to the abolition of slavery had anything to do with it, but certainly it did follow that the vote was taken away from our people, but this has been a never-ending struggle.

This has been a vital struggle, and like most vital causes, it never will end until it ends with the solution that we all hope to see in our lifetime. If we do not, we know that our children will carry it on, because many of those who have passed on have been active workers for this cause, and yet the cause has been so firm, so solid, so wonderful in its conception that those who have come on in subsequent generations have not given up the hope that we will yet win.

We do think, Mr. Chairman, that your reference to the international situation is of the utmost significance, because some of us, while we are in hearty accord with many who regard with a great deal of sorrow the abolition of suffrage in Czechoslovakia, in Latvia, Estonia, and in Poland and the other countries behind the iron curtain, we sincerely believe that it would probably be with much better grace if we could say that in the Capital of these United States, especially in this one hundred and fiftieth year of the continuity of the democratic system, if it could be said that our people in this capital were restored the right to vote, just as we hope it will be restored in the countries behind the iron curtain.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [Applause.]

Senator SMITH. May I ask a question. I am new on this committee and new here in Congress, so I am just asking for information. If everybody has been for this bill, why has it not been passed? Now I want the practical aspects.

I do not think that, for example, behind the iron curtain they are going to know what we are doing here in the District, but I am concerned with the right of the people in the District who pay taxes and who live here, to have local self-government so far as they are concerned. Now what is the reason that it has not been passed? Both parties have gone on record for it, and it has been here year after

Mr. HILDRETH. I think the answer is that the Congress has not been permitted to vote on it. Whenever Congress has had the right to vote upon this bill, it has.

It passed the Senate overwhelmingly, but the House never has had the right, it never has been granted the right to express its opinion one way or another, and even though a considerable number of Congressmen signed a petition and asked that the bill reach the floor, they were denied that privilege.

Senator SMITH. It could not be if a sufficient number signed, could it?

Mr. HILDRETH. All but 13, I think, signed the bill.

Senator SMITH. It sounds to me like they ought to go on the House side, Mr. Chairman, and work on them. I was interested in the real reasons back of it, why the House has not passed on it.

Mr. HILDRETH. We do not understand why the House has not been permitted to vote on it. We certainly have struggled and many Members of the House have asked that it be brought to the floor, but it has never been released so that the Members of the House could vote on it.

May I add one other point. Mr. Chairman, I think you asked a few minutes ago about the number of people voting by absentee ballot. At the headquarters of our committee in the last election we sent cut more than 130,000 absentee voters' ballots. Those were applied for in person. Sometimes the line of voters went clear around the corner and down the block.

Of the 130,000 ballots that were sent out from our headquarters, more than 7,000 went to the State of Ohio. Out of some 2,000,000 votes cast in the State of Ohio, President Truman carried the State by about 7,000, and, therefore, it was with considerable pride that we felt that the voteless District of Columbia had sent out to the State of Ohio from our headquarters where our personnel could not vote, enough votes to carry the State of Ohio for President Truman.

Senator SMITH. Now if that is correct, then if you had not done that, if they had to vote here, the President would have lost Ohio. Mr. HILDRETH. No, sir, because this bill provides you can vote here as well as in Ohio.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hildreth.

Mr. William Fadler representing the Democratic Club of the District of Columbia will please proceed.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM FADLER, REPRESENTING THE DEMOCRATIC CLUB OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Mr. FADLER. Mr. Chairman, my name is William Fadler, Jr. I am an attorney in the District of Columbia and executive vice president of the Democratic Club of the District of Columbia, and a member of the Young Democrats of the District of Columbia.

It is a pleasure, Mr. Chairman, to speak in favor of the home rule before your committee, on behalf of the Democratic Club of the District, as a member of the Young Democratic Club of the District

zation feel that the long-sought-after right of suffrage to the District is close at hand.

Home rule for the District is in both major parties' platforms, and as you know, Mr. Chairman, we regard our platform as a contract with the people of the United States and not merely a piece of paper to be kept at will. Home rule for the District is a nonpartisan measIt has been endorsed by almost all of the civic, political, and business organizations of the District. It is an American right and heritage inalienable under our concept of free democratic govern

ure.

ment.

Governments, Mr. Chairman, derive their just power from the consent of the governed. Governments are by and for the people, not people by and for government, as we find in the District.

This District contains 860,000, more American citizens than any one of the States of Arizona, Delaware, Idaho, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Vermont, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Utah, or Wyoming, and even after substracting the 215,000 Federal employees resident here.

It is irreconcilable to spend millions of these people's dollars for Federal taxes and thousands of these boys' lives through military service, to insure the ballot box to Asiatics and Europeans, and deny this safeguard of freedom to them. These people here, Mr. Chairman, are too well mannered and have too much respect for their Government to revolt against this intolerable condition. It would appear this great Government should have the equal respect for these people, especially when they make such a great contribution to the function and support of this Government.

More than 11 States in population, more than 14 other States in military service, and more than 25 States in Federal taxes. It is granted that it would be easier to rule people when they cannot vote or choose their own officials, or if they could vote to place only one name on the ballot, or submit only one name for them to approve, but that is not the kind of people we are, and that is not the kind of ernment that we are supposed to have.

gov

Mr. Chairman, if the Senate will pass this bill again as they did in the Eighty-first Congress, I am certain that the Democratic Club of the District and the Young Democrats will show you that the people of the District are for this measure and demand this measure and will wage a vigorous campaign to secure its passage in the House, and I can almost assure you and I will assure you that we will have public demonstrations in favor of this bill this time.

I know that you will do all in your power to help us in our efforts to regain our lost ballot box and restore a government by and for the people of the District of Columbia.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Smith, have you any questions?

Senator SMITH. No. I believe I did hear you say it would be easier to control people when they did not have a chance to vote, did you not? I think you said that.

Mr. FADLER. It has been so, I think.

Senator SMITH. Do you reckon that is the reason some folks want

Mr. FADLER. I am in the military service myself, Senator.
The CHAIRMAN. Past 18?

Mr. FADLER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much Mr. Fadler.

Mr. A. L. Wheeler, representing the Democratic Central Committee. (No response.)

The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Donald Beatty, representing the District of Columbia League of Women Voters.

STATEMENT OF MRS. DONALD BEATTY, REPRESENTING THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS

Mrs. BEATTY. I am Mrs. Donald Beatty, 4105 Bailey Street, NW., president of the District League of Women Voters, and I would like to begin this statement by saying there is no president of any other membership organization who speaks with more authority than I do this morning, because our members have studied the contents of the bill last year, and we know from the expressions from our members that they want this statement given this morning.

I want to say first of all-and this comes from our board yesterday-that we are grateful for the prompt hearings that have been called, because we think this will speed it to the House quickly, and we want speed this year.

Our stand on this bill is well known. We do not bring anything original this morning at all. We are for this bill, but we have developed over the years a missionary zeal, and in fact last year reached the place where we thought we had even found a text that we could use, and this is it: "I am a man of Tarsus, a citizen of no mean city, and demand to be heard."

We are going to use that text this year. No time by the league is needed for the preparation of home-rule testimony. It is hardly necessary before this subcommittee or for the record that the League of Women Voters of the District present its conviction as to the essential rightness of the bill presently under consideration. In the past we have spelled out the arguments in favor of the bill, and it would be repetitious and time-consuming for the committee to hear all these again, although we could provide a special new bound copy of those arguments.

We have for the 30 years of our existence, and we do now support fully the principle that the people of Washington should be given the opportunities and the responsibilities of voting citizens. Very simply, we believe in democracy. The central concept of democracy is participation.

We believe in self-rule through duly elected representatives of the people. We have a record of the deep concern not only for the principle but for the practice of democracy. We are an organization whose sole purpose is to promote citizen responsibility. Lacking a vote, this has been no mean task in the District League.

We have done the best we could in the abstract as it were, and in addition, womanlike, we have kept at the daily housekeeping chores