Mr. MACK. Thank you, Judge, for your appearance before the committee.

Judge MATTHIAS. Thank you.

Mr. MACK. The next witness we will hear is Mr. Adin M. Downer, a representative of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. We are very pleased to have you, Mr. Downer.

STATEMENT OF ADIN M. DOWNER, ASSISTANT LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES

Mr. DOWNER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, H. R. 55 was introduced at the request of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and seeks to recognize for pension purposes service in the Moro Province, including Mindanao or in the islands of Samar and Leyte after July 4, 1902, and prior to January 1, 1914.

Mr. MACK. There are a number of other similar bills introduced on this same subject, 1 by Mr. Elliott, H. R. 252, and 1 by Mr. Cunningham, H. R. 417, and 1 by Mr. Wier, H. R. 1310, and 1 by Mr. Hagen, H. R. 2715.

Mr. DoWNER. Yes, sir. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that H. R. 55, H. R. 252, H. R. 1310, and H. R. 2715, for all practical purposes, are identical.

Mr. MACK. How about H. R. 417?

Mr. DOWNER. H. R. 417 is identical except that it provides for retroactive payment to the 60th birthday. And H. R. 1310 is slightly different in that it limits it to 90 days' service. However, as a practical matter, I think that would make no difference because any veteran engaged in hostilities in those areas certainly must have had at least 90 days of service.

I think the committee will probably recall that a similar bill was enacted or passed by both Houses of the Congress in the Seventyeighth Congress and was vetoed by President Roosevelt. The bill was slightly different in that it extended the termination date of the Philippine Insurrection, and in the veto message of the President that was one objection that was made to the legislation.

Subsequently, in the 79th Congress a bill which accomplishes the same thing as H. R. 55, which is presently before the committee, passed the House of Representatives and died in the 79th Congress for failure of any action in the Senate. A similar bill was the subject of hearings before this committee in the 80th Congress.

This matter has been long an objective of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. Our commander in chief, Frank C. Hilton, in the 82d Congress, in the presentation of our legislative program to the full Committee on Veterans' Affairs, listed that as one of our primary objectives.

Now, actually, it seems to me the essence of the question presented by this bill is whether or not we are to consider a state of war as a question of law or a question of fact. The pension benefits have been denied because, as a matter of law, there was no war. I have never heard anybody contend that, as a matter of fact, there were no hostilities, and the bill itself, by its own language, limits the benefits to those who engaged in hostilities in those particular areas at that time.

Now, another objection that has been made to this legislation when it has been considered in previous Congresses was that it would establish a dangerous precedent to extend benefits to members of the Armed Forces for peacetime service.

There, again, we must recognize that the term "peacetime" is used in its legal sense rather than its factual sense, and insofar as the precedent is concerned, we must all recognize that the precedent has been established already by the granting of benefits to veterans of the Korean campaign. So, it seems to me that that objection has been eliminated.

Now, at the time that this matter was before the committee in the 80th Congress the testimony disclosed that there were approximately 1,900 surviving veterans to be affected by the bill. The testimony before the committee at that time disclosed the average age of those veterans to be 73 years. Five years have since elapsed, so I assume it would be safe to say that the average age of the veterans to be affected by the bill is now 78 years.

Our information is that the estimate as to the number of present survivors is 500 veterans, and approximately 300 widows. So, I wish to say to the committee that the position of our organization is that the veterans to be affected by this bill are, in fact, wartime veterans.

I think it is significant to note that during the period of service covered by this bill the Army awarded 11 Congressional Medals of Honor to members of the Armed Forces for service in this area during this period of time. I think the number of fatalities in action in the Armed Forces during this period of time equalled or perhaps slightly exceeded the number of fatalities in the Armed Forces during the entire period of the Spanish-American War.

And it is our belief that in justice and equity, the service of these veterans should be recognized for pension purposes. It is a question about which we receive considerable correspondence in our office, and it may be rather surprising, but it nevertheless is a fact that most of the people who write to us about this are not persons who will receive a pension through the adoption of this legislation, but, rather veterans of the Spanish-American War who served in these areas during this period of time who are aware of what the actual conditions were, the extent of the hostilities, who are aware of the fact that the Moros were ferocious and fanatical fighters, and they write in to us because of their belief that their comrades who served at that time under those conditions should have their service recognized.

That is the only bill before the committee, Mr. Chairman, on which the Veterans of Foreign Wars has any official position.

Mr. MACK. This committee on three previous occasions has brought out this bill by favorable report; has it not?

Mr. DOWNER. Yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. In other words, if we should bring it out again we will merely be confirming the previous action taken by the veterans committee?

Mr. DOWNER. That is correct; yes, sir.

Mr. MACK. And have you any feeling that the enactment of this legislation will create a precedent whereby the veterans of the Nicaraguan war, the Mexican, and so forth, or, rather, not the wars, but those police actions, we might call them, would be eligible for pensions?

Mr. DOWNER. I think not, Mr. Chairman. Insofar as any precedent is concerned, in regard to what, as a matter of law, is peactime service, it has already been established. And, further, it seems to me that each of these campaigns must stand on its own merits and should be so considered and so weighed. If other campaigns can show actual hostilities and actual conditions of warfare, I think they should be recognized.

Mr. MACK. The last sentence of the report which we have received from the Veterans' Administration says:

Advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that the enactment of the proposed legislation would not be in accord with the program of the President.

Do you know if, in the 78th Congress, when Mr. Roosevelt was President, and in the 80th Congress, when Mr. Truman was President, the reports carried the same form of statement?

Mr. DOWNER. I don't know, Mr. Chairman. I have here the report from the 80th Congress. Mr. Patterson informs me that the President vetoed it in the

Mr. MACK. That is correct, in the 78th it was vetoed.

Mr. PATTERSON. There was an adverse report in the 80th.
Mr. MACK. There was an adverse report in the 80th.

Mr. Gentry, do you have any questions?

Mr. GENTRY. I have no questions.

Mr. MACK. Mr. Fino?

Mr. FINO. I have no questions.

Mr. MACK. Mr. Long?

Mr. LONG. I have no questions.

Mr. MACK. We are very happy to have had you as a witness today, and we thank you for your statement.

Mr. DOWNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. MACK. The next witness is Mr. Jack Kyle, who wishes to be heard on the Moro Province bill. Mr. Kyle.

STATEMENT OF JACK KYLE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. KYLE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am Jack Kyle, 1811 19th Street NW., Washington, D. C., and I am appearing on behalf of the potential beneficiaries of H. R. 55, a bill which we have been interested in and these gentlemen have been interested in for many, many years.

Mr. Chairman, inasmuch as H. R. 55 would extend Public Law 269, 74th Congress, I ask that that law be inserted in the record at this point.

Mr. MACK. It has already been inserted.

Mr. KYLE. Not the bill, Mr. Chairman; I mean the law that the bill pertains to.

Mr. STANDISH. He wants the law itself.

Mr. MACK. Very well, it is so ordered.
(The material referred to is as follows:)

PUBLIC LAW 269, 74TH CONGRESS

AN ACT Granting pensions to veterans of the Spanish-American War, including the Boxer Rebellion and the Philippine Insurrection, their widows and dependents, and for other purposes

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That all laws in effect on March 19, 1933, granting pensions to veterans of the Spanish-American War including the Boxer Rebellion and the Philippine Insurection, their widows and dependents, are hereby reenacted into law and such laws shall be effective from and after the date of the approval of this Act.

SEC. 2. That all Acts and parts of Acts in conflict with or inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed.

Approved, August 13, 1935.

Mr. KYLE. Mr. Chairman, this subject has been ably covered by a distinguished witness preceding me, but I would like to reply to some of the standard objections to this bill. I would like to answer the chairman's question asked the preceding witness as to whether or not the stock statement as to the bill not being in accord with the budget program of the President has appeared in previous reports.

I can say that that paragraph has appeared in each Veterans' Administration report on similar bills since 1942, to my personal knowledge.

Today we have a great soldier in the White House, and I have no reason to believe that the President would not sign this bill. I do not think he is going to be bound by the precedents of his predecessors.

Mr. Chairman, actually, the men who served in the Moro Province and on the islands of Leyte and Samar after July 4, 1902, fought a continuation of the Philippine Insurrection. The Philippine Insurrection was ended by Presidential proclamation on July 4, 1902, and I desire to read a portion of that proclamation:

Whereas the insurrection against the authority and sovereignty of the United States is now at an end, and peace has been established in all parts of the archipelago except in the country inhabited by the Moro tribes to which this proclamation does not apply.

* **

So, the fighting continued until 1914, during which time 103 engagements were fought. At this time, Mr. Chairman, I ask the committee's consent to incorporate in the record a report from the Archivist of the United States listing the dates and places of the 103 engage

ments.

Mr. MACK. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The material referred to is as follows:)

Hon. J. HARRY MCGREGOR,

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,

THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES, Washington, D. C., December 11, 1950.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. MCGREGOR: This is in reply to your letter of November 11, 1950, in behalf of Mr. John Milton DeW. Kyle II, requesting information relating to casualties in the Philippines, 1903-14.

The monthly returns of the Division of the Philippines in the records of the War Department in the National Archives discloses the following:

Men wounded, including Philippine Scouts:

Total number of military personnel dying of disease, including Philippine Scouts:

Approximate number of enemy killed (the exact figures are not listed and the number of wounded are not listed in the records:

A chronological list of battles, actions, and engagements in which troops of the Regular Army and volunteers have participated, and troops engaged in the Philippine Islands, 1903-14, is given below.

Chronological list of battles, actions, and engagements in the Philippine Islands, 1903-14