Because I did not hear until today that this legislation was scheduled for consideration by your committee, I have not had an opportunity to discuss this matter with the Bureau of the Budget. With warm personal regards, I am, LOUIS JOHNSON. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, The honorable the SECRETARY OF DEFENSE Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY: This afternoon the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy commenced consideration of S. 2215 and H. R. 5534. Section 1 of these bills, which are identical, would amend the provisions of the present law creating a Military Liaison Committee to the Atomic Energy Commission. The amendments provide for a civilian Chairman, would fix his salary at the same level as that of the Chairman of the Munitions Board, and would call for appointment by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Likewise, the amendment would remove the existing anachronism and refer to the Department of the Air Force, as well as to the Departments of the Army and Navy. A question was raised as to whether or not a purely military group such as the Military Liaison Committee should have a civilian Chairman, and also as to whether or not you personally and the Joint Chiefs of Staff favor the amendment. I therefore read your letter to me of May 5, 1949. There you made reference to H. R. 3572, a bill introduced on March 16, 1949, by Mr. Durham, and also designed to amend the basic law relating to the Military Liaison Committee. In this letter you advocated the very kind of provision incorporated in S. 2215 and H. R. 5534. As a matter of fact. these latter two bills were drafted with your suggestions specifically in mind. However, some committee members still felt that your views should be solicited, with express reference to section 1 as contained in the two more recent bills. It was also felt that the Joint Chiefs of Staff should be requested to express independent opinion as to the wording in section 1 of the two bills. Accordingly, I would be very grateful indeed if you yourself would again write me, indicating whether or not you approve the Military Liasion Committee portion of the bills in question. I would also be most appreciative if you would request the Joint Chiefs to write me a similar letter in which they express an independent opinion in the same manner as they would if called to testify personally before the committee. Unfortunately, there is a time factor present so that I would be glad if replies can be made at the earliest convenience of yourself and the Joint Chiefs. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I am glad to have the opportunity, which your letter of July 13 affords me, of restating the importance which I attach to our present system of having a civilian chairman at the head of the Military Liaison Committee, together with military personnel representing each of the three departments. As you know, I have previously stated the views of the National Military Establishment on this subject in my letter of May 5 to you, a copy of which 1 attach. In addition, the same general viewpoint was expressed in my letter of June 6, 1949 to you. copy attached, which dealt with a related but not identical subject. In this field, as in so many others, I want to make it clear that the subject under discussion represents one of the major steps toward successful unification which was carried out by my predecessor In his annual report to the President and the Congress, Secretary Forrestal listed this particular development as one H. Rept. 1282 of the most important changes that had been made during the first year of unification, and said: The "The reorganization of the Military Liaison Committee to the Atomic Energy Commission the result being a material improvement in the working arrangements between the Commission and the National Military Establishment. Committee, as reorganized, consists of a civilian chairman designated by the Secretary of Defense and two members designated by the Secretary of each department.' Section 1 of S. 2215 and H. R. 5534, on which you have requested my comments, Would make specific statutory provision for the same sort of arrangement which we have worked out administratively It would broaden the 1946 act by making express provision for Air Force representation on the Military Liaison Committee the Air Force having been established as a department in 1947, subsequent to the effective date of the McMahon Act and would also provide for the appointment and compensation of the civilian chairman of the Military Liaison Committee Both of these changes would constitute improvements in the act, in my opinion, and I hope that vour committee will see its way clear to early and favorable action on section i In your letter, you state that a question was raised in your committee as to "whether or not a purely military group such as the Military Liaison Committee should have a civilian chairman I do not think that the Military Liaison Committee should be regarded as "a purely military group.' Moreover, a civilian chairman in this vital field of activity can be of great assistance to the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Congress in assuring continued civilian control of the Military Establishment. With warm personal regards, I am. LOUIS JOHNSON. 1st Session LEON MOORE No. 1283 AUGUST 19, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and ordered to be printed Mr. WALTER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany S. 627 The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (S. 627) for the relief of Leon Moore, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with an amendment and recommend that the bill do pass. The amendment is as follows: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following: That in the administration of the immigration and naturalization laws the Attorney General shall not consider as applicable to Leon Moore (a) the provisions of (1) the Act relating to certain excludable classes of aliens approved October 16, 1918, as amended (U. S. C., 1940 edition, title 8, sec. 137), and (2) sections 3 and 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, as amended (U. S. C., 1940 edition, title 8, secs. 136 and 155 (a); Supp. V, title 8, sec. 155); and (b) the provisions of section 305 of the Nationality Act of 1940 (U. S. C., 1940 edition, title 8, sec. 705). PURPOSE OF THE BILL The purpose of the bill, as amended, is to permit the subject of the legislation to remain in the United States permanently and to make him eligible for United States citizenship notwithstanding his affiliations with the Communist Party of Soviet Russia prior to Octo ber 1940. GENERAL INFORMATION An identical bill for the relief of the same alien, introduced by Representative Keating, of New York, passed the House of Representatives in the Eightieth Congress. The pertinent facts in this case are set forth in a letter from the Assistant to the Attorney General, dated May 27, 1948, to the then chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, which letter reads as follows: Hon. EARL C. MICHENER, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your request for the views of this Department relative to the bill (H. R. 5336) for the relief of Leon Moore, an alien. The bill would direct the Attorney General shall not consider as applicable to Leon Moore (a) the provisions of (1) the act relating to certain excludable classes of aliens, approved October 16, 1918, as amended (8 U. S. C. 137) and (2) sections 3 and 19 (a) of the Immigration Act of February 5, 1917, as amended (8 U. S. C. 136, 155 (a)) (8 U. S. C. 155) and (b) the provisions of section 305 of the Nationality Act of 1940 (8 U. S. C. 705). The The files of the Immigration and Naturalization Service of this Department disclose that the alien, who is the beneficiary of this bill, is a native and citizen of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, having been born in Poltona, Russia, on December 10, 1900, and that he now considers himself to be stateless. records disclose that he was admitted to the United States on August 2, 1940. as a Russian diplomat, and that he was accompanied by his wife and daughter. He and his wife and daughter were again admitted to the United States at Rouses Point, N. Y., on September 28, 1940, for permanent residence on the basis of visas issued at Montreal, Canada. The alien's wife became a naturalized citizen of the United States on January 21, 1946, and his daughter was granted citizenship on April 26, 1946. Mr. Moore and his family now reside in New York City and are supported by his membership in several business corporations. The alien filed a petition for naturalization in the United States in the District Court, Southern District of New York on October 23, 1945, and it was recommended that his petition be denied on the ground that he had been a member of the Communist Party, a proscribed organization under section 305 of the Nationality Act of 1940, within the 10-year period immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition; that he had failed to show continuous permanent residence in the United States for the period required by law; and that he had failed to establish that he had resided within the jurisdiction of the court in which he filed the petition. No final decision on the petition for naturalization has been made by the court. A warrant of arrest in deportation proceedings containing charges based on his affiliation with the Communist Party was issued against the alien on February 4, 1948, and further proceedings have been deferred pending consideration of this bill. The alien. if found to be subject to deportation, is ineligible for discretionary relief for the reason that the proceedings are based upon one of the grounds of deportation set forth in section 19 (d) of the Immigration Act of 1917. Mr. Moore testified that on June 7. 1945, he procured an order of court changing his name from Leon Helfand. He stated that from 1918 or 1919 until he severed connections with the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in August 1940 he was a member of the Communist Party but alleges that his actual services to that party were in the nature of simply being a "rubber stamp" and that he had to put on the appearance of being a bona-fide member because of his high position in the diplomatic service of his country He denies that he ever personally advocated the overthrow of government by force or that he ever belonged to any organization which advocates the overthrow of the American form of government. He alleges that he cooperated closely with the American and British representatives while he was in the diplomatic service of his country and that he was in disagreement with the Russian policy Mr. Moore states that on his last official trip to Moscow in December 1936 he decided to sever relations with the Soviet regime and the Russian Communist Party, but that because of the danger to himself and his family he was unable to do so until 1910 when he was ordered to return to Russia and was able to make arrangements to come to the United States. In support of his petition for naturalization he presented the affidavits of a former United States Ambassador to Rome, Italy, who stated that he became acquainted with Mr. Moore in Italy in 1936 ard that through close acquaintance he found that Mr. Moore was not in sympathy with the totalitarian policies followed by the Soviet government, and that since 1936, Mr. Moore, who was the chargé d'affaires in the Soviet Embassy at Rome, was able to impart impor |