Mr. HARTLEY. No, sir; I thought it was a meeting to consider problems relating to Germany and Europe and the settlement in Europe. Senator JOHNSON of California. I don't catch you.

The CHAIRMAN. He says this present meeting is called to settle questions arising in Germany in settlement of the war.

Senator JOHNSON of California. Certainly. And if they find themselves in a situation where one of those great nations shall have violated the Charter, they would have to send the requisite number of troops to put it down, would they not?

Mr. HARTLEY. Sir, as I understand it, the Charter depends upon the Great Powers acting together to prevent aggression. If one of them starts aggression, then the Security Council cannot act.

Senator JOHNSON of California. I cannot follow you because there is some difference between this implement in front of me and that in front of you, and I don't want to say it is your fault any more than it is my fault, but I don't follow you how you reach the conclusions that you do, and for that reason I will cease any further.

examination.

Senator WILEY. Mr. Chairman, may I make this point? Having in mind what was said by a witness today less than an hour ago, a distinguished gentleman stated that if we had had 400 bombers available in the Near East we could have stopped with those 400 bombers the southern march of Japan.

Senator JOHNSON of California. How much do you consider those bombers will do against the immense roll of the dead, the dying, and the wounded thus far and published officially by the Army and the Navy? What I am trying to get at, and this is in no invidious spirit at all, is how many troops will be required of the United States of America to put down any breach of the Covenant?

Mr. HARTLEY. I do not believe anyone can answer that, but I would estimate in Europe it is a question of a few thousand, because I think we would use other means primarily.

Senator JOHNSON of California. Are you including Japan in that

statement?

Mr. HARTLEY. I don't think at the present stage of the war in the Far East that one can estimate.

Senator JOHNSON of California. I reiterate that I hope that the sending of our youngsters into Japan will be in some way avoided. Is that your view?

Mr. HARTLEY. Sir, I think we ought to win the war..

Senator JOHNSON of California. What?

Mr. HARTLEY. I think we ought to win the war in the Pacific, whatever has to be done.

Senator JOHNSON of California. Of course, we have got to win the war. There is not any question about that at all. We have got to win the war with Japan. Now, do you contemplate any such loss of life as has occurred thus far?

Mr. HARTLEY. Sir, I cannot speak about that now.

Senator JOHNSON of California. What?

Mr. HARTLEY. I don't know about that, I think that is guesswork. Senator JOHNSON of California. Of course you don't know about it. That is what I am getting at. It is that you are testifying here about

matters that you have no conception of at the present time; isn't that so?

Mr. HARTLEY. No, sir; because this concerns a war in which Japan has been mobilized and we are mobilized, and it is a war that has been going on for 3 years. When we are talking about the Security Council, we are talking about police action to prevent a war and not joining a war when everybody is mobilized.

Senator JOHNSON. Well, I cannot follow you and so I will cease. The CHAIRMAN. We have 11,000,000 in the Army and the Navy now; have we not?

Mr. HARTLEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And we have no Charter?

Mr. HARTLEY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. With the Charter we would hardly send over 11,000,000, would we?

Mr. HARTLEY. I think we would send a few thousand at the most. The CHAIRMAN. All right. Are there any other questions? Senator TUNNELL. Yes; I would like to ask a question.

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Tunnell.

Senator TUNNELL. Would not the number sent in each case in all probability be different from each other? The numbers sent would be different in each instance, wouldn't they, in all probability? Mr. HARTLEY. I should think so.

Senator TUNNELL. There is not any way by which you can put a number down that would be sent no matter what the trouble is?

Mr. HARTLEY. I should think that you could reach an amount which all countries would agree to make available under the special agreement which would cover any situation that was going to come up under police action.

Senator TUNNELL, But for any particular difficulty you would have to be governed by the circumstances of the case.

Mr. HARTLEY. Yes, sir; that is what the Security Council and the Military Staff Committee would do.

Senator TUNNELL. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.
Judge Oliver, of Philadelphia.

STATEMENT BY JUDGE L. STAUFFER OLIVER, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF UNITED NATIONS COUNCIL OF PHILADELPHIA

Judge OLIVER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am speaking as chairman of the board of the United Nations Council of Philadelphia. It is an organization that has more than 4,300 members, representing a cross section of the life of the city. We have spent the last 21 years in promoting discussion of problems relating to international relations and the preservation of peace, and to that extent we may claim to be a reasonably well-informed body of citizens. We urge immediate ratification of the Charter without reservation, and also the prompt approval of the Bretton Woods agreement.

It has been said that the Charter is not perfect. That is true only to the extent that no written instrument in a complicated situation is ever perfect. If any instrument was perfect, was perfect for a

given moment and a given situation, and it would become imperfect when there is a slight change in time or situation.

This, in our opinion, comes as close to being a perfect document as can be prepared in a practical and imperfect world. We think that it is a marvelous document, notable for its directness, simplicity, and completeness. We urge that this Charter be approved promptly because of the effect upon other nations of the world. I can say we can say with a certain feeling of justifiable pride that they look largely to the leadership of this Nation and we should furnish that leadership. I believe it will be admitted that the spirit in back of this document is far more important than the mere phraseology of the document, and if we fail to ratify with promptness and dispatch, we injure that - spirit of cooperation and good will which was so manifest at San Francisco.

We further have recommended that the document be approved promptly and without limitations or reservations.

We have two reasons for that-one is that any attempt to amend this document, which is the result of the labors, the conscientious labors of the delegates of 50 nations, would only result in what may be called throwing a monkey wrench into the machinery of international good will.

Secondly, we point out that this document contains within itself the method of amending in the future. If some amendment is necessary, let time point out what is and what is not necessary, and then amend the document according to the provisions of the document, and if the documents are sound, we have no fear that the rest of the world won't approve them. We are strong believers of the thought that if your ideas are good enough they will be accepted, and if our ideas in the future as to amendments are sound, we need not worry.

Furthermore, we believe that in addition to the prompt ratification without limitation, that our country should do its utmost in bringing about the proper removal of economic maladjustments and frictions and other causes of human misery and anxiety and dissatisfactions which lead to war. Our view is that any sum this country may risk in such a venture as the Bretton Woods proposal, even though it may run into billions of dollars, is trifling compared with the cost of another modern war in human lives, in misery, and the waste of economic reserves.

We understand that it has been commented by some objectors that there should be a limitation on the power of the representative of this country on the Security Council, that he should have no right to vote for the use of armed forces without recourse to Congress. It is our view that that stems from a misunderstanding of the provisions of the Charter. That instrumeut does not provide for the establishment of a new high office, that of a United States representative to the United Nations with independent powers of his own. The representative should be and is clearly intended to be merely a diplomatic agent of our executive branch of the Government. He should be appointed by the President, confirmed by the Senate like any other diplomatic office, and he should be a diplomatic agent. Many times in our past history our President has had to call upon our forces for armed intervention in international matters, and we have never re

garded it as a violation of our Constitution, and we submit that it is no violation of our constitutional provision to have this agent, this diplomatic agent of the executive branch of our Government, have that same power that the Chief Executive has so far as this Council is concerned.

Therefore, we urge prompt ratification without reservation and that no limitation will now or hereafter be placed on the authority of our representative on the Council, and that our country make this Charter workable in a practical sense by assisting vigorously in removing the international causes of war.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions of Judge Oliver?

(No response.)

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Judge Oliver.

Gentlemen, we have next former Senator Owen, of Oklahoma, who was a distinguished Member of the Senate for many years and very active in the affairs of the Senate. Proceed, Senator.

STATEMENT BY HON. ROBERT L. OWEN, FORMER SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA

Senator OWEN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, my deep affection and respect for the Senate and my ardent desire to recíprocate in some degree the deep obligations I owe to others brings me here to express the hope that your committee will take prompt action, will favorably endorse the United Nations Charter, will take the steps necessary to make it effective. I trust that the proceedings in the Senate may not be greatly prolonged lest it weaken the power of the people of the United States to establish what now appears to be a great opportunity for which the world has waited long and made innumerable sacrifices. In my humble opinion the world is now prepared to make completely effective the objectives of the United Nations Charter.

I will not attempt in the few minutes at my disposal to analyze the Charter itself. I have taken great pains to examine the splendid report of the Honorable Edward R. Stettinius. It is a large volume. I have studied it carefully; it has given me profound satisfaction.

I heard the President of the United States here in the Senate advocate speedy action, and his reasoning, in my humble judgment, was sound. I heard, read, and studied the masterful address of the chairman of this committee, the Honorable Tom Connally, of Texas. The argument was absolutely unanswerable.

I heard Senator Vandenberg and I approved the substance of both of these great speeches urging the adoption of the United Nations Charter.

I am profoundly impressed with the colossal fact that the accredited representatives of 50 peace-loving nations have, after prolonged and careful collaboration, submitted the United Nations Charter and endorsed it unanimously. The closing speeches of the representatives of 10 leading nations is impressive in the highest degree of the good faith behind this Charter. I am glad to give it my loyal adherence. I do not represent anybody except myself, an American citizen who has lived long and loved much. When I came into this world

on February 3, 1856, I entered an atmosphere of unselfish friendship and loving kindness, and every day since then I have been fed, clothed, sheltered, and instructed by God's little messengers, and to them I owe a debt which I am trying now to pay.

What I want to say in brief is this: That during the last 30 years the world has been going through a gigantic change through modern education, through modern means of communication, through radio, through the moving pictures, through the wonderful modern newspapers and magazines and books published in our country and elsewhere throughout the world.

The education of the world has been proceeding apace and there have been devices and means by which any person of intelligence can learn to read and write his own language within a day or two. Of this matter America has taken but little note nor has it been very much the subject of discussion in the Senate or the House of Representatives of the United States. But there has been taking place a revolution of tremendous force and tremendous character which never can be stopped by any force on earth. Illiteracy is being abolished by using phonetic alphabets and by means of this reform the poverty and the disease and the weakness which follow ignorance will be abated. Over 350 nations using phonetic alphabets now can read and write their own language.

With education as a base, there has been a giantic change for the better throughout Russia to whose great people I take off my hat with deepest respect and with the firm hope and belief that in their integrity, in their common sense, in their fundamental goodness of character, they will sustain the work being done by the United Nations Charter. Russia under this intensive education based upon their phonetic alphabet has increased its production over 400 percent, and the end is not near. Education in that country is being financed by the Government from the kindergarten and elementary schools, to the high schools, universities, laboratories, technical establishments engaged in modern production through their many factories. In 1939 Russia printed four times as many books as the United States did, and 700,000,000 copies were issued as of that year for the use of the Russian people.

I know the propaganda attributed to the Third International, the Trotsky idea of world revolution and the taking from those who had to give to those who had not, but I remind you that Trotsky was compelled to leave Russia because of his views, and that Russia has gone through a change by which they have established a rule based upon common sense and based upon production, in which the principle is recognized that the welfare of all of the people is concerned in protecting the rights of every individual. That is the fundamental principle upon which alone the world can proceed with safety and security.

I have faith in the common sense and in the character of the human race. I believe in a divine power guided by loving kindness, and that that power is irresitible.

I look with great approval upon Franklin D. Roosevelt in his four inaugurations putting his hand on his mother's Bible on the thirteenth chapter of Corinthians, teaching the doctrine of love. The doctrine