Mr. SANDERS. I do not have complete information. Certain of the countries have made payments.

Mr. CANNON. I should think that would be one of the first things you would inquire about before you come up here before this committee.

Mr. SANDERS. Well, we have a difficult problem here in that it perhaps applies to a considerable extent more to us than to some of the other members. We are moving toward the liquidation of this Office and the creation of an over-all World Health Organization, and it seemed to us we could move in that direction with better grace if we had paid up our obligations.

Mr. CANNON. I notice in your justifications you refer to this proposed merger, or this prospective organization. Why should we have to pay our way into it unless other nations meet their obligations? And we have no assurance here that other nations have or will meet their obligations. Suppose you ascertain and report within the next day or two just what other nations have done or are doing or are expected to do.

I still fail to see why, if we have paid for 1945 and 1946, we would have to buy our way into this new organization, especially if other nations fail to advance their quotas.

Mr. KURTH. We will furnish that information, Mr. Chairman. (The information requested is as follows:)

Mexico, Belgium, Spain, Sweden and Turkey have made payments, and the United Kingdom has announced that it will pay its back dues. Upon the liquidation of the Office, it is contemplated that its assets will be taken over by the new World Health Organization.

Mr. TABER. Do you have any statement of their financial operations over these years that are involved?

Mr. SANDERS. I have a statement from the Director General of the Office which describes the activities undertaken,

Mr. CANNON. As a matter of fact, what did they really do in 1941, 1942, 1943, and 1944; actually what did they accomplish, and what could they accomplish under the circumstances? Everything over there was lost in a whirlwind. I do not see how they could function at all. What did they do?

Mr. TABER. And what did they pay out and what obligations did they incur?

Mr. SANDERS. The staff continued to function and to perform many of its usual activities as the secretariat of the organization. Payments were made for salaries and incidental operating expenses.

Mr. TABER. That is only a general answer. Maybe it is the best you have.

Mr. SANDERS. I think the statement I have referred to will be helpful in this connection.

Mr. O'NEAL. This is for an additional amount. How much have they had altogether for these purposes during the fiscal year 1946? Mr. SANDERS. $10,209.36. That is for 1945 and 1946.

Mr. O'NEAL. And in your 1946 appropriation you have used that entire amount, have you? Did you have anything in your 1946 appropriation for it?

Mr. SANDERS. No. That is the entire amount we have asked for. Mr. O'NEAL. You did not ask in the regular bill for 1946 for anything for this purpose?

Mr. SANDERS. No; that is right.

Mr. O'NEAL. I do not understand how they were spending it if you did not make any request for it. How could they spend money for the fiscal year 1946 if you had no amount in the supply bill for 1946? Mr. SANDERS. That is a deficiency appropriation.

Mr. O'NEAL. You had no appropriation, but the organization continued on for 1945 and 1946? You asked for no appropriation for them, but expected to take care of it by a deficiency?

Mr. SANDERS. Yes, sir.

Mr. KURTH. Yes; they were covered in a deficiency item.

Mr. O'NEAL. May I ask why you did not ask for an appropriation for it? If you knew the employees were going to stay on there, why was there not an appropriation requested?

We had appro

Mr. KURTH. We followed the general policy of suspending all payments to all international organizations in Axis-occupied territory. Mr. O'NEAL. Even though you kept people on? Mr. KURTH. Even though the people were kept on. priations in 1940 and 1941 and, in some cases, in 1942. However, we did not make those payments; even though we had the appropriations, we suspended them pending an investigation into the situation after the war was over.

Mr. O'NEAL. Out of what funds were they paid?

Mr. KURTH. They were paid, as Mr. Sanders explained, out of the retirement funds they had accumulated for those employees in past years. Furthermore, some of the countries did pay in some of those organizations.

Mr. O'NEAL. And this goes to replace the retirement funds?

Mr. KURTH. That is right. The employees' retirement fund would be depleted and could not be replaced unless the countries contributed. Mr. O'NEAL. So this is actually an appropriation for the retirement fund, rather than the payment of salaries and operating expenses? Mr. KURTH. Well, it is to replace money taken from the retirement fund to pay their salaries.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me we ought to have something more specific for the record and, when they fix up their remarks, we ought to know just what has been paid out in dollars and cents.

Mr. CANNON. He is going to send that up.

Mr. KURTH. Yes, sir.

(NOTE.-The information requested is not available in Washington. We have requested the Embassy in Paris to obtain this data. As soon as received, it will be furnished to the committee.)

INTERNATIONAL BUREAU OF PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION

Mr. CANNON. Your second item is also for a defunct entity, namely, the International Bureau of Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague, and here again we have another back-payment propositionan estimate of $10,945.14.

How and where did the Bureau function during the war period and how were its operations financed when contributions were suspended? Mr. HALDERMAN. I do not believe this Bureau did very much. It is a continuing organization which was established under the Hague Convention first in 1899 and then in 1907, and the staff was small. The regular expenses are largely for the maintenance of the Peace

Palace and its library; the remainder is for salaries and other office expenses. The Permanent Court leases the building and, in addition to its maintenance cost, there is expense for the maintenance of the large grounds, the standing commitments for library requirements, and, during the war, for the protection of the works of art. During the years 1945 and 1946, the Court was actively concerned with panels of persons selected by the various governments parties to the Hague Convention to constitute the nominating group for judges to the International Court of Justice. The obligation of the member states is to the officials on a contractual basis, and also it is an obligation to the owners of the building on a contractual basis, including arrangements for retirement.

Mr. CANNON. Well, you cannot point to anything definite that they did or that they accomplished during this period?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Not other than I have indicated.
Mr. CANNON. The thing was just in suspension?
Mr. HALDERMAN. Was in abeyance.

Mr. CANNON. It was in a coma, so to speak?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Yes.

Mr. CANNON. And it has been superseded by the United Nations? Mr. HALDERMAN. No, sir. The basis of the Permanent Court at The Hague rests on those old treaties of 1899 and 1907. When we adopted the charter of the United Nations, the participating states evidently intended this would continue; because one of the functions of The Hague Court, as distinguished from the International Court of Justice, was to nominate judges of the new International Court of Justice, and it continued that sytem of nominations. So that it was evident that the members of the United Nations Conference at San Francisco intended that The Hague Tribunal would be continued.

Mr. CANNON. Who represents the United States on that Court now? Mr. HALDERMAN. The Court is a panel of judges who are available, and our judges on that panel are Cordell Hull, Henry L. Stimson, Green Hackworth, and Michael Francis Doyle.

Mr. CANNON. Who were our representatives on the panel in1940? Mr. HALDERMAN. They were the same; except, instead of Mr. Hull, it was Mr. Manley O. Hudson.

Mr. CANNON. What assurance have we that other nations will make their contributions?

Mr. HALDERMAN. I think the answer is that they always have and that in the United Nations Conference at San Francisco it was generally understood and expected that it would continue.

I might point out that one of the methods of settlement laid down in the Charter of the United Nations is arbritation, in article 33, and this is the only real arbitral tribunal set up on an organized basis as distinct from a court of law.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What is our obligation, if anything?
Mr. HALDERMAN. Our financial obligation.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What is the obligation?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Our obligation is to contribute a share that is determined and has been determined by the Administrative Council, consisting of diplomatic representatives of member states at the Hague, including the representative of the United States. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. How much?

Mr. HALDERMAN. For each year, $1,722.57. At least, that is the way it has been running for a good many years.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. For how long?

Mr. HALDERMAN. This has been the figure since 1933. For the fiscal year 1932 the appropriation was $2,000.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Is this thing going to continue indefinitely, now that we have the United Nations set up?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Yes, until someone abrogates those treaties. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Is there a written obligation in the terms you have just given me in The Hague Convention?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What did the other countries do during these years when we suspended payment?

Mr. HALDERMAN. I think the other countries did the same thing. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Can you furnish something for the record that will show us specifically what has been done and what is being done now in terms of other nations? Instead of giving us generalities, I think we ought to have a clear picture of what is going on.

Mr. TABER. Could not we have a statement of their financial operations, receipts and disbursements, over that period?

Mr. KURTH. We can obtain that, Mr. Taber.

Mr. TABER. It seems to me like that ought to be presented here so that we can see whether there is occasion for making this payment and whether or not obligations had been incurred during that period; because there manifestly was no activity on the part of the organization.

Mr. HALDERMAN. Might I merely point out at this time, as I have, that these are contractual obligations?

Mr. TABER. Yes; but if the organization ceased to function and incurred no obligations that was a part of the set-up that created our obligations, it would undoubtedly present a little different picture.

Mr. HALDERMAN. The expenses are principally for the lease and maintenance of the Peace Palace and its grounds and for library requirements and, therefore, would be continuing.

Mr. CANNON. As a matter of fact, do not you have a sort of "white elephant" on your hands here? You have this elaborate organization built up with nothing to do, and you do not know what to do with it. As you say, it is a part of international agreements, but of international agreements which have become obsolete under modern conditions, and you do not know what action to take. It has no functions, is not functioning, and has not been functioning. Is not that about the situation?

Mr. SANDERS. I would like to say a word on that. It seems to me it has a very definite place in the scheme of things, even under the United Nations. In the first place, it is a procedure for arbitration available to the parties. The United Nations seeks to have the parties settle their disputes without referring them to the Security Council which is, in a sense, a court of last resort. This is one of the instrumentalities of pacific settlement to which the parties may have recourse of their own accord.

Mr. CANNON. Yes; but one to which we never resort and never will resort.

Mr. SANDERS. I am not so sure of that. We have resorted to this procedure ourselves in the past.

Mr. HALDERMAN. Six times.

Mr. CANNON. In recent times?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Yes.

Mr. TABER. When was that, and about what?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Well, I think our most recent case was the case with Sweden in 1928 concerning the detention of some Swedish shipsduring the first World War.

Mr. CANNON. In 1928! After the intervening events, that is very ancient history.

Mr. HALDERMAN. I wish to correct my statement. The year was 1932.

The theory of having this panel, I think, is that you need an organization set-up of that kind to which you can appeal, which facilitates the agreement of the parties to further arbitration. It is the one method by which you can have a binding decision without going to a full-fledged court.

Mr. O'NEAL. You gentlemen are not determining policies, now. This was considered at San Francisco, and, after some discussion of it, they decided to continue it. Am I correct about that?

Mr. HALDERMAN. It was done in a collateral way.

Mr. CANNON. I think the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. O'Neal] has put his finger on the very thing. It was not decided to continue it. Mr. O'NEAL. He said they had a provision whereby this Court was to be continued to nominate the judges.

Mr. HALDERMAN. That is correct.

Mr. O'NEAL. Which proves they had the intention of continuing it for a certain length of time, anyway, as I understand, and indirectly that indicates, when they leave the function there, they, of course, expect it to be continued. That is what I understood you

to say.

Mr. HALDERMAN. That is correct.

Mr. CANNON. As a matter of fact, has it been resorted to at all since 1928?

Mr. HALDERMAN. 1932. Article 33 of the charter lays down various methods for seeking a solution for the settlement of disputes. Those are negotiation, inquiry commissions-and I might point out there that The Hague Court is also available for setting up commissions of inquiry-conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, and resort to the regional agencies or other peaceful means of their own chain.

Mr. CANNON. Is there any likelihood that Russia would ever countenance resort to this agency?

Mr. HALDERMAN. If Russia ever wanted to arbitrate cases, the Court is available to her although she is no longer listed as a contracting party.

Mr. CANNON. Of course, this committee has nothing to do with policy; all we do is to supply money after policy is determined; but apparently somebody should give some attention to a continuation of what appears to be largely a vermiform appendage.

Mr. O'NEAL. Was it ever mentioned in any discussion that you know of in the UNO?

Mr. HALDERMAN. Not to my knowledge, except in that connection. Mr. SANDERS. I would like to say in connection with our first item, Public Health Office, we have a statement I mentioned, from the