WAR REFERENDUM FRIDAY, MAY 19, 1939 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, in the committee room, Capitol, at 10 o'clock a. m., Senator Carl A. Hatch (chairman) presiding. Present: Senators Hatch (chairman) and Borah. Present also: Senator Wiley of Wisconsin. Senator HATCH. The committee will please come to order. The first witness on the list this morning is Mr. J. G. Luhrsen. STATEMENT OF J. G. LUHRSEN, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, Senator HATCH. Please state your name for the record, and what organization you represent. Mr. LUHRSEN. My name is J. G. Luhrsen. I am executive secretary and treasurer of the Railway Labor Executives' Association. Senator HATCH. You may proceed. Mr. LUHRSEN. I appear before your committee in behalf of the Railway Labor Executives' Association composed of the following organizations members of the association: Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen. Switchmen's Union of North America. The Order of Railroad Telegraphers. American Train Dispatchers' Association. Railway Employees' Department, A. F. of L. International Association of Machinists. International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders and Helpers of America. International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers, and Helpers. Brotherhood Railway Carmen of America. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. International Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers. Brotherhood of Firemen and Oilers. Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers, Express and Station Employees. Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees. Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen of America. Order of Sleeping Car Conductors. National Organization of Masters, Mates, and Pilots of America. National Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association. International Longshoremen's Association. The approximate total number of railroad employees at the present time is 950,000, the vast majority of which is represented by the Railway Labor Executives' Association. As I understand it, this committee is considering Senate Joint Resolution 84, which is in principle identical to House Joint Resolution 89. However, in order to be specific with respect to authority granted me by the association, I suggest that both resolutions 89 and 84 be incorporated in my statement at this point to obviate any possibility of misunderstanding. Senator HATCH. They have both been printed in the record. I do not think it necessary to print them again. Your statement shows clearly that you appear in support of both resolutions. Mr. LUHRSEN. During the Seventy-fourth and Seventy-fifth Congresses similar resolutions were introduced providing for a referendum vote before declaring war, except in case of invasion. In the Seventy-fourth Congress, House Joint Resolution 167 was introduced and I quote from the record of the minutes of the association concerning the action taken: Prevention of war: House Joint Resolution 167, introduced by Congressman Ludlow was read and after considerable discussion on this resolution and various other bills introduced having for their purpose the prevention of war, the following motion was adopted: Motion That the legislative representatives be authorized to cooperate with all worthy organizations and individuals interested in the prevention of war and that they support such legislation as is designed for that purpose; that Congressmen McSwain and Ludlow and Senators Nye and Bone be advised of the action we have taken. In the Seventy-fifth Congress a similar resolution was introduced and on May 3, 1937, our association adopted the following motion: Motion. That we endorse this resolution and the national legislative representatives be requested to support the resolution. In the present Congress, House Joint Resolution 89 was again presented to the association and the record of the minutes disclosed the following: House Joint Resolution 89: Concerning this legislative bill it was pointed out that the association supported a similar bill in the first session of the Seventy-fourth Congress, and again in May 1937, adopted the following motion: "That we endorse this resolution and the national legislative representatives be requested to support the resolution." The following motion was adopted by the association: Motion: That we reaffirm our position on this referendum vote, and that the national legislative representatives be requested to support this resolution. Since Resolutions 84 and 89 are identical in principle it may be definitely stated that the association endorses the princple of Senate Joint Resolution 84 as well as House Joint Resolution 89. This subject matter is one in which every citizen of the United States, including women and children, are vitally interested since the boy of ineligible age for war today may be eligible tomorrow. Many of the million or more railroad men and their boys are and will be subject to call in case of war. We do not want war-and the best way to keep out of war is not to get engaged in European affairs, regardless of fallacious propaganda which encourages it. Mob psychology, brought into existence by the spreading of mischievous propaganda only deceives and misleads. Truth submerged because of a one-sided presentation with facts cunningly omitted enhances a wrong impression and through it all the cherished hopes against war are sacrificed. To exalt pride and vanity is one choice method, and yet the first evil which God condemns is "a proud look" followed by a "lying tongue." We know some of the arguments advanced against this legislation and, generally speaking, it is to the effect that the people are not well enough informed; that certain things must of necessity be kept secret between officials of government with respect to other nations; that all kinds of propaganda and politics will be injected in the case of a referendum; and that a delayed decision represents fear. We still believe in the logic that it is more sane to be "a live coward than a dead hero" and that both should have full information and time for deliberation before choosing to be either coward or hero. One-sided information is one of our greatest trouble makers today. It creates misunderstanding at home and likewise that holds true with respect to foreign relations with other nations. We need to pause and give studied deliberation to whatever is brought to notice, either of evil or of good, and time allowance for choosing as to the preponderance between them is essential. It seems to us better to temper justice with a forbearance from inflicting harm, than to rant in obscurity, letting our temper control without knowing all of the more salient facts involved. I know of no better way to illustrate what I mean by such temperament than to briefly cite the handling of disputes to avoid strikeswhich is war between employers and employees under a law enacted by a wise Congress. Under the Railway Labor Act the procedure prescribed permits of cooling time, a governor controlling steam, and time to learn all the facts, then holding conferences, beginning at the bottom and working toward the top, rather than letting only those at the top pass first judgment. This is followed by mediation and conciliation, and if that proves unsuccessful, then arbitration, and if arbitration is declined by either side, then the appointment by the President of an emergency board. Both sides can and do present all of the facts, beginning at the bottom and going up to the top of this machinery, and if either swerves from the truth, the guilty one dwarfs all of his argument, so that the combining and reconciling of opposites by the judges predominates on the side of truth. But even then, when such a decision is made, neither side can declare a war for a period of another 30 days, and by war I mean a strike of the employees or a boycott by managements. That law has worked very successfully since 1920, or for 19 years. So I conclude that by reducing things to a common understanding and within the sphere of comprehension, people will exercise a better and more sane judgment in making a decision than if such power is vested only in officers of organizations, or officers in public positions. No officer of any of the railroad organizations assumes the responsibility of declaring a strike until the rank and file has first had the privilege of a referendum vote, and based on this experience, the Railway Labor Executives Association has repeatedly endorsed legislation which provides for a referendum vote of the people with respect to war. We do not cherish looking forward to Europe as the burial grounds for the present or future posterity. We feel this resolution should be adopted as an amendment to the Constitution. I might add, Mr. Chairman, that I know our people feel that, if we can bring about an improvement in our own conditions, particularly with respect to unemployment, and paint a picture for the European countries by drawing ourselves as a model, it will be a whole. lot better than to get entangled in anything that is happening over in Europe, and for that reason I heartily endorse this resolution. Senator HATCH. Thank you. STATEMENT OF HON. ARTHUR CAPPER, A SENATOR IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS Senator HATCH. Senator Capper, if you are ready, you may proceed. Senator CAPPER. Mr. Chairman, in the last Congress I had a war referendum resolution sponsored by myself, similar to the Ludlow resolution. You will remember that several Members of the Senate had individual resolutions. My resolution was No. 223 in the last Congress. Then we united with Senator La Follette and others on the resolution now pending before your committee. I first want to present a number of petitions I have here. I have at least several thousand of them, in favor of a war referendum and favoring the pending resolution. Senator HATCH. Judging from the type of petitions that have already been presented, I presume that they are all about the same. Senator CAPPER. They are all about the same. Senator HATCH. There is no use putting them in the record. Senator HATCH. They will be filed. Senator CAPPER. I would like to make a brief statement in support of the resolution. I have been very strongly in favor of the principle for a good many years. I appear in support of Senate Joint Resolution 84, commonly called the war-referendum resolution. I shall try to be brief. I believe the intent of the proposed war-referendum amendment is perfectly plain. It is not ambiguous or deceptive. The language states exactly what it means, which is not always the case with legislative proposals. The only phrase which might be open to misunderstanding, is in section 1, "or to engage in overseas warfare." My understanding of "overseas warfare" is that it means military operations, use of armed force, and, frankly, I do not believe it could be stretched to include "measures short of war." I mention this because I understand there has been some discussion of what the sponsors of the resolution meant by this language. Now, as to the resolution as a whole. Under our Constitution certain powers are delegated to the National Government. Powers not delegated are reserved to the people, or to the States. One of the powers expressly delegated to the Congress is the power to declare war. The right of the people to recall such a delegation, or to limit such delegation of power, I believe is not questioned. The proposed referendum amendment would not recall this delegation of power, but it would limit that delegation to this extent. In case of attack, actual or immediately threatened, upon the United States or any of its possessions; in case of attack, actual or immediately threatened against any nation in the Western Hemisphere by any non-American nation, Congress would have the same power it now possesses, by delegation from the people through the Constitution, to declare war, to wage war. The Monroe Doctrine would be implemented and strengthened by the adoption of this proposed amendment, as I view the matter. Possibly this change, or rather this recognition in the Constitution of what is a traditional policy, is in some respects almost as important as the referendum proposed itself. So much for the present delegated power of Congress to declare war that would be retained by Congress if the proposed amendment became a part of the Constitution. But if Congress felt the occasion demanded that the United States declare war or engage in warfare overseas-participate in European, Asiatic, or African wars-Congress would have to call a Nation-wide referendum and allow the people to decide whether or not American boys would be sent overseas to fight in other peoples' wars. There is the whole matter in a nutshell. The people would reserve to themselves the power to decide this particular kind of warfare. I will admit that as a matter of sound national policy there are good arguments on both sides of this question, but to me those arguments resolve themselves in favor of submission of the amendment to the people to decide. I will leave it to opponents of the proposal to state the arguments against it. The proposal should have full and free discussion and every consideration. It is not a matter on which I believe snap judgment should be taken. I will try to state in the next few minutes, briefly and concisely and I hope understandingly, the reasons why I believe the war-referendum amendment should be submitted to the people for ratification and approval. If Congress submits this war-referendum proposal to conventions chosen by the people in each State for the sole purpose of considering this proposed amendment, I have no doubt as to the result. The people will ratify it. I do not believe we can get away from these realities. It is the people who fight the wars, die in the wars; it is the people who pay for the wars. I contend it is the people who should decide if we are to have wars of our own choosing-foreign wars; in other words, wars that are not wars in defense of the United States or the integrity of the Western Hemisphere. There is nothing in the proposed referendum, either directly or by implication, that would prevent or hinder in the slightest degree immediate action in a war of self-defense, and that self-defense includes the protection of all our own territories and all the Western Hemisphere against outside aggression. |