million which will scare everybody in Latin America stiff. It is time to have I like the expression a "square deal" better than "new deal"; I won't go into details.

It is time for this Congress, on its own initiative and within its constitutional rights, to initiate a demand for a statement of our war aims. Then we won't need a two or three million standing army or even a temporary army.

I thank you for your patience and will be glad to answer any questions, if you have any.

The CHAIRMAN. Any questions?

(No response.)

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any others who wanted to testify this morning? I recall some lady from Pittsburgh wired me, advising that she represented some mothers' organization. Is she here?

Were you scheduled to testify this morning?

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. Yes; you wired me yesterday at Scarborough. The CHAIRMAN. Will you please provide the clerk with your full name and the organization you represent?

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. I don't represent any organization. Just an individual.

The CHAIRMAN. And your address, please?

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. Eunice B. Armstrong, Scarborough-on-the-Hudson, N. Y.

The CHAIRMAN. If you have a prepared statement we will be perfectly willing to have you insert it into the record. It might save you that much time.

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. I am sorry, it is in my own peculiar typing. I could perhaps send it.

The CHAIRMAN. The only reason I made that suggestion is that we have so few committee members here this morning and naturally any view which you might wish to express, if reduced to writing, would be read by all of the members of the committee and it might spare you some time.

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. There came with me two ladies, one a Gold Star Mother, who want the opportunity to-I have a written statement but these other two ladies haven't written statements. We are all from Westchester.

The CHAIRMAN. They want to make just brief extemporaneous statements?

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That is perfectly all right.

Now, in addition to your prepared statement-which I believe you stated that you would prepare and hand to the reporter-do you desire to make any extemporaneous statement?

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. May the other ladies make their brief speeches first?

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. And you will submit your statement in writing, and that will be, without objection, embodied in the record. I thought possibly that would convenience you more than otherwise Mrs. ARMSTRONG. Yes. Mrs. Lawrence is the Gold Star Mother. The CHAIRMAN. If the other ladies would want to be heard extemporaneously we would be very glad to hear them.

Would this lady be good enough to provide the reporter with her name and address.

STATEMENT OF MRS. GRACE M. LAWRENCE

Mrs. LAWRENCE. Mrs. Grace M. Lawrence, 33 Maurice Avenue, Ossining, N. Y.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I didn't know that I would have to make much of a speech, that is why I didn't write one up, but inasmuch as I represent the American Gold Star Mothers of the World War, Inc., I felt as if I would like to help the boys that are to go over, and the mothers, to comfort those who are to meet what we mothers have met.

I want to say that I feel that I should work for the mothers and try to get them to feel as we had to feel when our boys went.

My son lies in France-just 4 days before the armistice was signedand I know what they are coming to, and that is why I should like to help and do all I could to help the coming war.

We are now working in my town for different objects, and trying to do all we can to promote and keep out of war, and I feel that it would be very useless to send our boys over there.

I don't think they would get there, and what we have now we want to keep for our own America, so I don't know as I can say so very much more, because this is on a different subject, but I do want to do all I can to help these mothers to be consoled and their boys that are in camp, and hope and trust that we will not have any war to take them away from our shores.

I feel as if our President has made that statement that we should be kept out of war. I don't feel that we should be drawn into it by any propaganda from the other side.

Thank you very much. I don't think I have anything more.

The CHAIRMAN. We are very glad to have had an opportunity to call you at this moment.

Mrs. LAWRENCE. Thank you.

The CHAIRMAN. This other lady here. If you will be good enough to give your name to the reporter and your address, we will be glad to have a statement from you.

STATEMENT OF MRS. GRANCEL FITZ

Mrs. FITZ. Mrs. Grancel Fitz, New Rochelle, N. Y.

Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Lawrence is a Gold Star Mother, and I have two sons, aged 19 and 26, whom I still like to keep alive; that is, if possible.

I would send them instantly to war if I felt that we were really threatened, if we were invaded, but I don't want them to be sent to war in any light-hearted manner.

About the resolution for keeping the boys in the Army, I am against that for the reason that most people give-that I think it would be a breach of faith and greatly impair the morale of our boys in the Army, and also, I can't see why this so-called present exigency which we see now couldn't have been foreseen a year ago. In fact, I remember thinking about it myself and asking the question, "Well, will 1 year be enough? Won't it at the end of that time seem that the boys will be indispensable, that they will be needed and shouldn't be released?"

And about the acuteness of the national emergency, it doesn't seem to me-of course I am not very much informed on these things, I

haven't very much time to go into them deeply-but the national emergency to me does not seem more acute now than it was a year age.

I feel that we have had a whole year of national defense, a year of preparedness, and not only that, but Germany is, to my way of thinking, with Russia on her hands, not in a position to be any great menace to us, not nearly so much as 1 year ago.

Most of the arguments that I have listened to in favor of keeping the boys in the Army, I have not found convincing. In fact, to me the reasons seem mostly trumped up, and the feelings pumped up.

I feel we are proceeding on the basis of waging an aggressive war rather than for home defense, and I personally am not for anything but home defense to repel an actual physical invasion.

I think that in the future we ought to lay our cards on the tableto quote Senator Nye-and I think we should let the boys go, and in the future to plan with more foresight to figure out just how large an army we should have, and that should be active all the time, and let the boys come in and go out in relays.

That is all I have to say. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. We are glad to have had the opportunity of hearing you. If there are no more witnesses the meeting will be closed until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.

Senator AUSTIN. The lady from Pennsylvania wanted to say something.

The CHAIRMAN. Was there someone else?

STATEMENT OF MRS. EUNICE B. ARMSTRONG

Mrs. ARMSTRONG. May I make a very brief statement? Mine is so ragged. People were making all the points I was making, and I don't intend to repeat them.

The CHAIRMAN. We are very glad to accord you this opportunity. Mrs. ARMSTRONG. Speaking as the mother of four sons they were born between 1915 and the Versailles Treaty. I thought that Wilson's ideals might be achieved if we kept out of war. Then when we went in, I hoped they might be, and when the Treaty of Versailles was signed I knew that this war would happen.

I have never let my boys forget that democracy can't be achieved by war, nor imposed by war, nor saved by war. If I thought it was possible that their deaths would make secure our form of government, increase human liberty, I honestly can say I would willingly let them die.

I know it hasn't worked, and what happens even with this threat of war? This is the particular thing I wanted to say, what this threat of war is doing to us now, the morale question that everyone else has spoken about. I think I have a little more the women's reaction.

There are many women who knew I was coming down here, and they said things like this: "Oh, I would love to come, but I wouldn't dare. My boy is in camp and they would punish him for it."

Another woman said, "Well, I would go, but my husband has a defense contract. I wouldn't dare."

They

That was the phrase, over and over again, "I wouldn't dare. have ways of knowing." And two other women said, "I don't even

dare write letters to the President or to Congressmen. what happened to so and so. That is a high price to pay."

You know

I think the only other point I want to make-because I will send you my written statement, but it isn't so very important-is that apparently this conscript army was not well planned for.

Many people feel that the provision for the limited 12 months' time and the provision prohibiting the use of our draftees outside the Western Hemisphere were both put in simply to facilitate the passage

of the bill.

I can't believe that-when I know the statements favoring hemisphere defense made by you Senators-can be true. I think the American people want a good efficient army for defense. That is what laws have been passed about.

I don't see why it has to be a conscript army. Conscription wasn't the point. It was getting a good army. It seems to me that as a practical suggestion-I don't know any of the mechanics for doing it but if, instead of putting the bills or Resolutions 92 and 93 up first, you would instead put before the Senate bill 91, which deals with sending men out of the Western Hemisphere.

I think, if you would defeat that bill by an enormous majority, you would not have the slightest difficulty in getting a huge volunteer army. They could be picked for the job.

I think the threat that hangs over our whole lives, the obstacle to unity, the feeling that we are being tricked, deceived, that plans are made about which we know nothing, isn't good for people. It isn't good for a child not to trust the people on whom he has to rely, and it isn't good for citizens.

If you will end the threat of an A. E. F. by defeating once more Resolution 91, I think, if you can pass your Resolutions 92 and 93, with some sensible limits, so that the President doesn't have the power for eternity to say where, what men shall serve, I think you could get a huge, adequate, willing volunteer Army.

That is really all I had to say.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much.

Before closing the meeting, I want to state that we have several witnesses scheduled for tomorrow morning, and we will be forced to close at 12 o'clock tomorrow, so I hope the witnesses scheduled for tomorrow will be on time.

I have before me now a letter from Maj. Gen. John F. Williams, reading as follows:

Upon my return to the office yesterday after the hearings before your committee, I found a letter from Maj. Gen. Claude V. Birkhead, commanding the Thirty-sixth (Texas) Division of the National Guard.

I am enclosing an extract from this letter which, if convenient, I would appreciate having incorporated in the symposium which I handed to your committee. I am also enclosing a complete copy of the General's letter, as it is one of the most enlightening communications I have received and which I hope you will find the time to glance through.

I would like to express my appreciation and that of the National Guard officers for the very cordial reception which we received from yourself and the members of the Military Committee.

With kindest personal regards, I am,

Very sincerely vours,

JOHN F. WILLIAMS,

Major General, Chief, National Guard Bureau.

Without objection, there will be incorporated in the record extracts from the letters of division commanders, as requested, and also a copy of the letter that is mentioned by the General.

(Extracts from letters of division commanders are as follows:)

EXTRACTS FROM LETTERS OF DIVISION COMMANDERS

Major Gen. Claude V. Birkhead, Thirty-sixth Division, Camp Bowie, Tex.: "I find by talking to many, both men and officers, that their beliefs and feelings are as hereafter set out. If there is an emergency, then everybody should stay stay in the service until it is over; if there is no emergency, then the system of limited training periods can safely be put into effect.

"If there is an emergency, this policy should have universal application. The national danger affects the trainee much as it does the National Guard man and both should be called on-or neither. To attempt some character of differentiation, if Congress thinks there is danger of war, is erroneous and endangers our country.

"1. The distinction between trainee and volunteer guardsman has disappeared in this division. Many friendships have been made. In many instances the men of the different categories came from the same towns and knew each other in civil life. In the level of training attained there is little difference and that grows daily less. The trainee is pugnaciously loyal to and proud of his unit. In short, the division has absorbed the trainee and the trainee has absorbed the division. There is no distinction between the men, and you must go to the records to remind yourself that some of the men-about 6,000-are trainees. It is plain that to release one class would be ruinous to the morale of those retained. They would, I believe, regard it as an unjust discrimination.

If

"The division is just now commencing to function as a satisfactory team. the 6,000 trainees be withdrawn, the whole job must be done over and, meanwhile, it will be of little value as a combatant unit."

(The letter of Gen. Claude V. Birkhead is as follows:)

HEADQUARTERS, THIRTY-SIXTH DIVISION,
OFFICE OF THE COMMANDING GENERAL,

Maj. Gen JOHN F. WILLIAMS,

Camp Bowie, Tex., July 16, 1941.

Chief, National Guard Bureau, Washington, D. C.

DEAR GENERAL WILLIAMS: I have for sometime meant to write you about things hereafter expressed, but have not because of the fact that I have been almost continuously in the field, away from base camp engaged in corps and division maneuvers. Dead for sleep, I have but now caught up. This is true

of the whole division. We are working very, very strenuously.

I find by talking to many, both men and officers, that their beliefs and feelings are as hereafter set out. If there is an emergency, then everybody should stay in the service until it is over; if there is no emergency, then the system of limited training periods can safely be put into effect.

If there is an emergency, this policy should have universal application. The national danger affects the trainee much as it does the National Guard man, and both should be called on-or neither. To attempt some character of differentiation, if Congress thinks there is danger of war, is erroneous and endangers our country.

We think there is an "energency." The President has twice said so; first declaring a "limited" emergency; then a "total" emergency. Congress already in effect has declared an emergency by appropriating money-billions for Army, Navy, and their support and supply. Yet Congress has yet to activate the emergency fully. This activation will necessarily be a "supercolossal "emergency. Not trying to be sarcastic, I am simply amazed at the pother raised and the confused and conflicting views about what seems otherwise a crystal-clear proposition. All this parallels the course of France before its enslavement.

When I say that I believe that an emergency exists, I mean simply that America is already at war, or seriously threatened with being involved in one. From careful inquiry I am sure that is what the men of this division almost universally think.