I mean it is a very serious situation, and even with South American copper, copper is going to be replaced by aluminum to a great extent in my opinion because it is just going to become nonexistent.

Right now we do not have any substitute for copper in a great many of our military end items, and the failure of copper scrap to flow is a very serious thing right this very minute.

Mr. BONNER. Mr. Larson, you as one of the higher responsible officials of this Government, might just as well learn now as later that the feeling is in this country that, unless we get some cooperation from these countries to which we are granting great benefits and aids and so forth, there is going to be a decided change.

This morning I have just come from a meeting of the Merchant Marine Committee, and I want to tell you first-hand, and I want to let this subcommittee of mine know, that Senate Joint Resolution 104 was proposed to the committee this morning, authorizing the sale of war-built coastal ships to the Republic of South Korea. It was tabled in the committee just now. The reason it was tabled is that if we cannot get any more cooperation out of the Government of Korea than we have been getting, we might as well find it out now.

It is no use for us to send these ships in there to carry the materials that we have been talking about here, there, and elsewhere, when they do not know where the materials are going. And that feeling is going to be more evident in Congress from now on, and the State Department and your agency might just as well let Mr. Syngman Rhee know that we are expecting some cooperation from his government or else. We will stay there and fight the war out, but we are going to let them know a thing or two.

Mr. LARSON. In principle, Mr. Chairman, I could not agree with

you more.

Mr. BONNER. I am just saying that for your benefit. You can pass it on to the State Department or the agencies that you collaborate with. Mr. LARSON. I have already done so, not in such specific terms as that.

Mr. BONNER. This has just happened, and it is an example of what is going to happen.

Mr. LARSON. But if you could sit in day-to-day negotiations as I have to go through with foreign countries, it would make you feel even more urgent about this than you have expressed here.

RESISTANCE TO SUBCOMMITTEE TRIP TO KOREA

Mr. BONNER. And another thing I want to let you know: that this subcommittee is not going out on any kite-flying or sensational expedition. It has come to me this morning that it is questionable whether or not the Members of Congress on this subcommittee, not considering the staff, are going to be allowed to go into Korea.

You had a mission in Korea, looking into the very thing that we are interested in, composed of various types of men. And now if the Congress of the United States, which is the board of directors of this country in our international effort, can not go forth and see what is going on, then it is high time a showdown was had on that.

I do not relish going to the Pacific or going around the world. My pleasure would be at home preferably, but I feel it my duty, since I

94756-52-12

have gotten into this, to go ahead with this mission, and I feel very keenly about the different blocks that I have seen thrown into the path of the subcommittee, and the mission of this subcommittee; and especially this Korean angle, since there have been so many various types of people and purchasing agents and inquiring agents from various departments of our Government and individual members of Congress going into Korea. So you just pass that along to some of them, and I would appreciate it, sir.

COORDINATION OF OVERSEAS DISPOSAL AGENCIES

Mr. WARD. May I follow up that question just a bit, Jess? It is very important and the subcommittee has been thinking about it quite a bit. I was wondering whether, when Public Law 152 was set up, if it was a mistake to let the Army and Navy and the overseas disposal agencies do their own disposing, because there have been a good many instances where it looks like the stuff has fallen in the cracks. The Army and Navy did not want to do it. The OFLC has wanted to get out of the business.

Do you think it was a mistake that it wasn't coordinated through the new agency?

Mr. LARSON. What do you mean by coordinated?

Mr. WARD. The overseas disposal coordinated with the disposal at home and with the procurement that has developed at home since that time.

Mr. LARSON. In normal times. Those of us who had to do with 152 were thinking of normal times. These are not normal times. I do not think we can saddle our organization with an abnormal situation.

Here is what we were trying to avoid in Public Law 152, setting up a tremendously big administrative force. I do not care how hard you try, if you set up a separate administrative force to perform a function that an agency of the Government is already doing in the field, you just duplicate so many things, and it grows and grows. I know that from personal experience. I have had a terrific time trying to hold these three overseas offices of mine down to what I indicate. If a central Government agency had that responsibility, you would find a tendency to set up an administrative organization out of proportion to the value of that sort of thing. Of course, in an emergency, I think the Army is best suited to take care of its own scrap. I think the Munitions Board is best suited to coordinate that within the armed services, because, as I get the picture of the South Korean thing, if it weren't for the Army doing this, it couldn't be done. No civilian organization could go into South Korea and operate. It is a matter of security. There are guerrillas all over the country. There is this lack of sense of responsibility that would require such a tremendous supervising staff. The Army is there.

For instance, in the case of tungsten, the Army is taking the responsibility for transporting that to the port. Prior to the Army's taking responsibility for that, a truckload of tungsten would leave one of these mines and it would never show up at the port.

Mr. WARD. I appreciate that. Mr. Bonner, however, when you consider apparently what we have lost in Germany due to the Army

not being particularly interested or dollar conscious with respect to a lot of trucks and other things that were left over there, it would pay for a pretty good sized administrative organization to keep the thing under control.

Mr. LARSON. I think that the military should be required to assume that responsibility because any other type of organization would have to go in and duplicate.

In a foreign country you have the matter of quartering, the matter of subsistence, the matter of transportation, and so forth.

If the Army is the occupation agency of the Government, if it is the dominant operating agency there, it ought to have the responsibility for these other things, and it is a matter of making them conscious of that responsibility.

Mr. BONNER. Thank you very much, gentlemen, for coming down. I appreciate it very much.

(Whereupon, at 11:25 a. m., the subcommittee adjourned.)

FEDERAL SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

(Overseas Survey)

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1951

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS SUBCOMMITTEE

OF THE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES
IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS,

Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 10 a. m., in room 1015, New House Office Building, Hon. Herbert C. Bonner, chairman of the subcommittee presiding.

Members of Congress present: Herbert C. Bonner, chairman; Harold D. Donohue, Bill Lantaff, Charles B. Brownson, Thomas B. Curtis, and George Meader.

Staff representatives present: Christine Ray Davis, chief clerk; Thomas A. Kennedy, general counsel; Herbert Roback, staff member; Ray Ward, Bureau of the Budget; and Lee Seymour, General Accounting Office.

Mr. BONNER. Mr. Brodsky, you know the purpose of the meeting, and what the endeavor of the subcommittee is. Will you proceed?

STATEMENT OF NATHAN BRODSKY, ASSISTANT TO THE VICE

CHAIRMAN, MUNITIONS BOARD

Mr. BRODSKY. We have two presentations this morning, Mr. Bonner. The first one relates to the screening of excess property in the United States, and we have asked Commander Barnett, who is head of the Surplus Materials Division of the Navy, to explain to the committee how foreign excess fits into the picture. As you remember, the Surplus Materials Division operates under the Navy Department, but is nevertheless the Department of Defense screening unit. It screens all property of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force, not only that of the Navy. Commander Barnett's presentation is relatively short, and we have asked him to speak first. He will be followed by Colonel Coats who will give you the detail on the various Army installations that you will be visiting overseas. Would you carry on, Commander Barnett?

Commander BARNETT. All right.

NOTE.-Asterisks denote classified material deleted for security reasons.

159