who have not yet been paid in full are those whose awards exceed $100,000. All of these award holders have received 80 percent of the principal of their awards and have received or are presently entitled to receive substantial payments on account of interest. Funds for further payments on account of these awards had become practically exhausted when the Federal Republic of Germany agreed in February 1953 to pay $97,500,000 over a 25-year period in full settlement of claims of private holders of awards of the Mixed Claims Commission which were then estimated to amount to $104 million. One annual installment of $3 million was distributed to the award holders on December 1, 1953, and a second installment in the same amount was distributed on June 1, 1954. No further amounts will be available for distribution until the next annual installment, due April 1, 1955, is received from Germany. Paragraph (8) (A) of the act, as amended by the bill, would provide for the payment in full of the aggregate balances of principal and interest on awards, and defined parts of awards, where such balances do not exceed $15,000. This would directly affect 80 accounts and would involve a distribution of approximately $530,000. It would grant a preference to these award holders in that they would be paid immediately in full instead of receiving approximately 80 percent over a period of 24 years. The bill would next authorize in paragraph (8) (B) a payment of $15,000 on each of the remaining residual balances. This would create a new group of claimants having small balances to be paid over a period of the next 23 years and would involve a distribution of $2,955,000 among 197 award holders. The bill would then authorize in paragraph (8) (C) (i) payments on account of interest in proportion to the combined residual balances of principal and interest and in paragraph (8) (C) (ii), after the interest has been paid in full, on account of principal also in proportion to the residual balances. The payments which would be authorized by paragraph (8) (A) could be completed in 1955. The additional payments which would be authorized by paragraph (8) (B), however, would bring the amount to be distributed to approximately $3,485,000. Since only $3 million would become available for distribution in 1955, the payments which would be authorized by paragraph (8) (B) could not be completed until after the installment due April 1, 1956, is received from Germany. Only after the payments which would be authorized by paragraph (8) (B) were completed could the payments which would be authorized by paragraph (8) (C) begin. It should be noted that the proposed payment of $15,000 is to be made on account of a combined balance of principal and interest. No provision is made, however, for its allocation between principal and interest. Such a provision is necessary in order to ascertain how much of the remaining balance is interest to be paid in accordance with paragraph (8) (C) (i) and how much is principal to be paid in accordance with paragraph (8) (C) (ii) and on which interest will continue to accrue. It should also be noted that paragraph (8), as amended, will no longer contain the proviso that payments on account of interest reduce the principal balance for the purpose only of further accruals of interest. Without an arrangement of this sort, it will be impossible to complete payments of interest so long as interest continues to accrue on unpaid principal balances. Under the present law, payments to award holders are being made on account of interest in proportion to the respective interest balances. Under this arrangement, assuming that payments are received from Germany in accordance with the settlement agreement, each award holder will receive an annual distribution of approximately the same size until approximately 1972 when all interest balances are expected to have been paid in full. Thereafter, payments will be made on account of principal in proportion to the respective principal balances. Since the various principal balances are not in the same proportion with each other as are the various interest balances, the share of the various award holders in the annual distribution will change somewhat when payments of principal begin but thereafter the annual distribution on each award will be approximately the same size as the preceding one. Under the proposed legislation, however, the payment of $15,000 under paragraph (8) (B) will pay some interest accounts in full (assuming the payment is to be allocated first to interest and then to principal). In such cases, no further payment (except for currently accruing interest) will be authorized until all interest accounts have been paid in full and the account would become relatively dormant for approximately 17 years. In the other cases, payments on account of interest in proportion to the combined balance of principal and interest in accordance with paragraph (8) (C) (i) will result in the completion of interest payments on the various accounts on various dates and in corresponding periods of relative dormancy until all interest has been paid in full and principal payments are authorized to begin under paragraph (8) (C) (ii). It is suggested that provision could be made for the payment of accounts under $15,000 without changing the language of the existing paragraph (8) of section 4 (c) of the Settlement of War Claims Act of 1928, as amended, by adding immediately preceding that paragraph a new paragraph in substantially the language of subparagraph (8) (A) as contained in the bill. Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Your request for comment on the bill (H. R. 1567) to provide for payment to members of the Armed Forces of compensation at the rate of $1 per day for each day spent in hiding during World War II to evade capture by the enemy, has been assigned to this Department by the Secretary of Defense for the preparation of a report thereon expressing the views of the Department of Defense. The purpose of this measure is to amend the War Claims Act of 1948 by authorizing payment from the war claims fund to a member or former member of the Armed Forces of compensation at the rate of $1 per day for each day during World War II on which he concealed himself to prevent capture or recapture by the enemy, if such concealment exceeded 10 days. The War Claims Act of 1948 authorized claims by American civilians and military personnel against the war claims fund. The claims of civilians were based on the theory of "detention" of the person by the enemy and could be filed either where the person had been interned or went into hiding to evade capture. Claims of military personnel were authorized only in the event of capture and the subsequent violation of their rights under the Geneva Convention by their captors. The distinction between the two groups relative to "hiding from the enemy" seems to be a valid one, not only because of the difference in theory of their claims, but also because military personnel are required to assume greater risks that civilians and in most cases would be expected to fight till death or capture. The bill only applies to the period covered by World War II and does not include the Korean conflict. In that respect it is discriminatory. In addition, the lapse of time since World War II will create serious evidentiary problems in the administration of any law. Furthermore, it is believed that if enacted, it would set a precedent which in fairness should be applied to the Korean hostilities and any future wars in which the United States might be involved. Should such a precedent result in permanent legislation, a monetary incentive would be created for members of the Armed Forces to desert or absent themselves without authority to avoid the danger of combat and then claim that they were in hiding to prevent capture. In this event, the determination of which claims are bona fide will be most difficult. It is not believed desirable to enlarge the benefits for military personnel under the War Claims Act of 1948 in the manner provided in this bill, but that these benefits be restricted to those for prisoners of war which are based on violation of right provided by the Geneva Convention. In view of the foregoing, the Department of the Navy, on behalf of the Department of Defense, opposes the enactment of H. R. 1567. This report has been coordinated within the Department of Defense in accordance with the procedures prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. The Department of the Navy has been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there is no objection to the submission of this report on H. R. 1567. For the Secretary of the Navy. Sincerely yours, IRA H. NUNN, Judge Advocate General of the Navy. FOREIGN CLAIMS SETTLEMENT COMMISSION OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. PRIEST: This is in further response to your request for the views of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, on the bill, H. R. 1567, a bill to provide for payment to members of the Armed Forces of compensation at the rate of $1 per day for each day spent in hiding during World War II to evade capture by the enemy. This bill is identical with H. R. 8460, 83d Congress, and similar to H. R. 5395, 84th Congress. As indicated in its title, the bill provides for payments, comparable to those made to prisoners of war pursuant to section 6 (b) of the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended, to military personnel behind enemy lines who, though not actually held as prisoners of war, were in concealment for the purpose of preventing capture. The bill would amend section 6 of that act by the addition of a new subsection (f). Payments to eligible "evaders" as defined in the bill would be at the rate of $1 per day for each day such evader "concealed himself to prevent capture or recapture by the enemy." Such payments would be made out of the war claims fund. This fund is derived from the proceeds of liquidated German and Japanese assets seized by the United States in World War II. To be eligible for such payments a claimant would be required to establish (1) membership in the Armed Forces of the United States by regular appointment, enrollment, enlistment, or induction, (2) immediate danger of capture or recapture by the enemy in the period December 7, 1941, to August 16, 1945, (3) concealment for a period in excess of 10 days during such period to prevent capture or recapture, (4) that he was a citizen, national, or resident of the United States on the date of enactment, or, if dead on such date, his survivors would be required to prove that he died a citizen or resident of the United States, and (5) a discharge under honorable conditions, or presently on active duty with the Armed Forces of the United States or that death occurred while so serving. The bill further provides for payment of claims according to the "priorities. established by subsequent (d) (2)" of the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended. There are four subsections (d) (2) in the act, none of which relate to priorities. The Commission believes this ambiguity should be corrected. Payment of similar per diem compensation at the rate of $1 per day was made to prisoners of war in World War II pursuant to section 6 (b) of the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended, which reads in part as follows: "(b) The Commission is authorized to receive, adjudicate according to law, and provide for the payment of any claim filed by a prisoner of war for compensation for the violation by the enemy government by which he was held as a prisoner of war, or its agents, of its obligation to furnish him the quantity or quality of food to which he was entitled as a prisoner under the terms of the Geneva Convention of July 27, 1929. ***". The attention of the committee is invited to the fact that payment of compensation pursuant to the above-quoted provisions is contingent (1) upon failure by he detaining power to observe the standards prescribed under the terms of the Geneva Convention of July 27, 1929, relative to the furnishing of the proper quantity and quality of food, and (2) the fact of detention by an enemy government. Payment of such compensation was justified on those grounds. Although decisions of the Commission hold that the Governments of Germany and Japan, for the purpose of making such payments, violated the terms of the Geneva Convention in failing to furnish the adequate rations to prisoners of war, similar determinations were not made with respect to the enemy Governments of Italy, Rumania, and Bulgaria. A substantial number of so-called evaders were behind enemy lines in these countries. With respect to persons behind enemy lines, whose freedom of movement was not restricted, there could be no violation of the Geneva Convention by the enemy government involved. The agreements reached in that convention were made for the benefit of persons detained by hostile forces. Article 2 of the convention, for example, provides: "Prisoners of war are in the power of the hostile power, but not of the individuals or corps who have captured them.” Article 4 of the convention provides: "The power detaining prisoners of war is bound to provide their maintenance." Thus it is clear the convention was designed to apply only to persons in the power of, or detained by a hostile force, and that no obligation rested upon the enemy governments in World War II to provide for the maintenance of persons seeking to prevent capture. Accordingly, the payments provided for in the subject-bill would be in the nature of a bonus, made in addition to accumulated service pay or other allowances paid to such persons upon their return to allied military control. It is appreciated by the Commission that large numbers of military personnel who escaped from prisoner of war camps or otherwise attempted to evade capture behind enemy lines suffered deprivations and hardships as severe, in many cases, as those suffered by personnel actually confined as prisoners of war. In its present form, however, the bill would benefit a very substantial number of military personnel who were merely absent without leave, or who were given asylum by the Swiss Government or other neutral powers under authority of various international agreements. It is impossible to determine, with any degree of accuracy, the number of persons that would come within the purview of the bill if it is enacted into law. It seems logical to assume, however, that the number would probably exceed 100,000 and would include personnel of the Philippine Scouts and other Philippine military components ordered into the service of the Armed Forces of the United States who escaped or avoided capture in the Pacific theater and fought as members of recognized Filipino guerrilla forces. For these reasons it is believed the cost of the measure, although it cannot be ascertained on the basis of available information, would be very substantial, and far in excess of any assets in the war claims fund available for the payment of the claims that would be authorized by enactment of H. R. 1567. The only other source of funds for the payment of the claims provided for in the bill would necessarily be appropriations of general funds from the Treasury. Another important consideration in connection with such claims is the absence of clear-cut records by which the validity of the claims in individual cases can be ascertained. Payments to prisoners of war or their survivors and the civilian internees under claims filed pursuant to the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended, were made on the basis of official records of imprisonment or internment and were not dependent upon self-serving declarations as to the period of confinement which would be the case with respect to claims by persons in an escapee status. In view of the foregoing circumstances the Commission is opposed to enactment of H. R. 1567. Informal advice has been received from the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the presentation of this report to your committee. Sincerely yours, WHITNEY GILLILLAND, Chairman. EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Washington, D. C., September 19, 1955. Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This will acknowledge your request of February 5, 1955, requesting the views of the Bureau of the Budget with respect to H. R. 1567, a bill to provide for payment to members of the Armed Forces of compensation at the rate of $1 per day for each day spent in hiding during World War II to evade capture by the enemy. This bill would amend section 6 of the War Claims Act of 1948 to authorize the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission to provide for such compensation to any claimant who as a serviceman in World War II evaded capture or recapture by the enemy by hiding for a period of more than 10 days. Payment to eligible "evaders" would be made from the war claims fund, a trust fund derived from former enemy assets vested by the United States as a result of World War II. The Chairman of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission and the Secretary of the Navy, in the reports they are making to your committee on this bill, are recommending against its enactment for the reasons set out therein. The Bureau of the Budget concurs with the views contained in these reports and recommends that this measure not be enacted. Sincerely yours, ROWLAND HUGHES, Director. Hon. J. PERCY PRIEST, DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, D. C., September 13, 1955. Chairman, Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. PRIEST: Further reference is made to your letetr of February 5, 1955, transmitting for the comment of the Department of State three copies of H. R. 1590, a bill to amend the War Claims Act of 1948, as amended, which has been introduced in the 84th Congress. The proposed legislation would extend the coverage of section 5 (a), (b), and (f) of the War Claims Act of 1948 (Public Law 896, 80th Cong., approved July 3, 1948), as amended, in three respects. As now worded, these provisions relate to benefits for the detention, injury, disability, or death of civilian American citizens who were captured by authorities of the Japanese Government on or after December 7, 1941, at Midway, Guam, Wake Island, the Philippine Islands, or on any Territory or possession of the United States, or while in transit to or from any such place, or went into hiding at any such place in order to avoid capture or internment. The proposed measure would define the person eligible to receive the benefits provided under section 5 (a), (b), and (f) of the War Claims Act of 1948 as "civilian American," which term would include not only an American citizen, but also a national of the United States whose status as a national arose in an outlying possession of the United States, which was then and continues to be under the jurisdiction of the United States. The second extension of the coverage of section 5 (a), (b), and (f) of the act would be the removal of the limitation that benefits are payable only in cases where capture or hiding to avoid capture or internment occurred in specific places. The proposed measure would provide benefits irrespective of the place of capture or hiding to avoid capture or internment. The third extension of the coverage of section 5 (a), (b), and (f) of the act would be the elimination of the restriction that benefits are payable only in cases involving action by the Japanese. The proposed measure would provide benefits in a case of capture, internment, imprisonment, or hiding to avoid capture or internment by the government of any country with which the United States has been at war subsequent to December 7, 1941. The proposed measure would also amend section 7 of the War Claims Act of 1948 by substituting the term "civilian American” or “civilian Americans" for the terms "civilian American citizen" or "civilian American citizens" wherever the latter appear. Section 7 presently authorizes the payment of claims of religious organizations for the reimbursement of expenses incurred in furnishing aid to members of the Armed Forces of the United States and to civilian American citizens, and the payment of compensation to religious organizations, which furnished relief in the Philippines to members of the Armed Forces of the United States or to civilian American citizens, for the loss and damage sustained as a consequence of the war to their schools, colleges, universities, scientific observatories, hospitals, dispensaries, orphanages, and other property or facilities connected with their educational, medical, or welfare work. The categories of claims covered by H. R. 1590 are only two of a large number of claims arising out of World War II, with respect to which compensation has not been provided. As you are aware, section 8 of the War Claims Act of 1948 required the War Claims Commission to prepare a report for submission to the Congress with recommendations concerning war claims not authorized to be paid under existing legislation. The final and supplementary report of that Commission, which contains comprehensive recommendations for the disposition of claims arising from the war was submitted to the Congress on January 16, 1953 (H. Doc. 67, 83d Cong., 1st sess.). Although the War Claims Commission recommended the payment of claims of American civilian citizens interned by enemy other than Japanese or in areas other than specified in the War Claims Act of 1948, no action thereon has yet been taken by the Congress giving effect to that recommendation, except with respect to merchant seamen. With reference to the matter of eligibility of claimants in connection with the Commission's comprehensive recommendations, the report, on page 176, reads in part as follows: "To qualify as a claimant the individual must, at the time of loss, have been either a citizen of the United States, a national of the United States, or a permanent resident of the United States who had formally declared his intention of becoming a citizen of the United States, and, at the time of the filing of the claim, must have been either a national or a citizen of the United States." 81964-56- -21 |