The CHAIRMAN. When we finish the hearing. I can't tell how long it is going to take. We will do the best we can.

Mr. Towe. The paper says you were going to have it March 13.

The CHAIRMAN. I am hoping to get it on the floor next week some time. I don't know when. You can't, because there is a heap of work to do on these things. We are going to give everybody a chance to be heard.

Mr. Towe. Mr. Chairman, here is Mrs. Stewart.

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes. We have been waiting for you. We called your name about four different times here.

Tell the committee to come back in here. Mrs. Stewart is in here. Mr. HESS. They are coming back, Mrs. Stewart.

Mrs. STEWART. Thank you very much.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, you have a copy of your statement, Mrs. Stewart?

Mrs. STEWART. I have only one copy for the gentleman here.
The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Give your name to the reporter.

Mre. STEWART. I am Mrs. Alexander Stewart of 625 Fullerton Parkway, Chicago, and national legislative secretary of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, before you commence, will you please advise the committee how large an organization the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom is; what is your membership?

Mrs. STEWART. That is taken care of in our Philadelphia office. I think it is around 10,000 in this country and something like 50,000 in the various sections for we have members and sections in 35 countries.

The CHAIRMAN. I wish also you would file for the record a financial statement of how you are supported and how you disburse your receipts so the record will show that.

Now, go ahead, Mrs. Stewart, and read your statement.

Mrs. STEWART. Thank you, sir.

I explained to Mr. Blandford that I could not be here Friday afternoon, because I was making a recording, with Judge Reva Beck Bosone, Congresswoman from Utah, to be broadcast Saturday on a Nation-wide hook-up, against conscription of women. The CHAIRMAN. All right, go ahead.

STATEMENT OF MRS. ALEXANDER STEWART, WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM

Mrs. STEWART. The Women's International League for Peace and Freedom throughout 35 years has been working to help establish those political, economic and psychological conditions both at home and We believe that the abroad which can assure peace and freedom. only answer to the threat of totalitarianism is the development of a democratic social order in which the dynamic forces of scientific discovery and economic change can be utilized to enrich the life of all members of the human family.

We believe that only democratic principles in action can remove dangerous tensions between nations and within nations and effectively counter totalitarianisms and dictatorships.

We view with considerable alarm the present armaments race and the gigantic sums being appropriated which we feel places the emphasis on preparation for war rather than preparation for peace. It is certainly unfortunate and unfair for the military to use the present crisis to achieve its long sought goal of putting teen-age boys under its control at a time when the resources of manpower, money, and materials would be better used on a long-term basis to help meet the world's basic problems of hunger, poverty, disease and ignorance.

Therefore we of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom would oppose H. R. 2811 for the following reasons among many others:

1. We have always opposed the principle of conscription. We have worked vigorously to prevent war and we consider conscription one of the steps toward war. Peacetime conscription has been a basic principle of totalitarian states but not of our American democracy. In a democracy the power of conscription lies in the willingness of people to be conscripted. In several trips to Europe since the war, I have had many freedom-loving people say to me, "Do not let universal military training or conscription in any form come to America. If you indoctrinate your youth with the philosophy that 'might makes right' and that wars are inevitable, and these youth become the teachers, ministers, doctors, lawyers, farmers, business and labor leaders, you will find that the same thing will happen to you that has happened to us. You will either have lost the courage to speak out against the system or you will be so regimented you will not be permitted to do so."

One of the things that has contributed to America's greatness has been the use of the democratic process and our faith in democratic and free institutions. We have held steadily to the conviction that the democratic way is not the way of centralized control of people. We have resisted attempts to put our social, economic and political life. under such types of control that would develop a garrison state.

Another question that should be raised is whether the word "person" which is used throughout the Senate bill and quite often in H. R. 2811 could be interpreted to include or leave the way open for conscription of women?

Recent articles in national magazines by William Bradford Huie, Maj. George Fielding Elliott and Mrs. Mildred McAfee Horton, as well as radio broadcasts, one as recently as yesterday, have been presenting the case for conscription of women. To consider extending the area of conscription and regimentation to another and large group of citizens is serious and dangerous and the public should be made aware of these plans.

2. This is a permanent program. This legislation according to the testimony of Assistant Secretary of Defense Mrs. Anna M. Rosenberg, January 10, 1951, "will not be an emergency bill, but a proposal for permanent legislation designed to provide the greatest long-term security with the lowest cost in men and money."

We feel there should be a definite termination date on the bill.

If it becomes a permanent program for the United States, then it involves certain totalitarian aspects in peacetime as well as wartime. Heretofore, this type of legislation has been enacted on a temporary basis with some hope that at a certain time in the future it would end.

The universal military service and training legislation provides for peacetime military training by giving the President power to eliminate the service requirement during a time of peace. At the President's discretion the 4-6 months' basic training could be maintained even though no crisis existed. By dropping the 21-23 months of service the new bill would, in effect, give the country universal military training.

I believe that several witnesses have already called attention to the serious interference with the educational, career, or homemaking plans of young men that a 21-months to 2-year or 27-months draft would cause. It would also have serious effects upon our economy for as the years pass we would find our economy more and more geared to a war economy rather than a peace economy. There would be a depletion of civilian needs as more and more the military needs are stepped up. Many times already in Europe I found resentment against the emphasis put upon rearmament when they needed more economic reconstruction.

I believe that is growing today.

The people still living amidst ruined cities said to me, "We cannot eat your guns and sleep in your obsolete planes. What we need is adequate food and clothes on our backs, houses and agricultural implements and things of that kind to reconstruct our economy and raise our standard of living."

3. We especially oppose lowering the draft age to 18 years while reiterating our opposition to conscription at any age. The 18-yearold is not usually emotionally stable enough to withstand the effect of the kind of life he finds when put in occupation armies in Europe or the Far East or in the kind of international army being discussed in the rearmament of Western Europe as well as the generally demoralizing effect of the army camps at home. This is the wrong time to put young men under the type of training the military services give which goes counter to training for democracy and freedom.

Understanding and intelligent parents and teachers and an adequate school system have had as their objective the development of inner discipline, initiative, and personal responsibility in youth.

Turning them over to the military at this particular period tends to break down these habits for the nature of military training undoes much of the good accomplished at home and in the school because it has to be one of strict compliance to orders without the right to question, express individual opinions, and develop initiative.

These latter qualities have long been considered a part of our democratic principles and freedoms which have made America great.

The observation of many regarding army troops stationed abroad in peacetime over long periods is that there is too much idleness and lack of a constructive program for which these young men are not prepared. Their normal development would be better benefited by continuance of educational plans, occupation on farm or in factory and the influence of family and community life and wholesome social relationships.

Again an illustration from Europe. In a German city I was visiting one of the bunkers which had been made into a rehabilitation center for young girls 14 to 18 who had come there from hospitals after their experiences with our American boys. The social worker

in charge was telling me of the problems these girls faced in a period when most of the basic necessities were denied them. She said, "Why does the American Government send such young boys over here into this chaos? They are ruining our girls and our girls are ruining them."

The life in army camps both at home and abroad is usually an abnormal pattern for any young person who would be better off in the more normal relationships of home, church, synagogue, and community life.

Though other witnesses have done so, I want to emphasize also that the effect on high-school boys waiting to be drafted would be especially upsetting. It is important to have young men making plans for their future with some assurance of carrying them out. The disruption that a draft causes is likely to prevent many from ever completing their vocational preference.

I hope Dr. Ralph E. MacDonald of the NEA has testified, or that he will. He indicated when testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee that approximately a third of the boys who started college training would not come back in spite of GI bills that would afford them help in college education. It seems to me for the future of our country that it is important to make sure that we have young people trained with adequate background to meet the future long-term needs of our country.

4. Peace through "situations of strength": We would question the basic assumption of our present foreign policy which has been expressed many times, that is that we can create a peaceful world by developing "situations of strength," "peace by superior might."

We would question whether each side in the power struggle developing stockpiles of strategic materials, atomic bombs, and other weapons of mass destruction and each conscripting more manpower will bring about an atmosphere in which nations with differing political and economic views can sit down and negotiate their differences. Instead we would agree with Senator Brien McMahon who stated in the Senate a year ago, February 2, 1950: "Arrayed against the choice of such a policy is 5,000 years recorded history which teaches again and again and again that armament races lead to war-under today's conditions, hydrogen war."

This arms race can only be maintained by appealing to men's fears and curtailing civil liberties until the so-called free world becomes a garrison state based on conscription and regimentation.

We would propose instead of an arms race, that serious time and effort be given by our Congress and the State Department to plans for world disarmament and world reconstruction.

We support Senator McMahon's peace proposals to extend point 4, develop peaceful uses of atomic energy and extend economic aid to all countries through the UN. We are grateful to President Truman for presenting to the United Nations General Assembly on October 24, 1950, the strongest plea yet made by any high United States official since the end of World War II.

The President said in part: "Disarmament is the course which the United States would prefer to take. It is the course which most nations would like to adopt. It is the course which the United Nations from its earliest beginnings has been seeking to follow."

The Women's International League for Peace and Freedom would agree with those who believe that young people should be trained for service to the community and Nation. We feel that many would respond voluntarily if they had any assurance that the work to be done was of a constructive nature. We would encourage not only 1 or 2 years' service but all of their life.

The Government might make grants for special kinds of projects such as work in mental hospitals, increased educational opportunities in backward areas, playgrounds for children, homes for the aged, slum clearance, flood control, reforestation and types of work necessary for the well-being of the community that are not being done adequately at present.

Between the nations there should be more exchange of students, of workers in factory and farm and the development of teams of trained persons to help solve problems of tension. Surely the idealism and courage of youth could be channeled along these lines to help bring people together rather than separate them.

I was much impressed by the statement in Friday's Washington Post of the visit of the teen-age scientists to see President Truman. I should like to use this as an illustration of what I mean.

The President saw 40 teen-age scientists and he told them to use their talents to fashion weapons for world welfare, not weapons for destruction.

The Presidential advice was given to the 30 boys and 10 girls from 14 States competing here for the $11,000 in Westinghouse science scholarships. I quote the two paragraphs from the President's state

ment.

The CHAIRMAN. Some of them testified up here.

Mrs. STEWART. Pardon me?

The CHAIRMAN. Two of them testified before the committee.

Mrs. STEWART. Did they? Wonderful.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mrs. STEWART. Did they quote what the President said to them?

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we read that.

Mrs. STEWART. I would like to insert that in the record.

The CHAIRMAN. All right.

Mrs. STEWART (reading):

You young ladies and gentlemen can make a great contribution to all those things that are associated with scientific research

the President was quoted as saying.

But the weapons we want are not those for destruction, but weapons for the welfare of the world, and the improvement of all mankind so that we won't have to spend those tremendous sums for destruction, but use those tremendous sums for the improvement and welfare of all the races in the world.

To sum up, we would suggest, instead of the demand made to prepare young people for war, that alternatives be offered to include: (1) Resist the idea that a third world war is inevitable and that our youth should be conscripted for it;

(2) Strengthen the peace-making machinery of the United Nations and channel for of the economic reconstruction through its agencies;

(3) Work for security through world-wide disarmament and the use of the money, manpower, and resources thus saved to meet the basic problems of conquering hunger, poverty, disease, and ignorance.

80531-51-41