Mr. HILL. I have not. Mr. MARTIN. Are you familiar with the President's message on the signing of Public 520? Mr. HILL. Only in a general way. Mr. MARTIN. This quotation I gave you is a circular letter and an interpretation of what would be an adequate margin, and it does not seem to draw any line of demarkation between different items at all. It is a rough rule that they apparently are following. I wonder whether you have had occasion to examine that policy and what its implications may be? Mr. HILL. I have not. Mr. MARTIN. Now, when Public 520 came over from the Senate side. to the House Committee on Military Affairs it contained a section 10 providing for free trade for the acquisition of stock piles. Do you have any views regarding the advisability of attaching such a provision as that to our Stock Pile Act? Mr. HILL. I have given it no thought. Mr. MARTIN. I have given it a lot of thought, and I have been looking for somebody in the Government agencies who has likewise given it much thought. Somebody has given it a lot of thought because when we struck that section out it bobbed up again with the approval of the committee on conference. That didn't just happen to jump in there. Somebody was steering it in there. I want you to be on notice that things like that sometimes come up here from down at the other end of the Avenue. It is rather farreaching in its effect on what we are trying to do in the legislation here under consideration. It went out when it was sent back to conference, so it is not in Public 520 as you know. LID OFF ON STOCKPILE ACQUISITIONS FROM PARTICIPATING NATIONS UNDER MARSHALL PLAN I have been trying to find out who cut down the last budget request, or the last request for strategic and critical materials authorization in the current appropriation bill. I have here as background to that, and to show you why I am interested, a photostatic copy of the Washington Daily News, Saturday, January 3, quoting W. John Kenney, Navy Under Secretary. It says: Stock piling finally is out of the model T era and ready to pick up speed. Mr. Kenney said the Munitions Board, charged with responsibility for stock piling, would ask Congress for $660,000,000 in the next 18 months, $225,000,000 to be spent between now and June 30, and $435,000,000 for the fiscal year 1949. I was watching for that particular item when it came up from the Bureau of the Budget, and I found it cut down to $360,000,000. When I found that was cut down I asked the Director of the Budget before the Committee on Ways and Means one day whether he had a military man on his staff and he said he did not. Then I started to hunt around to find out who had cut that down and why and to this day I have not found out. Mr. HILL. All I can say to you is that we did not cut it down. So it was not cut down with your action in the matter at all. Mr. MARTIN. There is another statement here in parentheses in this same photostatic piece that arouses my interest, and I have no other authority but the Washington Daily News of January 3. It is in parentheses in the same article: The State Department's concept of stock piling under the Marshall plan is to require expansion of world production by the 16 participating countries and buy that surplus on an open market with stock-pile appropriations.18 Do you have any comment on that? Mr. HILL. Well, my only comment would be that if we cannot get it in the processes of the administration of the Economic Cooperative Administration, then I think we had better buy it, but I would be hopeful we would get it through the operation of the so-called Marshall plan. Mr. MARTIN. Even though they go so far as the policy stated therein? Mr. HILL. I have a great deal of respect for Mr. Lucas as a reporter. I do not think that is a formal expression of State Department policy. Mr. MARTIN. If you looked to the Marshall plan for the acquisition I suppose you would suggest they stay within the bounds of the amount you discussed with me earlier in our discussion today? That is, we would not in America anticipate your bringing in through the Marshall plan such large quantities as to go far beyond this $375,000,000 limitation? Mr. HILL. I would bring in everything I could. Mr. MARTIN. You would not regard the $375,000,000 limitation as to anything that is done under the Marshall plan? Mr. HILL. Not at all. Mr. MARTIN. The lid is off on the Marshall plan? Mr. HILL. Why, certainly. Mr. MARTIN. Then national defense takes second place to that, is that correct? Mr. HILL. I do not quite follow you. Mr. MARTIN. Maybe I am jumping at the conclusion then. I understood you to say that you thought $375,000,000 was about all they could use properly. Was that based on domestic conditions? Mr. HILL. It was based on their request. Mr. MARTIN. On their request? Mr. HILL. Yes. Mr. MARTIN. The Munitions Board request? Mr. HILL. I have just read their statement of Mr. John Kenney for whom I have great respect which would indicate that the total he was requesting was approximately what they are now requesting. Mr. MARTIN. $660,000,000 was cut to $360,000,000. 18 SUBCOMMITTEE NOTE.-Those parts of the following documents (relating to the Marshall plan) which pertain to minerals and metals are presented in the appendix: Report of April 30, 1948 on "European Trade Patterns" by the House Select Committee on Foreign Aid, exhibit 61, pp. 1353 to 1409; "Final Report on Foreign Aid," May 1, 1948, by the House Select Committee on Foreign Aid, exhibit 62, pp. 1409 to 1441 House Report No. 1585 to accompany S. 2202 on the Foreign Assistance Act of 1948, exhibit 63, pp. 1441 to 1443; the Foreign Assistance Act of 1948, exhibit 64, pp. 1443 to 1448; and selected parts of hearings on "Military Functions, National Military Establishment Appropriation Bill," March 17 and April 26, 1948, exhibit 72, pp. 1526, 1529, 1538 and 1539. Also of interest is exhibit 65, p. 1448, "U. S. Stockpiling Program Rolling Along Under Aid Program," by Jim G. Lucas, Scripps-Howard staff writer, August 15, 1948. 7 When I was over before the Appropriations Committee recentlyand I understand it has been up since then-I learned that. This thing is changing rapidly. I do not know what has happened since then to cause them to think they could spend this larger amount any differently in the manner of the acquisition of the stock pile except that you think it is a little more urgent now than then, and if we put enough emphasis on stock piling we may change that figure still further, may we not? Mr. HILL. Possibly so. Mr. MARTIN. You are already committed to that, as I understand your answer, in the matter of the Marshall plan? Mr. HILL. I would like to make clear to you, we are not committed, as far as our staff is concerned, on any limitation of the amount they might spend in any way for stock-piling purposes. Mr. MARTIN. I am trying to coordinate and rationalize our approach to a sufficiency of our stock-piling programs. Mr. HILL. I perhaps might make myself clear, if I would say this, that if Congress would appropriate $10,000,000,000 for the stock pile in the fiscal year of 1949 I do not think it could be accomplished. Mr. MARTIN. Do you think it could be accomplished world-wide if they put the whole Marshall plan in? Mr. HILL. I do not think it could be accomplished world-wide with any amount of money. ABILITY TO OBTAIN MINERALS AND METALS IN QUANTITY FOR STOCK PILE FROM MARSHALL PLAN NATIONS QUESTIONED BY CONGRESSMAN Mr. MARTIN. Two-thirds of the materials come from the USSR, Great Britain, and America. Just how far are you going with the Marshall plan in getting any from the USSR? Therefore you are talking about our dealings with Britain, and if I gather some of the recent news reports, they are possibly in competition with us for some of the strategic and critical materials produced in the western continent right this minute? Mr. HILL. I am not familiar with what you have reference to. Mr. MARTIN. I do not have that news report right here in front of me. I just remember reading about that in the last few days, and I wonder where this mysterious supply is that the Marshall plan is going to effect or bring to our rescue. NSRB TOLD ADEQUATE NATIONAL DEFENSE PROGRAM REQUIRES DEVELOPMENT AND ACTIVE MINING OF DOMESTIC RESOURCES IN ADDITION TO STOCK PILING It is my conviction that our own economy, domestic economy, forms a very real part of our program and that we should devote the major part of our attention to building up our own domestice sources of strategic and critical minerals and metals. That is my conviction. That is why I am up here listening in to this-if you call that what I am doing. I do not consider Public 520 as the whole picture in adequate national defense. I feel seriously that a healthy domestic industry is a very real part of our self-sufficiency and adequacy for a war emergency and that is why I am so interested in the Russell bill and the legislation now before this committee of which I am not a member. I feel that it supplements or goes far beyond the concept of Public 520. NO POLICY REGARDING WELFARE OF DOMESTIC MINING INDUSTRY FORMULATED BY NSRB; CHAIRMAN ANTICIPATES PRESENTATION OF RECOMMENDATION TO BOARD I wanted to know primarily what your position is on the Security Board regarding the welfare of the domestic industry. Have you a policy formulated as yet as to the purposes of the Russell bill and these other bills we have before this committee at the present time? Mr. HILL. Was your question, Had we formed a policy on it? M. MARTIN. Yes. Mr. HILL. We have not. Mr. MARTIN. You have no position on it? Mr. HILL. Not yet. Mr. MARTIN. Do you plan to formulate a position? Mr. HILL. We do plan to formulate a position in connection with the stockpiling administration—— Mr. MARTIN. How about the health of the mining industry that is involved in the Russell bill? Mr. HILL. And we expect to have information given to us that will permit us to give consideration to such legislation that you are now considering. Mr. MARTIN. Do you consider the matter now before the Committee on Public Lands in the Russell bill and other kindred measures of sufficient importance and of sufficient emergency condition to bring from your organization a statement of policy in the very near future? Mr. HILL. Well, I must again remind you, Mr. Congressman, that we do not bring before you our statement. We make our recommendations to the President. Mr. MARTIN. And we cannot look to you for a statement of policy unless the President asks you to express an opinion to him on the matter? Mr. HILL. I did not make that statement. I said that our recommendations are made to the President. Mr. MARTIN. Well, then, let me ask it this way: Do you anticipate expressing a recommendation of policy to the President with regard to any legislation before the Congress adjourns, bearing on the health of the mining industry? Mr. HILL. I do anticipate presenting something to our Board on that, yes. Mr. MARTIN. Do you anticipate expressing that policy soon enough so that the wheels of the legislative machine can expect to culminate their work with an act of Congress presented to the President for his signature or veto? Mr. HILL. I cannot answer that question as to the timing. Mr MARTIN. Time is of the essence here, if I gather the import of some of the statements of the President and other members of his Cabinet. I cannot on the one hand witness what is developing heading up to the consideration of the draft bill, currently, and be satisfied to sleep through this same hectic period in the matter of our self sufficiency on the basic materials. That is why I am asking these questions. Mr. HILL. I fully appreciate your sincerity and I realize the problem with which you are wrestling. You ask me if I can get an expression from our Board to the President in such a way as would enable you to have it prior to your adjournment of Congress. I cannot answer that. Mr. MARTIN. Not prior to adjournment: Far enough ahead of adjournment so we can anticipate getting it into law before adjournment. OBTAINING INFORMATION ON STOCKPILING POLICIES A MERRY-GO-ROUND OF REFERRALS FROM MUNITIONS BOARD TO NATIONAL SECURITY RESOURCES BOARD TO CABINET MEMBERS AND THE PRESIDENT Mr. HILL. I would simply like to point out to you, that you have the opportunity to call every one of the members of this Board before you to ask them the specific questions you are asking me. They are all members of the Cabinet. They are all well informed Government officials. Whether or not I can get it through a meeting of our Board and with sufficient staff preparation in advance, I cannot say. Mr. MARTIN. Would you suggest that we call each member of your Board up here individually? Mr. HILL. I would not suggest it but I merely state it to show that the information is available to you by that method. Mr. MARTIN. If that is your version of the functioning of your Board you have a different concept of the Security Act than I have. Mr. HILL. Not at all, but you are talking about some very short timing. We cannot function in our Board without information. Mr. MARTIN. And we cannot function very efficiently up here with the method you have suggested. I look at this National Security Act as having a purpose, and if the conditions are as serious as they present them to us regarding the draft. I turn it right back to you and ask you if it is not ringing in your ears that there is an emergency at stake that calls for something besides sleeping through until Congress adjourns on the matter of determining policy with respect to strategic and critical materials. Mr. HILL. Well, if I might in a polite way say to you that this is a rather late date for me to get the information you want on this particular legislation prepared and considered by our Board and submitted to the President prior to such date as you need to have it for consideration. Mr. MARTIN. Everything I have ever seen done in this field has been at a late date, starting in the first year I was in Congress in 1939. I have tried to find the answers from the Munitions Board. They turn me to you. Now you turn me to the President and to the individual members of the Cabinet. I vision your functioning as a Board as a means to approach this problem with some centralization of responsibility, and if we take the present approach to the problem of acquiring strategic and critical materials as a criterion or as a reflection of the present situation of our Nation, they are going to have a hard time convincing me there is |