roadways, pipelines, and other permanent-type installations-should not be regarded as "damages," but rather as definite improvements increasing the value of the lands. I concur in this view. All of the restoration claims relate to lands which have already been released by the U.S. forces to their owners. As already indicated, the Joint Committee found no meritorious claims to be supported by reason of the alterations caused to lands still under lease to the U.S. forces. 3. Water rights.-The U.S. forces took over two water points, or large springs, without compensation. They have a combined flow of 1,500,000 gallons of water per day. The owners of the water points formerly used the water for irrigation of crops, for domestic purposes, and for generating small amounts of electricity. The monetary damages suffered by the water owners amount to about $50,000. 4. Personal injuries and death.-Damages in the amount of about $830,000 for personal injuries and deaths were caused by personnel of the U.S. forces. These tortious damages resulted from accidentsinvolving motor vehicles, aircraft, and marine vessels-ammunition and gasoline explosions, and physical violence. From August 15, 1945, to April 28, 1952, 346 Ryukyuans were killed and 382 injured in such ways. Although no official compensation has been paid for these damages, donations amounting to about $7,000 were paid by American personnel to the victims of an explosion of ammunition; these gifts have been deducted from the meritorious claims approved by the Joint Committee for said deaths and injuries. 5. Growing crops.-Growing crops, valued at about $5,000 were destroyed on lands taken over by U.S. forces. 6. Fruit trees, mulberry trees, and teaplants. These damages amounted to about $430,000. The trees and plants were several years of age and bearing. The cost of each tree or plant was based upon its fair market value at the time of destruction. 7. Standing trees and bamboos.-Timber trees, pine, bamboo, etc., were damaged in the amount of about $600,000. 8. Firewood and charcoal material.-Hardwood trees, suitable for firewood and charcoal were damaged in the amount of about $18,000. This category involves almost 16 million board feet of wood. 9. Rental for buildings.-604 buildings were occupied by U.S. forces without compensation from August 15, 1945, to April 28, 1952. These rentals total about $74,000. 10. Buildings destroyed.—3,255 buildings, having at the time of destruction a reasonable value of about $610,000, were destroyed by U.S. forces in making lands available for U.S. housing and other necessary buildings, 11. Wells.-1,332 wells were destroyed, with a total value of about $110,000. 12. Tombs.-941 tombs were destroyed with a total value of about $80,000. 13. Reservoirs.-52 reservoirs were destroyed with a total value of about $65,000. 14. Stone walls.-1,994 stone walls were destroyed with a total value of about $390,000. 15. Water tanks.-219 water tanks were destroyed with a total value of about $14,000. 16. Collapsed and destroyed lands.-Extensive amounts of land were destroyed by tidal and water action arising from the destruction of seawalls and the diversion of natural water courses by U.S. forces. The lost land had a reasonable value of about $235,000. 17. Destruction of sugar mill.—A sugar mill was destroyed by U.S. forces causing a loss to the owners in the sum of about $8,000. 18. Loss of inshore surface fishing rights.—The U.S. forces excluded nine fishing cooperatives from taking fish in inshore waters. The cooperatives had been licensed to fish in these waters for many years. They utilized 243 fishing vessels, and 712 fishermen. The Committee found that the fishing cooperatives had suffered damage in the sum of about $560,000, for which they have received no compensation. 19. Removal and relocation of buildings.-The U.S. forces requisitioned certain lands from which the owners were compelled to remove 3,751 buildings at their own expense in the sum of about $220,000. 20. Severance damage. Many pipelines, powerlines, and other utilities required the taking of lands consisting of only a portion of the individual holdings. In many cases this caused measurable damage to the landowner because of the resultant severance of one portion of his property from the remainder. Damages caused by this piecemeal taking of land amount to about $14,000. 21. Property damages by tortious acts.-Because of negligence on the part of U.S. forces for their personnel, damages in the amount of about $80,000 were caused to buildings and other property in connection with 257 incidents, such as aircraft accidents and ammunition explosions the most notable of which was the explosion of an ammunition-laden LCT at a wharf on Ie Shima Island during August 1948. This completes my comments on the various categories of meritorious claims. I trust that my remarks will give you a general idea of how the Joint Committee went about its work, and of what findings it reached. I deeply regret that Judge King, who chaired the Joint Committee, is not here personally to give you more details of the Committee's work and to answer such questions as you may have about this portion of our presentation. He has been suffering from a serious heart conditon for some time and it has recently worsened to the point where the doctors have determined that it would be medically imprudent for him to come back to Washington, as had been planned, to participate in these hearings. As a matter of fact, it is anticipated he will be physically retired. It is a serious physical condition. Parenthetically I would like to say that this is a very emotional problem with him because he has worked on this matter, he has gone out personally and checked on it, he has devoted the major part of his last 8 years, really, to making this a worthy proposition for the Congress and it is really most regrettable that he couldn't be here. I must say I feel a bit emotional about it myself, if you will excuse me. Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, General Watson. General WATSON. Judge King's background and experience amply justified his selection by the then High Commissioner to chair the Joint Committee. Prior to becoming a civilian official of the U.S. Civil Administration of the Ryukyu Islands some 8 years ago, he had had 40 years of distinguished service with the Regular Army from which he retired in the rank of colonel in 1956. His military experience covers the Mexican border incident in 1916, World War I, World War II, and the Korean war. He graduated from Stanford University Law School with the degree of juris doctor, and has been an active member of the California bar since 1925. Most of his military career was spent as an attorney in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, and for his last 22 years in the service most of his professional time was devoted to reviewing claims submitted by foreigners against the United States. During 1943, when stationed in Hawaii, he personally reviewed claims involving loss of and damage to crops and trespass upon lands. From 1944 to 1945, he was in New Guinea and the Philippines reviewing claims relating to damage to and loss of trees, crops, and sonal property. From 1945 to 1951, as President of Foreign Claims Commission No. 173, he reviewed such claims in Korea; and from 1951 to 1956 he was similarly engaged in Japan. per During his more than 8 years of civilian service with USCAR, his regular assignment was President of the U.S. Land Tribunal, which adjudicates matters relating to the valuation of all lands leased by the U.S. forces in the Ryukyus. At the same time he also served as Associate Justice of USCAR's appellate court. In assuming the chairmanship of the Joint Committee, Judge King brought to this task not only demonstrated legal competence and extensive experience in the claims field, but also knowledge of the Japanese language and wide-ranging familiarity with the laws and customs of various peoples of the Far East. I have taken the time to give you this thumbnail sketch of Judge King in his unfortunate absence because I believe that you should know the kind of man who chaired this important Committee and guided it in reaching conclusions, findings, and recommendations based on solid factual analysis and endorsed by the High Commissioner and the executive branch. In conclusion, I believe that favorable consideration of this resolution by your committee and by the Congress would discharge an equitable obligation of the United States in the Ryukyu Islands and throughout the free world. Gentlemen, this concludes my statement. (The tabulation attached is as follows:) Mr. MURPHY. Thank you, General Watson. I will now turn the meeting over to Congressman Zablocki, chairman of the subcommittee. Mr. ZABLOCKI. Thank you for chairing the meeting in my absence. We will very likely be called to the floor of the House shortly. Should we be interrupted by a quorum call, it may be that the members could come back after answering to their name. We could then go into executive session for a few minutes and quite possibly could complete the hearings on this resolution this morning. Should there be others that want to present statements, and who could not be here, the subcommittee will receive them, and include the statements in the record. I suggest we continue with Ambassador Berger until the bells go. Mr. Ambassador. STATEMENT OF SAMUEL D. BERGER, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FAR EASTERN AFFAIRS Mr. BERGER. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have been asked to appear before you today to provide the views of the Department of State on House Joint Resolution 251 authorizing an ex gratia contribution to certain Ryukyuan inhabitants for death and injury of persons, and for use of and damage to private property, arising from acts and omissions of the U.S. Armed Forces before the entry into force of the Peace Treaty With Japan. As you know, the President has delegated to the Secretary of Defense the responsibility for the administration of the Ryukyu Islands as long as the United States finds it necessary to govern them. To the extent that the pretreaty claims question is an internal Ryukyuan matter, the Department of State supports the views of the Department of Defense expressed earlier by Secretary Resor and the other representatives of that Department. There are, however, two foreign policy questions raised by the proposed legislation on which the Department of State wishes to comment. First, there is the relationship of the proposed legislation to the Treaty of Peace with Japan (TIAS 2490). Article 19 (a) of that treaty reads as follows: Japan waives all claims of Japan and its nationals against the Allied Powers and their nationals arising out of the war or out of actions taken because of the existence of a state of war, and waives all claims arising from the presence, operations or actions of forces or authorities of any of the Allied Powers in Japanese territory prior to the coming into force of the present treaty. It is our view that residents of the Ryukyu Islands are nationals of Japan and that the Ryukyu Islands were Japanese territory in the period "prior to the coming into force of the present treaty" as specified in this paragraph. We therefore believe that the United States has no legal obligation to pay the claims of Ryukyuans arising from the presence, operations, or actions of U.S. forces in the Ryukyus in the pretreaty period. The Japanese Government similarly denies any legal liability on its part for pretreaty damages in the Ryukyus, since it had no administrative authority in this area during the pretreaty period and continues, under article 3 of the treaty, to have no administrative authority there. It further denies that the waiver provision of article 19 (a), which established U.S. nonliability for such claims, generated any corresponding liability for them on the part of Japan. Since both the United States, in its capacity as the former occupying authority, and Japan, in its capacity as nominal sovereign, deny legal liability for the claims of Ryukyuans for damages suffered in the pretreaty period, individual Ryukyuans would appear to have no recourse but to appeal through the government of the Ryukyu Islands, for redress to the United States as the present administering authority. The Department of Defense has already commented on the validity of these claims and their relationship to other U.S. programs in the Ryukyus. Second, I call the committee's attention to the fact that the Japanese Government, while denying legal liability, appropriated 1 billion yen ($2.8 million) in 1957 as an ex gratia payment to Ryukyuans having claims for damages suffered in the pretreaty period. This payment was made as an "advance" against future payment in full by the United States, and a Japanese Cabinet decision was made to the effect that the 1 billion yen ex gratia payment would be considered reimbursable to Japan in the event of a later U.S. settlement covering losses sustained by Ryukyuans during the pretreaty period. Both the United States and Japan are now contributing to economic development and social welfare in the Ryukyus, and we expect that the settlement by the United States of these pretreaty claims will contribute substantially to our common objectives. Utilization of a part of such settlement to reimburse the Japanese Government for its earlier ex gratia payment would reduce by that much the effectiveness of the U.S. payment in stimulating economic growth in the islands. In connection with the preparation of the administration's proposal on the settlement of these claims, the Department of State has brought these considerations to the attention of the Japanese Government, requesting that it now waive its claim to reimbursement for its 1957 payment. Although the Japanese Government is in sympathy and agreement with the objectives underlying the U.S. request that it waive these claims, it informs us that it can reverse its earlier Cabinet decision only through certain legislative action which would adversely affect its legal position with regard to outstanding claims in areas other than the Ryukyus. Because the Government of Japan considers it should be reimbursed if full payment is made by us, a provision has been inserted to provide that U.S. payment not cover payment already made by Japan. We anticipate no reaction from the Government of Japan as a result of its inclusion which would adversely affect the close, amicable relations which exist between our countries. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, this concludes my statement. Are there any questions of any of the witnesses who have appeared before the subcommittee? Mr. WHALLEY. General Watson, how much land does the U.S. base use in Okinawa? General WATSON. Mr. Santos is in the Okinawa Engineer District of the U.S. Army, and is well qualified to answer your question in detail. |