Senator SALTONSTALL. I would also say respectfully I know the Appropriations Committee has gone into that subject. Our colleague, Senator O'Mahoney, had a discussion on the record, and it might be helpful to get the record of the Appropriations Committee session of last Friday.

Senator HUNT. I attended it.

Senator JOHNSON. This report just covers sales of surplus property and the plants, et cetera.

Senator BYRD. I feel it is a very valuable report, and every member of the committee should consider it, so it is filed for the consideration of the committee.

The next matter

Senator BRIDGES. Mr. Chairman, this matter of Senator Johnson's was sort of left up in the air. He has the counsel of the subcommittee here in case the committee wanted to query him. If anybody does, Mr. Chairman, I think it should be done now, and if nobody cares to make inquiry, I move the full committee accept the report and approve it. Senator BYRD. It is customary to approve it or file it?

Senator JOHNSON. This is our last meeting.

Senator BYRD. I have no objection to approving it, except the other members of the committee have not read it. I am confident it is a very valuable report.

Senator BRIDGES. I move we accept it.

Senator JOHNSON. I do not think it would take long if somebody wanted to go over the summary of conclusions and recommendations. All of them have gone over them, I believe, except the two members that are not members of the subcommittee. We have seven members on that subcommittee.

Senator BRIDGES. Could we approve it subject to their confirmation after they read it?

Senator JOHNSON. That would be fine.

Senator BYRD. The report of the subcommittee-the motion is to approve the report of the subcommittee, if within a few days the other members of the committee who are not members of the subcommittee, do not interpose objection.

Senator SALTONSTALL. I would like to ask the chairman of the subcommittee this question: If we ask the full committee to approve this first report of the subcommittee and other reports are made to the full committee while the Congress is not in session, what will be their effect if there are reports that the administration or the Department of Defense does not like, if we ask the committee to approve them before they have, you might say, weight, bearing, standing, or respectability?

If we start with the first one and merely file it and then when another report comes along, say November 1, that may be not such a pleasant report to some departments, they will say that has no weight until the committee has approved it and that they are going to argue before the committee that it should not be approved.

Senator JOHNSON. If they desire to do that, they have that privilege. We have gone over this with each department, and we plan to do that again. But if they want to try their case before the full committee or before the United States Senate or before the country, we can do nothing to deprive them of that.

73988-50-2

6

The only point here is the subcommittee acted unanimously. We have gone over this thing with all the departments. I would not want to just leave it hanging in the air.

Senator SALTONSTALL. I was wondering if the word "filed" was not better than "approved," not looking at this report, but looking at the future precedent.

Senator JOHNSON. I have such confidence in the members of this subcommittee, which constitutes a majority of the members of the full committee, and the other members of the full committee that I am not concerned about anybody's trying their case before them and establishing-I do not believe this subcommittee of seven members will adopt anything they cannot stand upon, and once it does, if somebody wants to try it before the full Senate or before the full committee, I would be very happy for them to do so.

Senator SALTONSTALL. In other words, you would prefer to have the word "approved" used rather than the word "filed."

Senator CHAPMAN. Your point is: What will they say about another that cannot be approved by the full committee?

Senator SALTONSTALL. Congress might not be in session. I was looking to the future and the future usefulness of the committee.

Senator JOHNSON. Very frankly, I do not think the subcommittee would want to take the position that we want any weight given to our reports if the full committee does not agree with us. tee is nothing but an agent of the full committee. The subcommit

Senator SALTONSTALL. Supposing you could not get the full committee together. I am trying to be helpful.

Senator JOHNSON. I understand that.

Senator SALTONSTALL. Maybe I have a point that is a minor one, but I am trying to protect the committee.

Senator BYRD. Your point is if they make a report while Congress is not in session, that will not have approval naturally of the full committee.

Senator SALTONSTALL. That is correct.

Senator BYRD. The full committee can approve it later.

Senator SALTONSTALL. I want that report to have weight prior to the time it might be approved and might have weight and a position. That is my only point.

Senator JOHNSON. I have no doubt that when this committee acts, as it did on this report yesterday, but what it will have the necessary weight with the departments.

Senator BYRD. The only suggestion I make is that I think the other members of the committee should have an opportunity to read it. Not that I feel there is anything in the report that they will have objection to, but if you make it a perfunctory matter whereby the full committee endorses it without reading it-well, the motion is with the understanding that any member of the committee not a member of the subcommittee may interpose objection if he sees fit. Senator JOHNSON. That is satisfactory.

Senator BYRD. All those in favor signify by saying "aye." (There was a chorus of ayes.)

Senator BYRD. Opposed, "no."

(No response.)

S. 4128

Senator BYRD. The next matter up is Senate bill 4128, a bill to provide that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while holding office as such, shall have the rank and title of General of the Army, Fleet Admiral of the United States Navy, or General of the Air Force.

(S. 4128 is as follows:)

[S. 4128, 81st Cong., 2d sess.]

A BILL To provide that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while holding office as such, shall have the rank and title of General of the Army, Fleet Admiral of the United States Navy, and General of the Air Force

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That (a) the second sentence of section 211 (c) of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, is amended to read as follows: "The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while holding office as such, shall

"(1) if he is an officer of the Army, have the rank of General of the Army; "(2) if he is an officer of the Navy, have the rank of Fleet Admiral of the United States Navy; and

"(3) if he is an officer of the Air Force, have the rank of General of the Air Force;

and shall receive the pay and allowances of a major general, and in addition thereto, a personal money allowance of $5,000 a year.”

(b) The first sentence of section 211 (d) of such Act, as amended, is amended to read as follows: "The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, while serving as such shall not be counted for the purpose of any provision of law imposing a limitation upon the number of officers of the armed services who may be serving at any one time in the grade of major general or a higher grade or in the grade of rear admiral or a higher grade."

Senator GURNEY. Mr. Chairman, I introduced that bill hurriedly yesterday. My reason for introducing it was that I had read about a week ago Chairman Vinson's statement in the House committee to the effect that he felt General Bradley, because of the responsibility he presently has in the Korean situation, was more than entitled to recognition with five-star rank. I did not do a very good job of preliminary thinking on it, Mr. Chairman, because I find that the bill I introduced clashes with my conclusions that I reached at the time we handled unification, when I, myself, as well as the whole committee, unanimously agreed that we did not want, by any stretch of the imagination, the suggestion of a single Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Defense Establishment. The House agreed and the committee agreed, both Houses of Congress agreed that we did not want that. Now, the bill, S. 4128, while it does not establish a single Joint Chiefs of Staff, it does lead in that direction, I think, the way it is worded, because it says that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff shall always be of five-star rank.

I did not want to do that. I did not want to clash with the decision already made by Congress. Therefore, upon further investigation yesterday afternoon, I found that the Defense Establishment did on April 12, 1950, approve a bill introduced by Congressman Shafer, known as H. R. 6335, which just gives the five-star rank to General Bradley and would not otherwise disturb the Establishment, the Defense Establishment.

Therefore, I would rather have the committee consider the language of H. R. 6335 than the one I introduced yesterday.

(H. R. 6335 is as follows:)

[H. R. 6335, 81st Cong., 1st sess.]

A BILL To authorize and request the President to appoint General Omar N. Bradley to to the permanent grade of General of the Army

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the President is hereby authorized and requested to appoint General Omar N. Bradley, United States Army, to the permanent grade of General of the Army, with all the rights, privileges, benefits, pay, and allowances provided by law for officers appointed to such permanent grade pursuant to the Act of March 23, 1946 (60 Stat. 59). Such appointment is authorized to be made notwithstanding the Act entitled "An Act to establish the grade of Fleet Admiral in the United States Navy; to establish the grade of General of the Army, and for other purposes", approved December 14, 1944, section 504 (b) of the Officer Personnel Act of 1947, as amended, or any other provision of law.

Senator GURNEY. For the benefit of Senator Knowland, I will reiterate what I said about S. 4128. My preliminary feeling is that S. 4128 is not good in that it clashes with the decision of Congress not to establish a single staff-I believe that is the way we put it-a single Chief of Staff in the Defense Establishment. My purpose was just to recognize General Bradley and the big job he has done and has got to do from now on out, with all the services.

Therefore, I came to the conclusion that the committee should consider a bill with similar language to H. R. 6335, which just recognizes the five-star rank for General Bradley himself.

That language had the approval of Secretary Johnson on April 12, 1950. This language in H. R. 6335 would give this money amount, only $1,000 more than is presently provided for General Bradley with his four-star rank.

Senator BRIDGES. What is the advantage of the five-star rank? Senator GURNEY. $1,000 in money and make him at least equal to others under him with five-star rank.

Senator BRIDGES. Who is under him with five-star rank?

Senator GURNEY. General MacArthur, for one. That is the only

one.

Senator BYRD. We have a copy of the letter from Secretary Johnson addressed to Chairman Vinson, of the House Armed Services Committee, in regard to H. R. 6335. It will be placed in the record at this point.

(The letter referred to is as follows:)

THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE,
Washington, April 12, 1950.

Hon. CARL VINSON,

Chairman, Armed Services Committee,

House of Representatives,

MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Sometime ago you requested the views of this office with respect to H. R. 6335, to authorize and request the President to appoint Gen. Omar N. Bradley to the permanent grade of General of the Army.

In my opinion, nothing that any of us can do to honor General Bradley can exceed the honors to which he is entitled for his outstanding contribution to the security of this Nation.

In the last analysis, the question of whether or not H. R. 6335 should be enacted is a matter for congressional determination, but at the very least I can assure you that the Department of Defense interposes no objection to favorable congressional consideration of this bill.

You will recall that in the course of my testimony before your committee last October I stated:

"I believe in the concept of a Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; but I categorically assure you-despite rumors that have been circulated to the contrary-that I do not advocate a single Chief of Staff."

I do not want my views, as set out above, to be interpreted as evidence of any change of heart on this score. My viewpoint with respect to a single Chief of Staff remains as it was when I appeared before your committee last October. Accordingly, if H. R. 6335 is acted upon favorably, I would urge that it would be amended to make it clear that this legislation is intended as a deserved honor and reward for Gen. Omar Bradley as an individual, and not as a precedent with respect to five-star rank for the high position he is currently filling in such an outstanding manner.

With warm personal regards, I am
Sincerely,

LOUIS JOHNSON.

Senator BYRD. The suggestion has been made to the chairman that this bill be taken up in executive session.

Senator SALTONSTALL. I make that suggestion, Mr. Chairman, because I believe this is an intimate, personal matter we ought to discuss in executive session.

Senator BYRD. If it meets with the approval of the committee, we will put it at the bottom of the calendar.

(The committee subsequently met and voted to report a new bill, S. 4135, which became Private Law 957, and reads as follows:)

[PRIVATE LAW 957-81ST CONGRESS]

[CHAPTER 952-2D SESSION]

[S. 4135]

AN ACT

To authorize the President to appoint General Omar N. Bradley to the permanent grade of General of the Army.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, because of the many distinguished services which General Omar N. Bradley, United States Army, has rendered to his country (but not because of the position he holds as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), the President is authorized to appoint the said General Omar N. Bradley, United States Army, to the permanent grade of General of the Army, with all the rights, privileges, benefits, pay, and allowances provided by law for officers appointed to such permanent grade pursuant to the Act of March 23, 1946 (60 Stat. 59).

Approved September 18, 1950.

(As a matter of interest, the committee report accompanying S. 4135 is likewise quoted.)

[S. Rept. No. 2532, 81st Cong., 2d sess.]

The Committee on Armed Services, to whom was referred the bill (S. 4135) to authorize the President to appoint Gen. Omar N. Bradley to the permanent grade of General of the Army, having considered the same, report favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill do pass.

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

The purpose of this bill is to authorize the President to appoint Gen. Omar Nelson Bradley, United States Army, to the permanent grade of General of the Army.

GEN, OMAR NELSON BRADLEY

While General Bradley is known in every home in the United States and many are familiar with his individual accomplishments, few are fully aware of the distinguished and completely unselfish service that he has rendered to this Nation, both as a military man and in a civilian capacity.