far more in that submarine that you mentioned than I would on the scientist that designed it.

Senator HUNT. We have recognized the point you are developing in our most recent Draft Act where we gave to the President the authority to keep in the colleges and the universities those young men studying to be engineers and scientists.

Dr. KEYES. Yes.

NEED FOR RECALL AGENCY OUTSIDE OF DEFENSE DEPARTMENT

We, therefore, believe that H. R. 5426 should be amended so that reservists will be subject at the time of their proposed recall to review and selection by an organization outside of the Department of Defense such as the present Selective Service. A competent selective recall service should operate on the National, State, and local level. The results without question would be of benefit to the research and development units of the armed services, to defense industry, and to the country as a whole. Such an amendment to the bill certainly will save lives and prevent casualties and hasten the attainment of the military objective.

The proposed bill provides absolutely no possible appeal to any higher authority other than the Department of Defense. This is not a sound democratic procedure. The Department of Defense cannot effectively be both judge and prosecuting attorney. We wish to emphasize that we are not thinking of the deferment of the individual, or a class of individuals-I think that is an extremely important point. I want to reemphasize that. We are not thinking of deferment-we are thinking of their contribution to the national welfare and security regardless of whether it is in industry or Government. In World War II when the Reserve problem was not paramount, as it is today, the employer had the privilege of several appeals including an appeal to a Presidential committee for draftees. This privilege should be extended to the employer of reservists.

If the presently proposed universal military training bill is later passed, a time will come when our Selective Service organization as such will function only to induct the individual trainee. That is as we understand it. It will not function to select these men for service after training unless the current Reserve bill is amended. At that time, with no amendment such as proposed, all of our able-bodied young men will be subject to recall depending solely on the dictates of the armed services. The employer, regardless of who he is, will have no opportunity to appeal any case to a higher authority above the Department of Defense.

Thus, we believe, it would be highly beneficial from the over-all standpoint of security and future progress of our Nation to amend the Reserve bill and set up an adequate system for selective recall with the right to appeal.

Senator LONG. Thank you very much.

Are there any further questions?

Senator HUNT. I would just like to make this comment : That I am pleased to see the National Association of Manufacturers and the CIO in exactly the same corner.

Dr. KEYES. So I am, Senator. And we are.

Senator LONG. Thank you very much.

Dr. KEYES. Thank you.

Senator LONG. We will next hear from Dr. Edward C. Britton, president of the American Chemical Society.

The subcommittee will be pleased to hear your statement on this subject, Dr. Britton.

STATEMENT OF EDGAR C. BRITTON, PRESIDENT, THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY

Mr. BRITTON. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, with your permission I should like to read a short prepared statement and then try to answer to the best of my ability any questions which the committee may wish to raise.

My name is Edgar C. Britton. I am president of the American Chemical Society and director of the Dow Chemical Co.'s Organic Research Laboratory. I appear today as the representative of the more than 66,000 chemists and chemical engineers who comprise the membership of the American Chemical Society, one of the largest professional societies in the United States. The views I express are those of the American Chemical Society as approved by the executive committee of our board of directors.

I regret that the coauthor of this statement, Dr. Charles A. Thomas, chairman of the board of directors of the American Chemical Society and president of the Monsanto Chemical Co., is unable to appear today. As you may recall, Dr. Thomas, who played a very important role in the wartime atomic-energy project, was requested by President Truman to head a committee of the National Security Resources Board charged with the responsibility of developing a practical plan by which a strong technological and scientific force can be maintained in a period of national emergency. Therefore, he is well versed in the various aspects of the scientific and technical manpower problem. We believe that adequate Reserve legislation is needed. H. R. 5426 contains many provisions which we are not qualified to discuss. Members of the House Armed Services Committee and the House membership as a whole have given this legislation careful consideration in approving the measure as it now stands. We are confident that your committee and the Members of the Senate will do likewise. Our primary concern is not what is included in the pending bill, but what is omitted.

SELECTIVE RECALL OF RESERVISTS

An orderly and systematic recall of individual reservists within the various Reserve categories is a prime requisite. Some evidence of the difficulties which might be encountered without proper provisions for selection is shown by the experience in the recall to active duty of many thousand reservists following the start of military action in Korea. These points are emphasized in the House report on the Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1951 (H. Rept. 1066, 82d Cong., 1st sess.).

Today we have a substantial Reserve force, larger than that at the start of the Korean episode, to which there are constant additions under the provisions of Public Law 51.

Within a few years from the time that the provisions of the Universal Military Training and Service Act, the National Security Training Corps Act, and any other complementary legislation have been in effect, the great majority of our able-bodied young men, ages 18 to 26, will be reservists. The distress and hardship to large and small business, especially the latter, which resulted from the necessarily hasty recall of reservists following the start of military action in Korea will occur again to a more marked degree, unless some additional provisions are incorporated in the present bill. We say "to a more marked degree" because there are more reservists now than then and there will be still more under proposed legislation. Furthermore, the number of reservists recalled at the outbreak of hostilities in Korea was small compared to the number who would be recalled in a full-scale mobilization.

In a time of emergency the armed services have an obligation to take every possible step to protect the Nation. We believe that they should not be hampered in this effort. However, without the full industrial and agricultural might of the United States, it is patently obvious that it is impossible to support a large and active military program. Our one chance of survival in any sustained full-scale world war III is the continuance of a marked superiority in production and in the development by science and technology of better matériel and methods of production.

This development requires, even in time of war, the continued availability of research and development personnel in the universities and industries of our country. It also requires the continued education and training of men whose skill after completion of their education and training can be used in such development.

A sudden and indiscriminate recall of reservists by the armed services in a time of war or national emergency could well disrupt our ability to provide the military with modern weapons and matériel and disrupt it to the point where the security of the Nation would be imperiled. It seems to us that even in a time of war the recall of all reservists without due consideration of their civilian endeavors and scientific potentialities, including those in training for specialized fields, could be disastrous for the defense effort as a whole. The armed services wish to maintain a balance of manpower skills in the combat army. It is just as assential that this be maintained in the production and research army.

The national manpower mobilization policy which the President of the United States promulgated on January 17, 1951, recognized these principles. Among the five aims was the following:

While recognizing the very high priority of the Armed Forces' requirements for certain numbers and classes of manpower, the needs of mobilization also require a vigorous civilian economy. The manpower necessary to defense production, to civil defense, to agriculture, and to the production of essential civilian goods and services and to sustain our commitments of aid to other nations, must be considered as integral parts of a balanced mobilization program. One of the Basic Policies laid down was the following:

The greatest care must be exercised to assure that the supply of persons possessing critical skills will be distributed among military and civilian activities in a manner which will contribute most to the mobilization program.

RECALL AGENCY MUST UNDERSTAND OVER-ALL MANPOWER PROBLEMS

Therefore, we believe that the bill under consideration should specify that the recall of reservists be in such a manner as to cause the least possible disruption of essential civilian activities. Experience during the present emergency demonstrates how difficult it is to judge where a particular reservist will contribute the most. Responsibility for making these decisions, therefore, should be in the hands of an agency which is in a position to understand as fully as possible not only the need of the Department of Defense for men in military billets but also the Nation's need for men to initiate, direct, and work in essential research, development, and production. An agency which can estimate impartially the importance of these various needs appears to us to be essential to the successful operation of a reservist program. The precise character of this agency can be spelled out later. At the present time we see no reason why this bill should undertake to do more than create such a civilian agency and specify that it report directly to the President. In the years during which reservists are subject to recall, many will acquire highly specialized skills vitally needed in civilian positions. The agency responsible for recalling them, therefore, must be especially equipped to understand and evaluate the special competence of these individuals and the relative importance to their country of their services in a military billet as against serving in an essential capacity in research, development, production, or education. The main point which we believe should be established is that the final decision regarding which particular reservist shall be recalled should be in the hands of an agency with special competence for the job.

READY RESERVE RECALL SHOULD REMAIN WITH PENTAGON

We recognize that the Department of Defense must be able to call up as it sees fit active organized units of the Ready Reserve, the National Guard, or the Air National Guard. It is not practical for the suggested agency to pass on individual cases of men in these units at the time such units are recalled. However, we feel that there must be control over reservists not members of units and the involuntary transfer of any such reservists to active organized units of the Ready Reserve and that this control should be exercised by a civilian agency which will determine the capacity in which each trained individual can contribute most to national safety.

CIVILIAN AGENCY SHOULD RECALL CERTAIN RESERVISTS

Therefore, we suggest the following amendment:

"Whenever it becomes necessary to order reservists, except those in the active organized units of the Ready Reserve or in the National Guard or Air National Guard, to extended active duty, such individuals shall be recalled through a civilian agency under uniform regulations to be prescribed by the President, in such a way that there shall be the least possible disruption to civilian activities essential to the national strength and security. In addition, the involuntary transfer of reservists to such active units also shall be subject to selection through the same agency."

I wish to thank the committee, personally and on behalf of the American Chemical Society, for the opportunity to appear here today. Senator LONG. Thank you very much, Dr. Britton.

Might I ask you with reference to your proposed language, whether there should be some language there to make reference to the individual's hardship and dislocation? I notice that your language requires selection in such a way that there shall be the least possible disruption to activities essential to the national strength and security. It makes no reference to the hardship of the individual called.

Mr. BRITTON. Well, I think that is a good point. It probably should be in there.

CAN SELECTIVE SERVICE HANDLE THE JOB?

Senator HUNT. I am one who happens to believe that the Selective Service has done a magnificent job.

Do you see any reason why they should not be charged with this responsibility? They are an executive agency. The head of the Selective Service takes his instructions, of course, under the law from the President. I see that you suggest that the President has this executive authority, he could exercise it as he does now through Selective Service. Do you see why the present Selective Service could not handle this problem?

Mr. BRITTON. So far as I know, if they are given the power in the bill, they would have to have it delegated to them, that is, that power, as I understand it, because at the present time they do not have anything to do with the Reserve.

Senator HUNT. You, and I think the two witnesses before you, and I have myself mentioned about the many hardships that have resulted in the method that we have used in recalling reservists during the Korean incident. I think we should, for the record, say that those comments are not critical in any way of the Armed Forces. They did the best they could with what they had to work with. They did not have the use of the Selective Service. And over and above that, they had to do a job and do it quickly.

Mr. BRITTON. Yes.

Senator HUNT. I think the record should show that our statements are not meant to be critical, but just simply to say what happened. Mr. BRITTON. I agree with that, surely, because they had to do the best they could.

Senator HUNT. Thank you.

Senator LONG. Thank you very much, Dr. Britton. We will certainly take this into consideration in marking up this bill.

Mr. BRITTON. Thank you.

Senator LONG. The American Medical Association and the American Osteopathic Association were originally scheduled to appear before the subcommittee today. However, both organizations have requested permission to submit statements, rather than appear in person, and their statements will be included as part of the record at this point.

(The statement of the American Medical Association is as follows:) The committee on legislation of the American Medical Association considered H. R. 5426, Eighty-second Congress, on December 4, 1951, and voted to endorse it. This action was approved by the board of trustees on December 6, 1951.