Senator MORSE. The governor of a State under this law no longer has the right to transfer units around according to his best judgment unless he has the approval of the Pentagon?

Mr. WALSH. That is correct, and that is based on the National Defense Act. This has been in operation for 36 years.

Chairman RUSSELL. You may proceed, General.

Mr. WALSH. The National Guard Association appreciates that the time at the disposal of the Congress and the Armed Services Committees thereof in the current session will, perhaps, not permit consideration of the proposal advanced for the induction of trainees from a National Security Training Corps into the National Guard of a State, for, no doubt, such a matter would involve thorough study of the brief prepared and submitted to your committee by the National Guard Association and of others as well. It is realized, too, that such a proposal would entail amendments to nearly every section of the National Defense Act, as amended, and to the proposed Armed Forces Reserve Act as well. Nevertheless, this is a matter which should receive the most careful attention of the Congress, and conceivably as a long-range proposition.

May I say, Mr. Chairman, and gentleman of the committee, we are, indeed, very grateful to you and the committee for being afforded an opportunity to express our views on this very important matter. As I say, I have General McGowan, commanding the Fiftieth Armored Division of New Jersey, and Colonel Stevenson, who headed up this legal committee, and if the committee should desire to address any questions to them, I am certain they would be only too happy to answer. Again, I am very grateful, sir.

EFFECT OF PROVISIONS ENCOURAGING NATIONAL GUARD ENLISTMENT

Chairman RUSSELL. We are always glad to have you with us, General Walsh. Does not the National Guard think that the provision of the proposed bills which encourage men who have had this 6 months' training to enter the National Guard when they come out of training, will be extremely helpful to the National Guard?

Mr. WALSH. It probably will be helpful, Senator. But in view of the past laws that were designed to do the same thing, out of which literally nothing came, we have our doubts. Perhaps our doubts are increased by the abnormality of this Korean situation.

Chairman RUSSELL. I don't think that is a fair analogy at all as between men who have been selected and placed into the military for a period of 2 years and who have come back-those now are nearly all war veterans who have seen actual combat in Korea-and a group of 18-year-old boys who have had 6 months' training and have had no actual prolonged service in the Military Establishment.

It would seem to me that you have an entirely different situation from which these National Guard men are presumed to come. Mr. WALSH. Have you any ideas on that?

Col. CHARLES G. STEVENSON (State judge advocate, New York National Guard). I would like to give our experience in New York State prior to Korea. There was a similar provision in the Selective Service Act of 1948, which enabled the so-called 6-year reservists, those men who enlisted for 1 year voluntarily, to discharge their

Reserve obligation after 1 year by serving 3 years voluntarily in the National Guard.

We did not get one single recruit in New York State from that source, mainly because these men, as they came out through the separation centers were automatically assigned to the Organized Reserves, and we had to go and seek them out and find them in their homes and mail literature to them and send out men around to talk to them. But it was of no avail because they were already sitting on a list in the Organized Reserves and why should they join the National Guard? We didn't get one single recruit.

Some system will have to be devised whereby the National Guard can tell their story to these men at the separation centers before they get automatically assigned to the Reserve Corps or we won't get any under this law, either, sir.

Chairman RUSSELL. That may well be, but I still think that you don't have exactly the same state of facts. How many were turned up that had served 12 months? I didn't think we ever took but about 150,000 over the whole United States.

Mr. WALSH. 160,000, I believe.

Chairman RUSSELL. I am advised that it was 166,000 authorized, but that they didn't actually ever take but 22,000. So there wasn't a great deal to start with.

Mr. WALSH. There wouldn't be much to get.

WILL THE NATIONAL GUARD BE UP TO STRENGTH UNDER UMT?

Chairman RUSSELL. In this case if you get UMT to working full force, turning out 800,000 men a year, you would soon have your Organized Reserve units saturated, and these men would be looking for some place to go.

Mr. WALSH. I believe there is some thought being given in the Department of the Army right now to where we will be given an opportunity to contact those men at the separation centers. That wouldn't have to be written into the law or anything.

That would be simply a matter of administrative procedure. To what extent that will help it is difficult to say, but in my opinion it would help.

Chairman RUSSELL. You just haven't had the men heretofore that have not seen long service. Twenty-two thousand, I am told, went through this, and there is a great deal of difference between that and six and eight hundred thousand coming out in a period of 1 year.

Mr. WALSH. I can see that without any question, Senator.

Chairman RUSSELL. I think you would have guardsmen running out of your ears after that system has been in effect for 18 months or 2 years; I don't think you would have the slightest problem of filling up your guard completely.

Mr. WALSH. Perhaps the chairman will recall at the time the Burns board was in being every inducement was offered to us to increase our troop basis. We resisted that, and we felt Congress had acted very wisely when they held us in the fiscal years that I mentioned to 399,500.

Now, if the situation became serious and for good and sufficient reasons Congress felt that that strength, aggregate strength, should be increased somewhat, we would offer no objection whatever.

Chairman RUSSELL. It is always interesting to hear you gentlemen ́ and we appreciate your coming here.

Mr. WALSH. In other words, Senator, we are always willing to leave our tears with Congress and we contend Congress has very broad powers and I believe we have cited some rather eminent authorities.

Chairman RUSSELL. I shall read this brief with great interest. Senator MORSE. Will you have somebody in your organization prepare for me a memorandum on that Illinois case?

Mr. WALSH. I will be glad to do it.

Senator MORSE. I have been of the opinion that the Pentagon correctly informed me that they couldn't intervene in the case-they satisfied me that they couldn't-that it was entirely up to the Governor of Illinois.

Mr. WALSH. I think the Pentagon could have refused to withdraw the allotment. They did withdraw the allotment.

Senator MORSE. At the request of the Governor.

Mr. WALSH. By the same taken, once the Department of Defense makes an allocation to that State it can never be withdrawn without the consent of the Governor. So it works both ways.

Senator MORSE. Give me a memorandum on it, if you will.

Mr. WALSH. I will be glad to.

HISTORY OF NATIONAL GUARD RECRUITMENT

Senator LONG. You were mentioning these men who were being discharged after having served in Korea. Most of those men had their draft service extended by 1 year.

Mr. WALSH. I believe they had their enlistment extended by 1 year. Senator LONG. Yes. That would give most of them 3 years of service, would it not?

Mr. WALSH. Yes, sir.

Senator LONG. It is my understanding under the law when a man has 3 years of service, he has no further Reserve obligation at all.

Mr. WALSH. Well, under this bill he will have, even if he goes into UMT and takes his basic training of 6 months, he still owes the Government a Reserve obligation of 71⁄2 years, which he must serve somewhere.

Senator LONG. What I had in mind, General, is that you had drawn your analogy that under the present law the National Guard has not received what you feel to be their share of the men available, those who have been selected, and it is my understanding that since those men had their enlistments extended by 1 year, that up to the present time we haven't had much of a test to see whether those men actually would have gone into the National Guard, because those who had their enlistments extended have no further Reserve obligation to serve.

Mr. WALSH. Senator Long, we go back to what happened before. I am a great believer in what Patrick Henry said: "I know of no way to judge the future save by the past."

Here we had the act of 1940, Training and Service Act of 1940. Under the terms of that act about 12 million men were inducted into the Armed Forces, and written into that act was the 10-year service obligation. Yet, at the cessation of hostilities or after the cessation of hostilities, every one of those men was discharged from that obligation.

95064-52--30

• Whether it was done illegally or not is neither here nor there-they were discharged. We got none. We had to go out and recruit. We did recruit and worked out a lot of difficulties, but it was a lot of work.

Then came the further amendment of these 160,000. The chairman said only 22,000 were actually trained. That is nothing. We might as well dismiss it. But here now you are bringing in up to about 312 million men under the current emergency, and if we have no better luck than we had before, we do not expect that these men will come back into the guard voluntarily unless you offer them some inducement to cut down that 71/2-year service obligation.

NATIONAL GUARD SATISFIED WITH BILL

A lot of young men may want to go to school, enter the professions, get married, go into business, and they don't like the idea of looking ahead 712 years; but if you would give an inducement, say, where they could serve 2 years in an Organized Reserve or the guard, 2 years in the Stand-by Reserve, a total of 4 years, they would be willing to do that. That is our thinking.

Senator LONG. Have you proposed such an amendment as that? What you have here, I believe, is language to say that they would not be taken while they were in the National Guard.

Mr. WALSH. Section 37 is satisfactory to us, Senator Long, as it now stands in the bill.

Senator LONG. The bill as it now stands?

Mr. WALSH. Yes, sir.

program for Congress to

We merely offer this other as a long-range study at some time in the future.

Senator LONG. You are satisfied with the bill as it stands?

Mr. WALSH. Yes, sir.

Senator LONG. As long as there is that provision there that would encourage some men to go into the guard.

Mr. WALSH. Yes, sir, it is a very fine bill, at least we think so. Senator LONG. Thank you very much.

Chairman RUSSELL. If there are no further questions, we thank you, gentlemen, for your appearance.

The next witness is another man who is well known to the committee and who assisted the committee in some of our most important legislation in the past-Brig. Gen. E. A. Evans, who is executive director of the Reserve Officers Association of the United States, and appears here to represent that organization.

STATEMENT OF E. A. EVANS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR; ACCOMPANIED BY BRIG. GEN. MELVIN J. MAAS, CHAIRMAN, LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE; AND COL. JOHN E. COLEMAN, NATIONAL PRESIDENT, RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES Mr. EVANS. Mr. Chairman, I have with me General Maas, who served in Congress, as you well know, some 16 years. He has charge of our legislative committee. I would like to have him sit with me, and also our national president, Colonel Coleman.

Chairman RUSSELL. I was preparing to greet General Maas for the committee and tell him we are glad to have him here. Most of us knew him during his service in the Congress and are familiar with

his service to the Nation as a member of the Marine Corps. We will be glad to have you gentlemen sit with General Evans.

Mr. EVANS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, we would first like to comment on the report submitted by the National Security Training Commission. The Commission has, in our judgment, presented a most commendable document, and, with few exceptions, we could most enthusiastically accept the report, as written.

S. 2441 AND NSTC BILL DIFFERENCES

It is our understanding that hearings before this committee are not being held on the bill as presented by the National Security Training Commission, but are being held on S. 2441, which contains certain changes to the Commission bill. We would like to comment on these proposed changes.

The first change appears in section 4 where the words:

The corps shall be a component of the land and naval forces

have been deleted from the Commission bill, and only the proviso remains which states:

The trainees shall be deemed members of the Armed Forces only as expressly provided in this Act or in the Universad Military Training and Service Act, as amended.

We recognize the thinking behind this proposed change as it involves a rather important and basic principle in which we have always believed; namely, that members of the National Security Training Corps would not be considered as a part of the military forces of this Nation while they were undergoing their 6 months' training, but would be considered as civilians who were receiving military training for the purpose of thereafter being inducted into the Reserves. We are very much inclined to accept the proposed change as set forth in S. 2441, provided you gentlemen feel that such a change would accomplish the purpose for which it is intended. There was considerable discussion on this matter before the House committee, and it is noted that in reporting the bill the House did not accept this modification.

The changes suggested in sections 8 and 34 concern the control of the universal military training budget by the National Security Training Commission. Again we concur in the thinking behind these proposed changes. The American public has been told time and time again that the UMT program, except for the actual training, is to be under civilian control, not under military control. It is feared that unless the Commission is given more control over the budget than is set forth in the Commission bill, we may, in effect, be turning a large measure of control of UMT over to the military.

We are concerned over the addition of a new section in S. 2441; namely, section 37, that you have just had considerable discussion on with General Walsh. This new section would amend Public Law 51 and would reduce the 8-year obligation, which now exists by law, in those cases where inductees or trainees volunteer to serve in the National Guard or organized units of the Reserve. Senator MORSE. May I interrupt?

Mr. EVANS. Of course.