FORT SNELLING NATIONAL CEMETERY, MINN. Mr. ENGEL. The next is Fort Snelling National Cemetery, Minnesota, "Relocation and extension of fences, $9,500." You say the cemetery has an area of 178.56 acres. Then you want funds for the development of additional grave sites at this cemetery as authorized by the Eightieth Congress, and $42,400 for topsoiling, fertilizing, and seeding. Mr. CASE. What do these proposed improvements mean as far as increasing the capacity of the usable portion of the cemetery is concerned? Major KIRK. We are now burying in the southern part of the cemetery, in sections A, B, and C, and we will during the latter part of this year start moving into sections D, E, and F. It is sections D, E, and F which we want to develop. Mr. CASE. What does that mean in terms of the number of graves? Major KIRK. That is approximately 40 acres, at 400 per acre would be 16,000 grave sites, approximately. Mr. CASE. Are you still adhering to the idea you are going to make Fort Snelling serve a whole group of States? Major KIRK. That is the only one up there that we have in that area. The closest other one would be Fort Meade, S. Dak. Colonel GAGNE. This request is to finish off the work we asked for last year. Mr. CASE. That is, you are not extending the area? Colonel GAGNE. No, sir; this is just to finish off the area we requested last year. Mr. CASE. I have considerable sympathy with the development of national cemeteries and think there should be a proper one at Fort Snelling. My grandfather was mustered into the Civil War at Fort Snelling, and my associations are up in that territory. Still, I do not think the cemetery should be developed to the extent of 178 acres at Fort Snelling to the exclusion of the proper interests of the other States in the Northwest-Wisconsin, Iowa, or the other surrounding States. This fence is not to fence in the whole 170 acres, is it? Major KIRK. The permanent fence will extent to this point [indicating]. We have a permanent fence in the first group I mentioned, sections A, B, and C, up to this point [indicating], and down to where we have enclosed the new sections D, E, and F on each side except at the western end, which will only be a temporary fence so that we can keep moving that back. Mr. CASE. How many graves are there at Fort Snelling now? Colonel HOLLOWAY. As of the 30th of June, there were 3,752. Mr. CASE. And the area you are now developing will provide for 16,000? Major KIRK. Approximately; sometimes we get 200, sometimes 300, per acre. It depends on how much we can get. General HORKAN. It covers one of the biggest areas served by any cemeteries we have. Mr. CASE. You mean for new burials? General HORKAN. That is right. Mr. CASE. How many were buried there last year? Colonel HOLLOWAY. There were 513 buried last year. The burial rate is climbing rapidly, because that is one of the 3 major cemeteries in which World War II dead are being interred. Major KIRK. They are burying now at the rate of approximately 100 a month. We used 93 more sites during November, not including the Reserves. Including the Reserves, we had 192 burials in 1 month. Mr. CASE. The funds you are requesting for topsoiling, fertilizing, seeding, are to serve how many acres? Major KIRK. 35 to 40 acres. Mr. CASE. Will you get all of the topsoiling and seeding done on 40 acres for $43,000? Colonel GAGNE. This is to finish off what we did last year. (After discussion off the record.) Mr. CASE. Even if you bury at the rate of 100 a month- Mr. CASE. Three or four acres would take care of a year at the peak demand, and I do not know why you should develop 40 acres. Major KIRK. Our estimates show it will increase at the rate of 10 percent per year after this year. In other words, we have 136 this year; next year we will have 10 percent added on to that; and the next year we will have another 10 percent. General LARKIN. Another factor is that we have not reached the peak yet of bringing back World War II dead. Mr. CASE. I know; but you expect to reach that in the next 3, 4, or 5 years, do you not? General LARKIN. That is right. Mr. CASE. Are you expecting to take over all of the burials here from the veterans' hospitals? Colonel GAGNE. We are now. Mr. CASE. They are burying where they have cemeteries in connection with the hospitals, are they not? Colonel GAGNE. They are in some cases. Colonel MARSHALL. For instance, at New York, we are burying them all. Mr. CASE. But we are talking of Fort Snelling now. Major KIRK. We do get quite a few of their burials; yes, sir. In addition to the 136 actual burials a month, we are getting requests at the rate of 96 per month over and above that for interments of World War II. So that you can now see we are having approximately 236 per month of interments. Mr. CASE. At Fort Snelling? Major KIRK. Yes, sir. During the month of November alone, we had 96, and we had requested interments of 680 during 1 month, so that we can say over 200 per month. Mr. KERR. How much did you get last year for topsoiling, fertilizing, and seeding at Fort Snelling? Colonel MARSHALL. $8,900. Mr. KERR. And you want $42,000 now? Colonel MARSHALL. Yes, sir. Mr. SCRIVNER. $28,000 just for topsoiling? ADVISABILITY OF CONSTRUCTING NEW CEMETERY AT GUAM Mr. CASE. With respect to the Guam situation, I notice in looking ahead in the justifications that you have the details there of $800,000 or $900,000 for developing this Guam cemetery. I think we ought to face the situation we have there, and I will tell you how I personally feel about it. I feel if we are going to put $1,000,000 in the development of a cemetery in the Pacific, as a sort of Pacific cemetery, it ought not to be on Guam. I think it ought to be on one of the islands of Hawaii, and I think that for these reasons: First of all, you have more land, or there is more of a land mass in the Hawaiian group than on Guam. The second thing is that Hawaii is almost 4,000 miles nearer the mainland of the United States, and to the people who go from the continental United States out there to visit the graves of their next of kin, Hawaii symbolizes to them the war in the Pacific just as much as Guam does, if not more so. The third thing is that when the time comes that these pilgrimages are made by the next of kin, if they go to Guam, they are going to come back feeling they have been at a pretty dreary, hot, desolate place, and there won't be too much satisfaction either at the time they are there or in thinking about it afterwards; whereas Hawaii has one of the nicest climates in the world, and persons who would go there would come back with some sense of consolation, because it is a beautiful country; the climate is nice; and they would carry away that memory. The fourth thing is that if we get in another war sometime, Guam is bound to be a primary military target if the war involves the Pacific, and with the mass of installations there of navy yards, air strips, and what-not, any place you would select on Guam for a cemetery, as was brought out by Mr. Scrivner this morning, would inadvertently become a target-not an intentional target, but Guam would be a place where explosives would be dropped, or falling planes might drop, and one thing and another. In other words, you are bound to desecrate the cemetery on Guam; whereas there ought to be places on some of the islands around Hawaii where a cemetery site could be developed that would not be a military target either accidentally or intentionally. So, for all of those reasons, I would like to see you come in here with some estimate of what you could do in the way of developing a Pacific cemetery on Hawaii rather than on Guam. General LARKIN. Of course, we do plan, as you know, to have a cemetery on Hawaii. Mr. CASE. I know you do, and I do not know why that should not be developed rather than putting this thing that much further out. Mr. ENGEL. Of course, I think this illustrates the danger of having the War Department and some outside board which is not in contact with the people back home designating, without congressional action, the places where these cemeteries are to go. There has been no act passed authorizing the Guam cemetery, has there? General LARKIN. No. Mr. ENGEL. This Guam cemetery is being authorized by the Battle Monuments Commission, and the War Department, Navy, and Air? General LARKIN. Well, it is not being authorized. Mr. ENGEL. But they are designating it? General LARKIN. Yes; that is correct. Mr. ENGEL. There is no legislative authorization as such, except as you derive authorization from these other acts you mentioned? General LARKIN. Yes. Mr. CASE. I have a little prejudice against Guam as a nice place to live. I remember in World War I, I was in the Marines and remember once when I was stationed on Maui Island I was raising some question with my sergeant as to what I might do to get some leave at the week end, and he says, "The sergeant major says you cannot have it." I said, "Suppose I go, anyway?" He said, "Well, Guam is filled up with sergeant majors who did so and so." And Mr. SCRIVNER. While we are on Guam and the suggestions Mr. Case has made, one of the points he touched on is the fact of your congestion. If half of the plans we are told are in the making are carried out, I do not know where you are going to put all of the installations on Guam, because you cannot expand the island. you are talking about permanent installations not only of the Navy, but the Army and Air Forces; you are talking about any number of things that are going to be put on Guam, and the congestion there is probably one of the major items to be considered. I do not know just where they are going to put them all. There is not enough area to put everything you are talking about on Guam. Mr. CASE. I raised the query because I would like you to come back and suggest some alternative to Guam. TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 1948. CONSTRUCTION AT NATIONAL CEMETERIES INCLUDING ACQUISITION OF LAND KEOKUK NATIONAL CEMETERY Colonel MARSHALL. The first item we take up this morning, Mr. Chairman, is for the Keokuk National Cemetery, appearing on page 53 of the justifications. In this item we have an additional 2 acres which have been donated by the city. The request is for funds for the clearing and grading of the 2 acres and drainage for the new area included within the 2 acres. It also includes a water system and the removal of a section of the fence and wall separating the old and the new areas to the new boundary line to take in the 2 acres which would be added as a result of this donation. The total amount for this cemetery is $36,256. Mr. ENGEL. What bothers me is the addition of just two additional acres for this cemetery at a cost of $36,000. Somebody will come in and give another 2 acres of land, and we will be asked to spend $36,000 to develop it; and the next year or 2 years later somebody else will come in with another 2 acres and we will be requested to appropriate another $36,000. It seems to me to be a pretty expensive procedure just to take in 2 acres when more land will likely be needed in the near future. When you get the new acres how many new graves will be provided? Colonel MARSHALL. It will run between 600 and 800 burials. Mr. ENGEL. Between 600 and 800. Mr. KERR. How many graves are in the old part of the cemetery? Mr. ENGEL. And you are adding two additional acres and getting approximately 800. Colonel MARSHALL. Yes. The difficulty there, in part, Mr. Chairman, is because in the old cemetery are located the utility buildings and housing which occupy a portion of the 2.75 acres; that is the reason we could not get full coverage in the original site. Mr. ENGEL. I am not objecting to the use of the additional land, but it seems to me that a policy of just getting 2 or 3 additional acres of land is pretty expensive when you ought to have 10 or 12 probably to meet the future needs, and when next year or in a year or two you will be coming back asking for funds to acquire additional land and develop it and it is going to cost a lot more. How many burials have been in this cemetery? Colonel GAGNE. That is how many we have had in the last year? Mr. ENGEL. Yes. Major KIRK. There were 19 during the fiscal year 1947. Colonel GAGNE. We had requests in November for 22. There have been 58 burials and 14 reservations or a total number of 72 grave sites. In October we had a request for 19 and I believe it was a little more in November, and there are 10 grave sites for the first quarter of the fiscal year 1948 with a request for 36 for World War II. Mr. ENGEL. Here is what you have got to have to consider: Up until this war you had 4,000,000 World War veterans of World War I. Colonel MARSHALL. Yes. Mr. ENGEL. Most of those men are now getting up to the age 65 to 68 and you are going to have to bury close to 4,000,000 in the next 4 or 5 years or shortly thereafter. Colonel MARSHALL. Yes. Mr. ENGEL. Then you have 18,000,000 veterans from World War II, and those 18,000,000 will have to be buried at sometime in the future. General LARKIN. Yes. Mr. ENGEL. Every one of those in service are entitled to burial and we have to have cemeteries if they desire to be buried in a national cemetery. General LARKIN. That is correct. Mr. ENGEL. And when you take into consideration that picture it seems foolish to me to talk about adding on just 2 acres, and it seems to me before opening a new cemetery and locating a new wall to take in the additional acres the future requirements should be very carefully considered. How large is the city of Keokuk? Colonel MARSHALL. It is somewhere around 30,000. Mr. ENGEL. Thirty thousand. Colonel MARSHALL. Yes. General HORKAN. May I say, Mr. Chairman, in this connection that we are trying to get enough space in cemeteries from the distri |