Mr. MYERS. With the Federal regulations to safety. Mr. ROBERTS. Let me go a little further. You asked me if I stopped there. I think this control that the Federal Government has over aircraft in requiring them to be airworthy is an excellent rule. Now, to go a little further, interstate air commerce under paragraph (c), page 5 Mr. O'HARA. Where is that? Mr. ROBERTS (continuing). Defines interstate air commerce to include traffic whether such commerce moves wholly by air or partly by aircraft and partly by other transportation means. Mr. MYERS. That is lines 3 and 4 on page 71. Mr. BULWINKLE. Then again, I want to call your attention to this. You see here, Mr. Roberts, what happened was when the original bill was introduced, if you had been here at the hearings you would have heard Mr. Lea say upon the beginning of the hearings that that bill was introduced in order to have something before the committee. The committee then worked on it and reported out a bill similar in many respects, but a little different in some other respects, and that is the reason I want to call your attention to the fact that interstate air commerce-that is section 6-that you have in your copy of the bill may be different from the bill which was reported out. Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. It may be the same. I have not looked at it. I think it is practically the same, but I just wanted to call your attention to that. Now, may I ask you this question, coming back to those regulations: Do you know who drew those regulations? Mr. ROBERTS. Yes. Mr. BULWINKLE. Who were they? Mr. ROBERTS. The original drafts were made by Howard C. Knotts and Fred D. Fagg. Mr. BULWINKLE. And they are practically the same as when they were drafted? Mr. ROBERTS. There have been some changes in them. Mr. BULWINKLE. Not very much; some. Mr. ROBERTS. Quite a few; several amendments. Mr. BULWINKLE. They have not been amended to any great extent. They were competent men? Mr. ROBERTS. Very. Mr. BULWINKLE. Both Illinois men. Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. And Mr. Knotts was on the Illinois Aviation Commission? Mr. ROBERTS. He was on the Illinois Aviation Conference. Mr. BULWINKLE. He was on the conference, you say, instead of the commission? Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. And then he was at the bureau of air commerce? Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. There for a while? Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. And Mr. Fagg was at the head of the bureau? Mr. BULWINKLE. All right. Mr. O'HARA. Now, I am interested, Mr. Roberts, in what you think is wrong with those sections. That is what I would like to know, very much. Mr. MYERS. I think he was about to discuss that section at the top of page 71. He was on that when he turned off to some other section. You had read, Mr. Roberts: A place in the United States and any other place outside thereof. Whether such commerce moves wholly by aircraft or partly by aircraft and partly by other forms of transportation. You were about to state your objections to that particular section. Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. I would like to cite an example on that, and at the same time put it in a sort of a question. Suppose there is some air express which comes to Chicago by airplane and is put on the train for some other city in down-State Illinois or any other place within the State. Does the Civil Aeronautics Administration or the Civil Aeronautics Board have control over that traffic after it is put on the train? Is that the intent of the act? Mr. BULWINKLE. That is a good question. I would say not. Now, let me ask Mr. Tipton to answer that. STATEMENT OF S. G. TIPTON, ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL, CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD Mr. TIPTON. Your answer, in my opinion, is correct, Mr. Bulwinkle. The definition only covers the carriage by aircraft of goods and passengers whether the whole journey of those goods and passengers was by aircraft or otherwise. It is only the carriage by aircraft that is to be regulated under this bill. I might add, Major Bulwinkle, that is not a change in the present law. The present law provides that. Mr. BULWINKLE. That is the present law? Mr. TIPTON. Yes; that is in the present law. Mr. BULWINKLE. And what amendment, if any, is there in this section 6 or wherein does it differ from the present law? Mr. TIPTON. It changes paragraph (a), the definition of interstate commerce. Mr. BULWINKLE. That is what I thought. Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Roberts, let me say I have the same sort of confusion in my mind that you have in yours, so that you are not alone in reference to that clause. I think it is confusing, Mr. Tipton, although it is probably evident that it is only intended to cover the air carriage. Mr. TIPTON. When the last phrase is read with the entire definition, particularly the opening part of it, it says that: "Interstate air commerce, overseas air commerce, and foreign air commerce, mean the carriage by aircraft of persons or property, including mail, for compensation or hire in commerce" between these places, whether that commerce moves wholly by aircraft or not. It is the commerce, the people, or the goods that is referred to by the last phrase. STATEMENT OF GEORGE C. ROBERTS, SECRETARY, ILLINOIS AERONAUTICS COMMISSION, SPRINGFIELD, ILL.-Resumed Mr. BULWINKLE. Well, all right, you may proceed, Mr. Roberts. Mr. ROBERTS. Now, in the findings of declaration of policy—this is not particularly an objection, but Mr. MYERS. Which are you referring to now; which one are you referring to? There are several declarations. Mr. ROBERTS. It is section 2 in this one. Mr. HALL. That is on page 72. Mr. BULWINKLE. "Uniform regulations," is that the one you refer to? Mr. HALL. Beginning at section 2, on findings and declaration of policy. Mr. ROBERTS. Yes, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. All right. Now, let us see what you have in mind. Mr. ROBERTS. It states that: For the reasons hereinafter enumerated, the promotion and protection of interstate and foreign commerce by air and the conservation, promotion, and development of civil aeronautics as a vital national asset for the national defense, commerce, the Postal Service, and the general welfare, require the national regulation and promotion of the operation and navigation of all civil aircraft using the air space over the United States. I am wondering if this, in view of that statement, if this legislation at this time is timely. We have approximately 32 to 37 States with State aviation agencies. Now, many of these State men who are familiar with aviation problems are in the armed services, the Navy, the Army, and various other branches. Consequently, many of them cannot speak in opposing this bill at the present time, and the indications are from the correspondence I have had with them that they are opposed to the act in general. So, it would appear to me to give everybody in aviation a chance to digest this and an opportunity to state their objections, that it should be postponed until such time as they can do so. Mr. BULWINKLE. Do you not think that we will have to have some post-war planning? Mr. ROBERTS. Sir? Mr. BULWINKLE. Do you not think that we should have some postwar planning, legislation looking toward the future? Mr. ROBERTS. I think the present act is sufficient for that, be cause Mr. BULWINKLE. Then as I understand it, so far as your opinion is concerned, that we sholud do nothing more now than what is already in the existing law; that you do not need look forward to the future at all until after the war is over. Mr. ROBERTS. I should judge that the present act is sufficient. Mr. ROBERTS. Also Mr. MYERS. Mr. Roberts, before you go on, I understood the chairman of the Commission to state that in his opinion many of the provisions contained in this bill were not only worth while, but should be adopted. His objections seemed to be upon the infringement of States' rights and he dwelt on the taxation feature. That was the only feature that I understood him to object to, infringement of States' rights with regard to the taxation feature. I might be wrong, but I understood him to say that there were many provisions in this bill which he thought quite worth while and probably should be adopted. That is the witness who preceded you. Mr. ROBERTS. That may be quite true. That is his statement, sir. Mr. BULWINKLE. You may proceed. We only have 15 minutes more. Mr. ROBERTS. I question paragraph (3) on this which states that aircraft are used primarily as instrumentalities of military and postal operations and commercial air navigation among the several States. I question the use of aircraft primarily in those categories as mentioned there. At this time I grant it is true. 1 Mr. BULWINKLE. Well, let me just ask you this, because you are confusing some other things. Here is the Federal Government making a law, and here the Federal Government is spending money for the development of aircraft. Would the Federal Government spend it just purely for personal use of its citizens if it were not for the national defense and the commerce features? Mr. ROBERTS. I would answer that by saying that it has. Mr. BULWINKLE. It has what; spent it purely for personal pleasures, you might say? Mr. ROBERTS. No; I would not say for personal pleasures. It has spent money in the training of these pilots before the war started, which was more or less-at the time that started there were no indications Mr. BULWINKLE. Oh, yes; this committee brought that out and this committee did it in order that we would have a reservoir of pilots in case an emergency should happen. Mr. ROBERTS. In that case I withdraw my objection to that one. I have not further objections to the bill, but I would like to present for the record here a resolution adopted by the Illinois Commerce Commission. Mr. BULWINKLE. You have that privilege. It may be inserted in the record in the course of your remarks. (The resolution referred to is as follows:) STATE OF ILLINOIS-ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION AT ITS REGULAR SESSION AT SPRINGFIELD, ILL., MARCH 2, 1943, RELATIVE TO THE CIVIL AERONAUTICS BILL (H. R. 1012) AMENDING THE CIVIL AERONAUTICS ACT OF 1938 By the Commission: The Illinois Commerce Commission has examined the civil aeronautics bill (H. R. 1012) to amend the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, and has also reviewed Report No. 124 of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce pertaining to said bill, and finds that the said bill, if enacted in its present form, would take away from this commission its present rightful authority over intrastate commerce. This is clear from the proposed definition of "Interstate air commerce" as set forth in new paragraph (a) of new subsection 21 of section 1 of said act, as proposed to be amended, and also from new paragraph (a) of new subsection 22 of said section 1 defining "Interstate air transportation." Also the proposed elimination of such words as "interstate or overseas" at various other places in the Civil Aeronautics Act of 1938, clearly indicates the intent to broaden the scope of the Federal authority so as to preclude any jurisdiction by State commissions. While this commission recognizes the importance of transcontinental and other interstate air commerce, and the correlation of such air transportation with the conduct of the war, it nevertheless is our opinion and considered judgment that nothing can be gained by depriving the States of their present jurisdiction and powers over intrastate transportation: Therefore, be it Resolved, That the Illinois Commerce Commission oppose the passage by the Congress of the United States, of civil aeronautics bill (H. R. 1012) and that the commission oppose any and all attempts to limit or deprive the sovereign State of Illinois of its right to regulate intrastate commerce within the said State of Illinois; be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to each of the Senators and Representatives from the State of Illinois who are Members of the Seventyeighth Congress of the United States. Adopted by the commission at Springfield, Ill., this 2d day of March 1943. ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION, Mr. ROBERTS. At the same time Mr. O'HARA. Mr. Chairman, I would also like to have Mr. Roberts insert his resolution. I do not believe he concluded reading it. (The resolution referred to appears earlier in the witness' statement.) Mr. BULWINKLE. Yes. You did not get quite through with that. Mr. ROBERTS. No, sir. At the same time, I would like to tell you so that you gentlemen may have the picture, the functions of the Illinois Aeronautics Commission. It was created by act of the legislature in 1931, and since that time it has acted in a promotional regulatory capacity. We have endeavored to promote particularly airports throughout the State of Illinois, not only in the large cities, but in the small cities, so that all of our citizens can have airport facilities as far as possible. At the present time in connection with that we are making surveys of airports for cities working very closely with the Illinois Highway Department, using certain technical information that they have in particular in connection with drainage and runways, and we have more or less laid out a long-range program which we had hoped to tie in with the Federal airport development program. This statement is not made by the commission, or in my capacity at representative of the commission, but more or less as a private individual. I think that the State of Illinois, within a few years, particularly after this war, would cooperate in an airport development program on a basis of Federal, State, and local participation. It seems to me that that is practical, because it has been tried out and followed in the highway program, and we have in the State of Illinois one of the best highway systems in the country, and it is its desire and the desire of the commission to have one of the best airport systems in the country. Mr. O'HARA. Right along that line, Mr. Roberts, what would that cost amount to, having in mind the number of communities, and the number of airports you think should be developed? Mr. ROBERTS. We have 116 communities that have over 5,000 population, and at the present time we have in the legislature an act, proposed enabling act, creating airport authorities in these various cities. So that by the creation of this authority we will have somebody in the community to carry the ball on these airport developments. Mr. O'HARA. You mean in other words that there are 116 communities that you visualize in Illinois that should have airport construction? |