Colonel GORRELL. Mr. Chairman, may I have one moment more? Before leaving this subject there is one small matter to which we respectifùlly invite the committee's attention. Section 1106 of the present Civil Aeronautics Act provides that the act does not abridge or alter remedies now existing at common law or by statute, but the provisions of this act are in addition to such remedies. It is by no means clear what this particular section means or what practical effect it may have.

However, it might mean that statutory or common-law rights and obligations, apart from those specifically defined in the Civil Aeronautics Act, might in certain circumstances be applied. It is suggested that in line with the policy reflected in H. R. 1012 to gather together in one statute a full statement of the rights and duies of persons subject to the act, the repeal of section 1106 would be in order. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will adjourn to meet at the call of the Chair, probably Monday or Tuesday, but not tomorrow, anyway.

(Thereupon, at 4:06 p. m., the committee adjourned to meet at the call of the Chair as above indicated.)

AMENDMENTS TO THE CIVIL AERONAUTICS ACT OF 1938

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1943

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON
INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a. m., Hon. Clarence F. Lea (chairman) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will please come to order. You may proceed, Colonel Gorrell.

STATEMENT OF COL. EDGAR S. GORRELL, PRESIDENT OF THE AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Colonel GORRELL. Mr. Chairman, when I left the stand last ThursI had just finished discussing the matter of regulating intrastate commerce. Before turning to a new subject I would like to invite the attention of the committee to a document of some importance which contains much material bearing on the constitutionality and the wisdom of regulating intrastate commerce as proposed in H. R. 1012. This document is entitled "Legislative History of the Air Commerce Act of 1926," printed for the use of the House Committee on Intrastate and Foreign Commerce by the Government Printing Office in 1928. The document gathers together many of the recommendations which led this committee, in the act of 1926, to regulate intrastate commerce in certain material respects. Since that document is now very scarce, since it is of great historical importance, and since it contains much material of direct relevance to the bill now before you, may I suggest that it be reprinted as an appendix to the hearings on this bill? While the document is fairly long, I am sure that its importance will more than warrant its reproduction at this time. The CHAIRMAN. Colonel, how long is that document; do you remember?

Colonel GORRELL. It might be an eighth or a quarter of an inch thick. The CHAIRMAN. We might review that and decide it, if necessary. Colonel GORRELL. The document is a great tribute to the foresight of this committee and historically it is very important.

Mr. BULWINKLE. I am in favor of that, Colonel.

Colonel GORRELL. I hope you will review it in the affirmative.
Mr. HOLMES. What is that document, Colonel?

Colonel GORRELL. So far as I know, it has no number It is very scarce. We can find one copy for you.

Mr. BULWINKLE. I can probably have that reprinted by the Committee on Printing as a House document.

Colonel GORRELL. The document shows that the committee a generation ago looked forward to this problem, was ahead of the country, even when we had no air industry.

Mr. BULWINKLE. I suggest that we review it in the committee, and I would suggest, Colonel, that you go over it. Parts of it you might be able to cut out.

Colonel GORRELL. Mr. Layton says that it is not a very long docu

ment.

The CLERK. It is a very scarce one.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, we will probably be agreeable to that. We will check it over first.

Colonel GORRELL. Thank you.

In connection with the questions that Congressman Halleck asked me last Thursday morning, may I expressly invite attention to the facts stated in a decision by the Civil Aeronautics Board in the Pennsylvania Central Rate Case, Docket No. 494, December 26, 1942. These figures demonstrate that three-tenths of a mill per pound-mile for carrying air mail (a rate of compensation which the Board has fixed in a number of cases) results in a profit for the Government exceeding by more than 40 percent the average profit made on highly remunerative first-class mail in the ordinary mail service.

If I may have the privilege, I would like to quote one sentence from that decision.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well.

Colonel GORRELL. It appears on page 56:

The net Post Office profit on each piece of air mail moving over routes on which a rate of three-tenths of a mill per pound-mile may be established will exceed by more than 40 percent the net profit on each piece of letter mail transported in the highly remunerative first-class mail service.

That very enlightening sentence is from the pen of the Honorable Edward P. Warner, who is now in this room, and is one of the greatest authorities in all America on matters, both aeronautical and scientific.

Mr. Chairman, before I take up the next subject, may I please invite attention to the fact that it is rather indicative of the age in which we are living, and our viewpoint that we have around the wall this morning no maps based on the Mercator projection. In years gone by when we looked at a map, we looked at it from that point of view. Today we are looking at a globe, or we are looking at a map projected around some point on the earth's surface, such as the Pole, and thinking in terms of great circle courses.

AIR NAVIGATION FACILITIES

I turn now to section 13 of the bill, at the bottom of page 9, which proposes to rewrite section 307 of the Civil Aeronautics Act. The proposal is that the Administrator of Civil Aeronautics should prepare and maintain a coherent development program for airports and other air navigation facilities, taking into account, among other things, probable developments in aeronautics in order that his program may be kept ahead of immediate needs. It is also provided that the Administrator shall report to Congress from time to time, and in any event at least once a year, concerning his program and the progress made toward its accomplishment.

I have in mind there, Mr. Chairman, that some Government body should be required by Congress to make reports at reasonable intervals on what it visualizes in the future as regards aerial navigation facilities, and airports, and so on.

The fact that when this war hit so suddenly you were able to fly across Alaska, and across the islands of the Pacific, not for commercial reasons, but for national defense, is proof enough that you understand the need for air navigation facilities. Those who came before the Congress in the past and suggested that devices be placed upon certain vital Pacific islands and in certain spots in Alaska, were civilians not connected with the Government.

There was one point, without mentioning names, attacked by the Japanese some months ago where the Japanese attack failed. In our judgment, one of the principal things that turned back that attack was the fact that an airport had been finished only 3 days before the Japs attacked, and our pursuit planes had occupied it less than 72 hours before. That airport was installed because civilians came to Congress and asked for appropriations.

The Government should look forward into things of this nature, and this item on pages 9 and 10 would so provide.

In this proposal there is nothing fundamentally new. However, there is no clear indication in the present act that the Administrator is to lay out a definite long-range program and work consistently toward its accomplishment with definite objectives in mind. Nor is there any expression on the part of Congress indicating the importance of keeping our air navigation facilities not only abreast but well ahead of the needs of the national defense and commerce.

In the recent report of the House Select Committee to Investigate Air Accidents, it is pointed out that the Federal airways will have to be overhauled after the war. And I am sure that this committee from its own familiarity with the problem will appreciate how vital an adequate system of air navigation facilities is. Indeed, I recall with pleasure the keen interest in this matter which was displayed by this committee during our testimony on the civil aeronautics bill both in 1937 and in 1938.

You will recall that there was a period, in the early 1930's, when appropriations for the construction of air navigation facilities fell literally to zero. Shocking as that may seem to us now, responsibility must be shared by all. In the early 1930's, before we fully appreciated the possibilities of instrument flying, the significance of a system of air navigation facilities was simply not fully realized.

It may interest you to know that when I appeared before your committee in 1938, measured from the beginning of the air lines in 1926 up to 1938, the civilian air lines had invested more in and along the airways than had Uncle Sam. Appropriations by Uncle Sam for new and original equipment on airways went to zero for 3 consecutive years, and it was only after a very serious accident in which a prominent Senator was killed that Congress began to provide for the erection of any further facilities. I can remember for instance during the years 1938, 1937, and 1936, when the Army desired to practice night flying, it was forced to call up civilians and ask if they would please turn on their beacon lights and their radios in order that the United States Army might practice its maneuvers by night time. Certainly that is not a situation which Congress would care to see recur.