50 years ago. It was referred to the Senate Committee on Interstate Commerce and was reported in Senate Report No. 992 on February 25, 1895. It was a bill to authorize Congress to pay $100,000 to any inventor, from whatever part of the world, who within a given time might construct a vessel which, on the verified report of engineers appointed by the Secretary of War, would demonstrate within or near the City of Washington the practicability of navigating the air at 30 miles per hour, carrying passengers and freight weighing at least 5 tons. When we survey the achievements of the air lines in transporting passengers and freight for the military during the past year, it is prophetic indeed that the first bill should have directed the Secretary of War to oversee the proposed experiment in the aerial transportation of passengers and freight. Another interesting and timely indication of the relationship of civil aeronautics to the national defense is to be found in the documents relating to the formation of the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. Glancing back at House Report No. 1423 of the Sixtythird Congress, where the committee on Naval Affairs recommended the creation of the N. A. C. A., we find listed first among those Government officials who favored the step the name of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, then Acting Secretary of the Navy. And at the outset of his letter on the subject-and, remember, this letter was dated February 12, 1915-he said: This new method of transportation by aircraft will, in my opinion, soon be utilized commercially as well as in the defense of our country. His linking of the commercial and military interest in air transportation is only another evidence of the foresight and wisdom displayed so often by our great Commander in Chief with respect to the development of civil aeronautics. It is not surprising, therefore, that in his letter to the National Aviation Forum of January 24, 1939, in speaking of the national policy set up by Congress in the Civil Aeronautics Act, he remarked that civil aviation supplies a reservoir of inestimable value to our military and naval forces in the form of men and machines. * * The proposal, therefore, in the new declaration of policy to the effect that the air transport system is to be located, equipped, and staffed, so that it may serve as the merchant marine of the air, simply reflects what has been in the minds of our leaders for many years past, and recognizes what we have learned in actual experience. By all means that policy should be affirmed and reaffirmed in the clearest possible terms. Only through diligent adherence to that policy can our Nation hope to provide for a victorious peace the indispensable conditions for the prevention of war in generations to come. None of us, I am sure, is satisfied with the progress made in air transportation prior to this war. Immeasurable as have been the benefits to us and to our allies of the air transport facilities which had been built up, there is no question but that had we started earlier or built more rapidly, we might even by now have shattered the Axis. In the world of the future there must be no lack of civil air transport facilities flying the American flag, carrying the power of America to the uttermost reaches of the earth, and providing at home a vast fleet which on the instant can be mobilized and directed to points of danger, loaded with the military men and machines who can do the job we must always be prepared to do. Mr. Chairman, in the last war I had the privilege of handling the strategy of our air forces. The maximum move we ever made in any one day was 120 miles. That was because we were limited to the speed of ground transportation and hampered by congestions on the roads. Mr. O'HARA. Colonel, in connection with that, and your position in the last war, we hear repeatedly that we had no American planes fighting in France in World War I. What is the fact? Colonel GORRELL. That rumor is absolutely false. It has been published time after time in the papers and used in speeches on the floor of Congress, and there is no truth in it. America had in Europe an assembly plant for planes manufactured on this side of the water and shipped abroad by boat. The assembly plant was so large that when General Pershing inspected it we had to put him on a railroad train to have him view it in the course of his stay. When the war ended, airplanes were stacked on the docks of this country, because there was not shipping space enough to get them across. Mr. O'HARA. I particularly wanted to have your viewpoint on that Colonel, because here just recently I saw in the press a statement that we had no American planes over there; that our aviators were flying British airplanes. Colonel GORRELL. It may interest you to know that the war plans of the A. E. F. called for the beginning of flight by American-built airplanes during the month of August 1918. The first squadron of American-built airplanes with American-built engines and other equipment in them flew over the lines on August 2, 1918. We did fly a lot of airplanes bought from our allies. For your information, we got almost no airplanes from the British. America could have shipped more airplanes abroad, but had they done so the policy would have been wrong. Planes would have taken up too much shipping space. The first thing we did in the summer of 1917 was to buy $100,000,000 worth of machine tools and raw materials. We took that equipment to France and doubled the production of the French factories. The British production was low, so we left them alone, except that we gave them materials which increased production for their own forces. The production in French factories was divided between American and French Armies. There was no mode of communication between this country and Europe that was fast during the last war. We could not fly the ocean. By the time we would learn what we needed for fighting purposes on the front, and could get the information back to America and place it in production, it would be out of date even before our factories got started, insofar as the pursuit planes were concerned. I remember that on July 31, 1917, we recommended that America build a type of Spad as the type of airplane for our pursuit purposes on the front. Less than 30 days had gone by when the second battle of Verdun took place and there the Germans came out with a two-seater pursuit plane that was a better one than the one which we had recommended that America build. Also, the sample of that pursuit plane which we got from the French pursuant to our July 31 recommenda tion did not reach the United States until September 26. It took about a month and a fraction longer in getting here than the Germans took to put it out of business. Had we sent it over there it would have been a death trap. What we did in this country was to try to build the larger planes, the types which did not change so often. We built in Europe, near the battle zone, the types that changed frequently. That was necessary because it was hard to communicate between the two countries and types of pursuit planes changed in 1918 at the rate of once every 30 days. We could not then build satisfactory pursuit planes in this country except for training purposes. Mr. O'HARA. Colonel, I appreciate very much having your testimony · in the record on that point. Colonel GORRELL. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. That concludes your statement on that subject? Colonel GORRELL. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Thereupon, at 12:10 p. m., the committee adjourned until 10 o'clock the following morning, Tuesday, February 9, 1943.) AMENDMENTS TO THE CIVIL AERONAUTICS ACT OF 1938 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1943 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOREIGN COMMERCE, Washington, D. C. The committee met, pursuant to adjournment, 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.Resumed Colonel GORRELL. Mr. Chairman, I have taken the liberty of laying on a number of your desks an advertisement released to the press by us a couple of weeks ago. Even a couple of years ago an advertisement of that kind would hardly have been believed. The illustration shows a couple of Army officers at some place west of Suez, having come by air from different parts of the world. Also, it mentions how air transport today makes the entire globe a conference table for the highest ranking officials of the United Nations. I thought that possibly the proposed advertisement might be of interest to you. Mr. Chairman, the people I represent and I are grateful for the time you have given to me. I know I have taken a lot of your time, but now I desire to close my testimony with but little more imposition. upon your limited time. I shall shortly complete my testimony. The CHAIRMAN. You have taken up some of the remaining topics for discussion in that material? Colonel GORRELL. Yes, sir. I desire to talk about regulation of contract carriers. The Congress has discussed that for a number of years and I am sure the general principle is well known to all of you. I wish to talk about declaratory orders, which is a legal question. I would like to make a minor suggestion concerning the filing of agree ments. I may make a suggestion on the paragraph about arbitration. I shall make the comment that in paragraph 802 the author of the bill seems to be on the right track in order to protect the taxpayers' pocketbook by preventing duplication of taxes. I shall suggest in reference to the Weather Bureau that the number of students to be allowed be increased from 10 to some higher number. The proposal before you suggests it. It seems to us that is a good 83838-43-14 205 |