2. In accordance with the principle set forth in paragraph 8 of Article 19 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation the ratification of this Convention by any Member shall not be deemed to affect any existing law, award, custom or agreement in virtue of which members of the armed forces or the police enjoy any right guaranteed by this Convention.

Article 6

This Convention does not deal with the position of public servants engaged in the administration of the State, nor shall it be construed as prejudicing their rights or status in any way.

Article 7

The formal ratifications of this Convention shall be communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration.

Article 8

1. This Convention shall be binding only upon those Members of the International Labour Organisation whose ratifications have been registered with the Director-General.

2. It shall come into force twelve months after the date on which the ratifications of two Members have been registered with the Director-General.

3. Thereafter, this Convention shall come into force for any Member twelve months after the date on which its ratification has been registered.

Article 9

1. Declarations communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 35 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation shall indicate-

(a) the territories in respect of which the Member concerned undertakes that the provisions of the Convention shall be applied without modification; (b) the territories in respect of which it undertakes that the provisions of the Convention shall be applied subject to modifications, together with details of the said modifications;

(c) the territories in respect of which the Convention is inapplicable and in such cases the grounds on which it is inapplicable;

(d) the territories in respect of which it reserves its decision pending further consideration of the position.

2. The undertakings referred to in subparagraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 of this Article shall be deemed to be an integral part of the ratification and shall have the force of ratification.

3. Any Member may at any time by a subsequent declaration cancel in whole or in part any reservation made in its original declaration in virtue of subparagraph (b), (c), or (d) of paragraph 1 of this Article.

4. Any Member may, at any time at which the Convention is subject to denunciation in accordance with thte provisions of Article 11, communicate to the Director-General a declaration modifying in any other respect the terms of any former declaration and stating the present position in respect of such territories as it may specify.

Article 10

1. Declarations communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 5 of Article 35 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organisation shall indicate whether the proprosions of the Convention will be applied in the territory concerned without modification or subject to modifications; when the declaration indicates that the provisions of the Convention will be applied subject to modifications, it shall give details of the said modifications.

2. The Member, Members, or international authority concerned may at any time by a subsequent declaration renounce in whole or in part the right to have recourse to any modification indicated in any former declaration.

3. The Member, Members, or international authority concerned may, at any time at which this Convention is subject to denunciation in accordance with the provisions of Article 11, communicate to the Director-General a declaration modifying in any other respect the terms of any former declaration and stating the present position in respect of the application of the Convention.

Article 11

1. A Member which has ratified this Convention may denounce it after the expiration of ten years from the date on which the Convention first comes into force, by an act communicated to the Director-General of the International Labour Office for registration. Such denunciation shall not take effect until one year after the date on which it is registered.

2. Each Member which has ratified this Convention and which does not, within the year following the expiration of the period of ten years, mentioned in the preceding paragraph, exercise the right of denunciation provided for in this Article, will be bound for another period of ten years and, thereafter, may denounce this Convention at the expiration of each period of ten years under the terms provided for in this Article.

Article 12

1. The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall notify all Members of the International Labour Organisation of the registration of all ratifications, declarations, and denunciations communicated to him by the Members of the Organisation.

2. When notifying the Members of the Organisation of the registration of the second ratification communicated to him, the Director-General shall draw the attention of the Members of the Organisation to the date upon which the Convention will come into force.

Article 13

The Director-General of the International Labour Office shall communicate to the Secretary-General of the United Nations for registration in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter of the United Nations full particulars of all ratifications, declarations and acts of denunciation registered by him in accordance with the provisions of the preceding articles.

Article 14

At the expiration of each period of ten years after the coming into force of this Convention, the Governing Body of the International Labour Office shall present to the General Conference a report on the working of this Convention and shall consider the desirability of placing on the agenda of the Conference the question of its revision in whole or in part.

Article 15

1. Should the Conference adopt a new Convention revising this Convention in whole or in part, then, unless the new Convention otherwise provides

(a) the ratification by a Member of the new revising Convention shall ipso jure involve the immediate denunciation of this Convention, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 11 above, if and when the new revising Convention shall have come into force;

(b) as from the date when the new revising Convention comes into force this Convention shall cease to be open to ratification by the Members.

2. This Convention shall in any case remain in force in its actual form and content for those Members which have ratified it but have not ratified the revising Convention.

Article 16

The English and French versions of the text of this Convention are equally authoritative.

Mr. McGRATH. Because I think some lawyers ought to take a look at those two conventions. Because if you ratified those conventions, I think you would have the closed shop in America.

Now, then, there is another one that has to do with fee-charging employment agencies. And there were two conventions. I think one was a recommendation. Under that setup, the Government would have the right to supervise.

Now, if I recall correctly, the supervision and authority of the United States Government was taken away from the State employment agencies, and they are now all remanded back to the States. I say to you that there are two conventions, one of which is now in the Foreign Relations Committee, that, if passed, would give the Federal Government supervision again over the employment agencies.

Those are the two sleepers that are in there. And, of course, they mix them in with a lot of maritime conventions, so that they get you in the habit of voting for these things. You see, you have voted for 10 of them now. And they say they are harmless maritime conventions. But fortunately someone was smart enough in the Senate, when the last four were ratified, to insert a reservation. You see, the other five went through. And when these maritime conventions went through, they put a reservation in there that it did not apply to the inland waterways of the United States. Now, whether that will hold or not, I don't know. But you see, the general idea there is that they know that your average businessman is not going to complain too much about maritime commerce, you see. They can put those into effect. And apparently you are not going to get too many businessmen coming down here and complaining about maritime conventions. There is an easier way to get around that. You can change the registry of your ships to Panama or Colombia, and then Panama and Colombia, are not members of the International Labor Organization, and you can avoid any restrictive practices that might be objectionable.

One of these conventions, No. 55, I think has already gone to the Supreme Court. And I bet there are very few people that know about it. That was convention No. 55. It is a maritime convention that was ratified. The circumstances are these:

There was a sailor on one of our ships, and he got off the ship and walked up on top of a mountain to a tavern and got drunk and fell off the cliff and was injured. Well, of course, heretofore the practice was if the man was injured while on board ship, in other words, if he was out on a social expedition in the town, I don't think the shipper would have been responsible. But I think if you will check into that case, that went to the Supreme Court on convention 55. I don't know how the Supreme Court evaded the thing in some way, but in any event the employer paid in that particular instance. But you see, they are just getting you conditiond. They have 10 of those through. But the sleepers are now in the Foreign Relations Committee.

Senator DIRKSEN. I might say, as a footnote, that the States very graciously yielded their employment services on telegraphic requests to the President of the United States during wartime. But it took us 4 years and more—and I had some part in it in the House of Representatives-in getting them back into the hands of the States. But it was not without an awful fight.

Mr. McGRATH. They will never thank you for it, because that was a great blow.

Senator DIRKSEN. But once it is lodged here, to get it back in proper hands is almost a lifetime job.

Mr. McGRATH. Don't you see how devious these people plan, how they move into the back door if they can't deal with you at the front door? They go around to the back door, And that is dangerous. How can you men keep alert to all of these things that are taking

place? I mean, you have enough trouble watching your front door and your visitors coming in.

The issue cannot be dismissed by saying casually that of course even a bare quorum of the Senate could not conceivably ratify anything that would not be in conformity with the Constitution. We are not talking about just today. We are concerned with the entire future history of the United States.

My basic concern in this whole situation is that there exists in Geneva an international organization which is presuming to write laws covering domestic matters for every country in the world. I have been there myself, and I have seen it operate. By simply calling everything "international," the ILO, supposed in theory to confine itself to matters concerning labor, is now arrogating unto itself the right to prescribe domestic legislation, on any subject it selects, for nations the world over.

Now, on that book that I gave you, if you will look on the back page you will see that the International Labor Organization is an association of nations, not a labor organization. They are very careful. It is not a labor organization. It is an association of nations, you see. It is no more a labor organization than it is an employers' organization. And they put that right on there, so then you don't have any trouble. They have come to the point where they think they can get away with that.

In this connection, Judge Florence Allen, of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit—and that, incidentally, sits in Cincinnati part of the time-says in her recent book entitled, "The Treaty as an Instrument of Legislation:"

Does the fact that the ILO, in its Philadelphia declaration, stated broad human objectives make it the legislative agent of the nations of the world in problems other than those affecting labor? That the ILO think so was clearly evident in the 1949 Report of the Director, who said in his report: "Today the role of the organization as an international parliament has become generally accepted."

I think that makes it pretty definite.

Who is going to write the domestic laws for the United States of America? An international organization sitting in Geneva or the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States, sitting in Washington? That, gentlemen, is the basic question I put before you today in connection with your consideration of Senate Joint Resolution No. 1.

And I certainly thank you, and if you have any questions I shall be glad to answer them.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, indeed.

I might say to you that if there is anything else that occurs to you that you would like to file with this committee before the 14th day of March, we would like to have you do so.

Mr. McGRATH. Since this meeting, there are some other documents that I would like to send in.

The CHAIRMAN. We would be delighted to have them. If any of your friends or associates wish to file them before the 14th day of March, every opportunity will be given to you.

Mr. McGRATH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator Dirksen and Senator Butler. I am very grateful to you for your courteous treatment.

(The information referred to follows:)

REPORT OF ROBERT L. HOGG, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL Counsel of THE AMERICAN LIFE CONVENTION, TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE AMERICAN LIFE CONVENTION RELATIVE TO THE 1952 INTERNATIONAL LABOR CONFERENCE

REPORT RELATIVE TO 1952 MEETING OF THE INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION

A brief description of the International Labor Organization, will facilitate this report of my attendance upon its 1952 conference in Geneva, Switzerland. The organization referred to as the ILO, and originally organized in 1919 as an adjunct to the League of Nations, has current participation by 66 countries. Coincident with the virtual dissolution of the League of Nations, it became an instrumentality of the United Nations and consequently has attained great prestige. The United States became a member in 1934 by a joint resolution of Congress. Each country has a tripartite representation-2 delegates representing government, 1 representing employers, and 1 representing employees. To each class of representatives, there are accredited advisers. The United States group, including delegates and advisers attending the 1952 conference numbered about 50. Administrative operation is conducted through what is called the International Labor Office. The staff is currently headed by Hon. David A. Morse, an American, with the title of Director General. Parenthetically, the late Hon. John G. Winant at one time held this same position. The staff is representative of all the 66 participating countries and of course is a cross section of all forms of governments and ideologies. Consequently, in ILO matters we cannot assume, as we are apt to assume, that the basic day-to-day operations of the ILO are sympathetic, either to our form of government or our economy. Of course, there are to be found some who do subscribe to them. These are probably in the minority.

Member countries meet annually in Geneva in the International Labor Conference which functions much the same as any legislative body and there is great similarity with some of the procedures of our Congress. There are committees on all important subjects. As practically all these committees meet simultaneously, obviously the delegates themselves must be represented at these meetings by advisers.

Tripartite committees are made up of an employer, an employee and a government representative from each country. For each tripartite committee, each of the above participating groups has its own special committee. Tripartite committees traditionally function under chairmanship of a government repre sentative.

Since the conference is held only once a year, interim direction is entrusted to the governing body which corresponds to an executive committee of commercial organizations. The governing body meets three or four times ecah year. Its jurisdiction is limited to such things as the agenda of the International Labor Conference and the operations of the International Labor Office.

Since the basic purpose of the International Labor Organization is to procure international cooperative action, this can be accomplished only at the annual conferences. Action can take the form of a resolution, a recommendation, or a convention. A resolution is merely a declaration of policy. A recommendation is substantially the same coupled with a strong advisory flavor. A convention on the other hand is very positive action, in that it is a draft of a treaty which each of the participating countries, under the constitution of the ILO is expected to ratify. It is of such importance in the ILO setup that a country not ratifying one of these conventions after its adoption by the conference, is called upon at periodic intervals to explain the failure of ratification. The conference has adopted 99 conventions of which the United States has ratified only a few dealing primarily with maritime matters.

Since its inception, the International Labor Organization has concerned itself with social security in a comprehensive way. At various times during its history, the annual conferences have approved treaties and made recommendations on the various phases of social security. Flowing from this consideration of social security on an item by item basis, was a 1951 proposal whereby all phases of social security which be consolidated into one instrument. This approach was was we may call a package deal, covering nine branches of social security. The objective was to establish minimum standards for social security throughout the world. This proposal for minmium standards was not, of itself, of momentous importance to our country. The method of measuring compliance with the