Mr. GRIFFIN. That is not my intention, I will say, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Wait until the witness is through, please.

Mr. GRIFFIN. My idea of this bill

Mr. JOHNSON. You have got a witness here; let us hear from him. Mr. GRIFFIN. I want to make a correction.

Mr. JOHNSON. We are developing a line of thought from the witness as to advancing peace through admitting a few more pacifists in the United States as citizens.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And I am against it.

Mr. JOHNSON. You must not impugn your own witness. This witness thinks he can help us.

The CHAIRMAN. Let the witness go ahead and give you his reasons. Mr. HAHN. I want to say that, if the other nations, for instance, are to have faith in our integrity, our honesty, as peace lovers, we cannot simply bar these people, whose only crime the crime of agreeing with our declaration that war is a crime, can we? It seems to me that if our outlawry pact is to be anything but a scrap of paper, anything but an empty gesture, then, men and women, like those who have been barred-those men and women are more consistent and more desirable citizens than the militaristic crowd, the saber rattler and jingler-if that gesture brings our Nation nearer and nearerMr. JOHNSON. You would not have any defense at all.

Mr. HAHN. What is that?

Mr. JOHNSON. You would not have any arms at all, if you had your way; you would not have a single gun?

Mr. HAHN. If I would have my way, there would not be any arms; no.

Mr. JOHNSON. You would have the United States then with no Military Establishment whatever?

Mr. HAHN. No what?

Mr. JOHNSON. No Military Establishment?

Mr. HAHN. I believe the United States ought to place more emphasis upon the peace machinery of the world; not to disarm as an isolated unit in a world bearing arms; but the United States should spend some of these hundreds of millions of dollars that are being expended upon militarism to-day-in educating our youth and drilling our youth in militarism-to spend some of those millions for the purpose of building up the peace machinery of the world.

Mr. JENKINS. You will agree that our country has done more than any other country in the world?

Mr. HAHN. I do not think I could admit that; no.

Mr. JENKINS. What country do you think has done more in the last 20 years to bring about an outlawry of war?

Mr. HAHN. It is not so much a matter of what the nations have done; it is what the small groups have done in that direction.

Mr. JENKINS. I asked you a question. I asked if you knew it was not true that this country of ours had done more than any other nation in the world, and you said you could not agree with that.

Mr. HAHN. No.

Mr. JENKINS. What country has done more?

Mr. HAHN. Denmark, Holland, the Scandinavian countries, and England, I think, has done more in late years.

Mr. JENKINS. What, for instance, has England done?

Mr. HAHN. She has put forth and is in the League of Nations, for instance.

Mr. JENKINS. In other words, you think we ought to be in the League of Nations, do you?

Mr. HAHN. No; I am not in full agreement with the League of Nations, but a lot of people are. I am not asking any peace group to follow my particular fancy as to what should be done; I am merely asking them to work for peace.

Mr. CROWE. I would like to make one suggestion here: This country, the United States, has had a border with Canada several hundred miles long, for a great many years, and we have not been in any scrap with Canada. This country does not wage wars against other nations. Would not it be better to leave these people in Europe, where they do have all of these wars, and where they promote them? We are peace loving here; and if you have people of that kind in Europe, would it not be better to leave them there, where they could promote their ideas, where they are needed? do not need them here.

Mr. HAHN. I am not asking that we send out an S. O. S. to all of the pacifists in the world to come here. I am merely talking about this proposition as a gesture on our part, the gesture of a peace-loving nation.

Mr. JENKINS. Let me ask you a question: Do you come here representing anybody? You said you were a minister of the church. Mr. HAHN. Yes.

Mr. JENKINS. Whom do you represent here; anybody send you here?

Mr. HAHN. No; just as a religionist, intensely interested in the cause of peace.

Mr. JENKINS. Do you belong to any of these organizations?
Mr. HAHN. No.

Mr. JENKINS. Or any pink organizations of any kind?

Mr. HAHN. I do not know what you mean.

Mr. JENKINS. Well, you know what the common acceptation

is what they mean?

The CHAIRMAN. You mean any peace organization?

Mr. JENKINS. No; any pink organization.

Mr. HAHN. No; I do not think I belong to a single pink organi

zation.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Parlor socialists!

Mr. HAHN. I try to be a consistent Christian.

Mr. CROWE. Did you pay your own way here or somebody else

pay it?

Mr. HAHN. What is that?

Mr. CROWE. Did you pay your own way here?

Mr. HAHN. Absolutely.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you have anything further that you want to present to the committee?

Mr. HAHN. I just have this further to say: This is more or less a question of whether you want to admit citizens who believe in violence, or admit those whose love is peace; specially in view of the fact that our great population centers are more and more rapidly drifting into lawlessness, and under the dominion of gunmen and gangsters and racketeers, whose qualifications are belief in violence,

are quick on the trigger, who will not satisfy their differences in court, but settle them with sawed-off shotguns and machine guns. I say, in view of that fact, we, who love America, ought to thank God that, occasionally, some aliens come over here, knocking at our door for citizenship, who do not believe in violence, but who believe in the civilized method of law and order..

Mr. JENKINS. Reverend, do you not know and do you not believe that all of these gun organizations, all of these fellows who want to put the red flag above the American flag, all of that class of people are on your side in this matter?

Mr. HAHN. I beg to differ with you. That red flag crowd believe in violence. You are deporting and jailing those in this country who want to change our Government by violence. You are deporting them and jailing them; and then we turn around and say, likewise, to those who do not believe in violence, "We do not want you here." Mr. CROWE. You do not mean to say that naturalized aliens believe in violence, do you?

Mr. HAHN. What?

Mr. CROWE. That naturalized aliens believe in violence?

Mr. HAHN. No; I do not say that, but if you refuse to pass this bill

Mr. CROWE. What percentage of the naturalized aliens are in that class?

Mr. HAHN. I have not the slightest idea.

Mr. CROWE. You are classing them all in one class?

Mr. HAHN. I am not. I say, if you fail to report favorably on this bill, you are placing a premium on the kind that does believe in violence; they are the only ones that can get in.

Mr. JOHNSON. Now, right there, I want your best judgment—if what we have just heard is correct, is it not better for this committee to undertake to make a bill putting limitations and restrictions, on those who seek to become citizens of the United States, through the naturalization process that makes it hard-is not that a necessary deduction from your testimony?

Mr. HAHN. Not at all. By the first series of questions, you can not elicit from the man who bears violence toward the United States and comes in here to destroy it-you are not going to get him to confess it?

The CHAIRMAN. Who is your next witness?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Now, Mr. Chairman, in view of the statement of the preceding speaker, I want to emphasize the fact that this bill before you to-day for consideration is not a peace bill. It is true that it has the support of the peace organizations; but if it has the support of the peace organizations, it is because it stands for human justice and fair play. If there is anybody in this room here that is to talk in favor of this bill, that holds a contrary opinion. I want them to declare themselves and retire, before they voluntarily support the bill. I do not want anybody who is supporting this bill purely as a pacifist. I want them to support this bill because they believe it is to enlarge human freedom and liberty and to be in accordance with the Constitution of the United States.

Mr. JOHNSON. Now, Mr. Chairman, Representative Griffin has introduced these bills, H. R. 297 and 298, and behind him he has a rather long list of witnesses, and if we can ascertain from these wit

nesses their various types of belief, with this or that motive, beyond Mr. Griffin's own thought as to the bill-if we can elicit anything like that, anything along that line, we are certainly entitled to do it; and it is not for the proponents of the bill to prescribe

The CHAIRMAN. I will agree with you, but at the same time, Mr. Griffin has a right to explain his position, as he rightly has, with regard to what he stands for, pertaining to his legislation.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; but he can not call upon the witnesses to go out of the room.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I did not ask them to leave the room.

I asked them

to withdraw as voluntary witnesses. I would not want anybody to act as a witness who was hostile.

The CHAIRMAN. Just proceed with your hearing.

Mr. CROWE. Mr. Griffin, do you want any of the testimony of the last witness stricken out?

Mr. GRIFFIN. No; let it stand as it is.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there anything you want to say now, Mr. Griffin, about this bill, or do you want later to come in to sum up things for a few minutes?

Mr. GRIFFIN. Yes; I think that is better; but we have got to at least offer some resistance to this unexpected testimony.

Mr. JOHNSON. Does the Representative mean to say that he has found himself in a bad place? Does not it look a little that way?

Mr. GRIFFIN. No; I would not like to say that. I respect the opinion and views of everybody, but the thing is this: Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am fearful that the purposes of the bill will be misapprehended, by getting into this kind of discussion.

I am trying to emphasize and bring home to the committee, and everybody that is here to-day, the thought that this bill has nothing to do with anything else in the world except the enlargement of human liberty and the recognition of religious liberty and freedom of thought.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well spoken; but you ought to talk about the bomb the gentleman has dropped on your bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed with your witness.

.

Mr. GRIFFIN. I will now introduce Mrs. Annie E. Gray, volunteer secretary of the Women's Peace Society of New York City. The CHAIRMAN. Mrs. Gray.

STATEMENT OF ANNIE E. GRAY, VOLUNTEER SECRETARY OF THE WOMEN'S PEACE SOCIETY, NEW YORK CITY

Mrs. GRAY. Mr. Chairman and honorable members of this committee, may I say that this is the first committee hearing that I have ever had the satisfaction of attending. I would like to say that I am impressed particularly by the fair attitude of the chairman, to begin with. That is my first impression of my first committee hearing. I hope that I may be allowed to make my few remarks uninterrupted, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Go ahead.

Mrs. GRAY. I would like to say, before proceeding with my statement, that there is one point that was made this morning that I

should like to take up. I think it was Mr. Cable who said that the Supreme Court decision settled things. Those were his words.

Mr. CABLE. That was Mr. Jenkins.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, they look alike.
Mrs. GRAY. I am not sure.

I accept the correction if I am wrong. But the word "settled " was the word that struck me as something very definite.

Now, there is one thing that I would like to remark about that, and it is this: That there is nothing settled in this world; that there is one thing that we can be sure about, and it is the inevitable law of change.

I think it was Abraham Lincoln who said that when there seemed to be anything in our Government that was in any way not in the best interests of the citizens, it was the solemn duty of the citizens to attempt to change that particular thing. I think I am right about that, that it was Abraham Lincoln who said that.

I believe in the Supreme Court. But I do not think that the Supreme Court is infallible. I think that the Supreme Court, even by 1 vote majority, can make mistakes. But I would rather take my chances of a mistaken verdict of the Supreme Court and trust to the future to right that mistaken verdict of the Supreme Court than I would consent or countenance a resort to force to change anything.

I want that point particularly borne in mind-that nothing is settled. The one thing we can be sure of is the inevitable law of change; that it is our duty as citizens, according to Mr. Lincoln, that when we see a thing that looks as if it requires change, we should appeal to the processes of the law to make that change.

As I understand the Griffin bill, that is what it proposes to do. It proposes to appeal to our Congress to make a legislative change that Chief Justice Hughes has pointed out must be done in order to remedy this discrimination against persons who are opposed to war for certain reasons specifically outlined by the Congressman in

his bill.

There have been moments in this hearing to-day when the atmosphere seemed to be a little more heated than I thought was necessary; when persons who I supposed would naturally be very legalistic, very judicial, in their attitude seemed to me-men particularly-seemed to me to get highly emotional. I thought that was the privilege and the prerogative of the female, but I see to-day that it is not. I see to-day that even our Representatives in Congress can become excited and heated and emotional. That, I think, is at least something new in my idea of those gentlemen.

Mr. JENKINS. That is very common here.

Mrs. GRAY. Now, gentlemen, I believe that a little touch of human interest in a hearing of this kind perhaps goes a long way, or ought to. So, I am going to give you a little human interest touch. I don't pretend to be very legalistic or very judicial or anything of the kind. But I do think the human interest, therefore, of a thing may be of service to relieve the tension, if it does nothing else.

Mr. JOHNSON. You want the human interest phase to be heard without any emotion in it?

Mrs. GRAY. I should prefer to have it that way, Mr. Johnson, with due respect to you.