have made our country strong. Such measures would be an easy factor for the entire obliteration of our democratic way and would weaken our democratic purposes. We believe the rights of persons, both citizens and noncitizens, as provided in the Constitution, should be guarded most carefully in this period.

With deep concern over the welfare of this country and its people, we have taken the position of unalterable opposition to measures which might cause international break-down of democratic guaranties guarding the rights of persons, and that is the general position of the people whom I represent, that it might lead to other measures which are in this category, quite contrary to our democratic Govern

ment.

Mr. WEAVER. Do you wish to ask any questions?

Mr. HOBBS. No, sir.

Mr. GUYER. No, sir.

Mr. WEAVER. Does that conclude your statement?
Mrs. HENDRICKSON. That is all.

Mr. WEAVER. We are very glad to have had you.

Now, who is the next witness who desires to be heard?

STATEMENT OF MISS ANNA M. W. PENNYPACKER, OF THE COMMITTEE FOR PEOPLE'S RIGHTS IN EASTERN PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA, PA.

Mr. WEAVER. Give your name, please, madam.

Miss PENNYPACKER. Anna M. W. Pennypacker, of the Committee for People's Rights in Eastern Pennsylvania. I am also a member of the Philadelphia chapter, which is the independence chapter, of the Descendants of the American Revolution.

Mr. HOBBS. Would you be kind enough to give your address? Miss PENNYPACKER. My address is Forty-third and Chestnut Streets, Philadelphia.

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: I am very glad to have an opportunity to be heard today and to speak against this bill, for it seems to me that this bill would work a great and unnecessary hardship and injustice on a large number of our population. It seems to me that it is contrary to the Constitution and to the principles and traditions of the American Government.

My people came to Pennsylvania in the Seventeenth century. My people came originally from Holland. Many people came to Pennsylvania from many countries, from Sweden, from Wales, from Germany, and England, and later from Ireland, and from many countries. We were all aliens. We have, in Pennsylvania, very splendid traditions of equality for people of all nations without discrimination of race or political views or religious views. That is the spirit in which the State was founded, for William Penn brought to this country people who had been, many of them, imprisoned in the old countries for their political and religious faiths, and they followed him to a country where they might never more be persecuted for these things.

I happen, personally, to have come in contact with people from many countries as I was, for many years, doing public health work in Philadelphia, and I worked among Poles, Italians, Jewish people, people from many countries, Irish people. We are really not very

318230-41-
1-ser. 2. pt. 2- -7

us;

different. We are all aliens, with perhaps a few generations behind but it seems to me that this bill would set aside aliens as a different group in the population. Here I note it says "deportable aliens," which makes a great difference; but there are a great many aliens who are deportable and for various reasons are not deported. And it seems to me to set them aside as a different class in the population can work only injustice to them and be harmful to us all.

The President has called for unity among our people. It seems to me that this bill must add disunity because it separates a class of people from the rest of us and subjects them, if they are deportable, and many of them for various reasons cannot go and continue to live among us. They must be subject to a board to which they must report and to which they must be willing to submit to various things, to physical examination, even psychiatric examination, to physical treatment which might mean operations under the hands of physicians whom they did not trust and against their own will. That seems to me quite horrible. They must answer a great many questions which are put to them, very personal questions about themselves, and their private lives, and their friends and associates. It seems to me that this is subjecting them, for no reason at all, to great hardships and indignities; and they may be detained.

I say that the bill appears to be quite definitely unconstitutional. Gentlemen, I am not greatly learned in the law, although my father was a judge and my brother was a lawyer and many of my family have been lawyers. But it seems to me that some things are quite clear and simple without an elaborate explanation. When it says in the Fourteenth amendment to the Constitution that no person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; and that all persons must have the equal protection of the law; that that is very plain language and surely no one would deny that aliens, even deportable aliens, are persons in our community. Also I read here in the Constitution that people may not twice be penalized for the same offense. I know some of these aliens have committed some offenses for which they have served their terms. Surely they ought not, therefore, to be subject to being again detained without trial, without jury, without bail. It seems to me that while this latter would bring hardship to a great many individuals, that the harm is even beyond that because I think it is a contravention of our whole spirit of Americanism. This country welcomed, in the beginning, people who came here from oppression in their own countries, who wanted to live here and who helped to build the great tradition of freedom, justice, and equality. Many of these people, as has been mentioned, were brought here to work in our country. They built our railroads. and built our roads and did much of the hard work, which helped to bring success to this country. Are they and other citizens to be treated in any different way from the other people who are here?

It seems to me that at this time it is more important than perhaps any time in our history that we stand for the principles of Americanism on which we were founded, and I think the harm that could come from the few deportable aliens that we have that we think might do us harm is a much less danger than the danger of altering the things for which we have stood and for which we, as Americans and the descendants of early Americans, have been very proud and have wanted to continue.

Mr. WEAVER. Does that conclude your statement?

Miss PENNYPACKER. Yes, sir.

Mr. WEAVER. Do you wish to ask any questions?
(No response.)

Mr. WEAVER. We appreciate your coming, Miss Pennypacker.
Anyone else?

Miss KAHN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to be heard this morning
because I will have to attend other hearings before the Maritime
Commission next week and this will be my only opportunity.
Mr. WEAVER. How long will your statement require?

Miss KAHN. I think only 10 or 15 minutes.

Mr. WEAVER. We will hear you at this time.

STATEMENT OF MISS ELINOR KAHN, REPRESENTING THE CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS MARITIME COMMITTEE, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Miss KAHN. My name is Elinor Kahn. I represent the maritime committee of the Congress of Industrial Organizations, which consists of the following 7 unions, with more than 140,000 members, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations: National Maritime Union, International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, American Communications Association, National Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, Inland Boatmen's Union, International Fishermen & Allied Workers of America, and Marine Cooks & Stewards Association.

I might add, incidentally, that some of those unions are as young as 4 or 5 years, and some have been founded on the eastern seaboard for a century.

Organized labor has repeatedly expressed its opposition to discriminatory treatment of aliens and to any such un-American measure as H. R. 3, which would subject aliens to detention in concentration camps. The second convention of the C. I. O., meeting in October 1939, and representing more than 4,000,000 members, unanimously adopted a resolution which stated:

Whereas (1) the civil liberties of the American people are indivisible and a threat to one group is a menace to all; and

(2) Certain legislation is now pending before Congress which, while directed at aliens would strike at the fundamental civil liberties of the American people: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, (1) That the Congress of Industrial Organizations hereby expresses its opposition to antialien bills that are opposed to the basic foundations of our democracy which would menace not only the civil liberties of aliens, but of all of us; and

(2) The Congress of Industrial Organizations urges the defeat of such measures as the Hobbs and Dempsey bills and the criminal syndicalism bill, and proposes as a sound policy toward aliens, a reasonable opportunity to become citizens, with provisions in cases of hardship to those who through no fault of their own, cannot meet the essential requirements, and the adoption of a widespread program of adult education to inculcate the principles of democracy.

John L. Lewis, first president of the C. I. O., wrote in his report to the 1940 convention of the C. I. O.:

There has now been passed by the House and pending before the Senate two measures directed at aliens which strike at the foundations of our civil rights. These are H. R. 4860, which would provide for the deportation of noncitizens who believe in any changes in the United States Government, and the Hobbs con

centration camp bill, H. R. 5643, which would set up concentration camps for aliens who in the troubled European situation cannot be sent back to their home countries. Both measures have been opposed by the committee on legislation. This report was unanimously adopted by the third C. I. O. convention, which also unanimously adopted the following resolution:

Whereas the passage of the Alien Registration Act and the pending bills attacking the rights of aliens menace civil libertie sof al Ithe American people by striking at the rights of minorities; Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, (1) That the Congress of Industrial Organizations pledges itself to constant vigilence that the Alien Registration Act be administered with a due regard to the rights of aliens as well as to their duties; condemns such measures as the Hobbs and Dempsey bills, and opposes the illegal discrimination against honest and faithful employees on account of their noncitizenship; and

(2) That the Congress of Industrial Organizations urges a national policy toward our noncitizens based upon the speedy naturalizations of all aliens who are ready and willing to share the rights and duties of democratic citizenship. Labor's Nonpartisan League, which carries on legislative activities not only on behalf of the C. I. O. but also represents a large section of the American labor movement not affiliated to the C. I. O., has also expressed opposition to this and similar antialien bills.

In a bulletin issued by Labor's Nonpartisan League on March 31, 1941, the following comment was made on H. R. 3:

It has been rewritten with the advice of the United States Department of Justice but contains all the basic features of the original bill.

The original bill was strongly opposed by the league and all its affiliated organizations.

The C. I. O. has long defended the rights of aliens legally resident in the United States to the full protection of our laws and to equal consideration with American citizens, as set forth in the Constitution of the United States. It is thus apparent that the C. I. O. maritime committee, in opposing this bill, is in complete accord with the policies adopted by its parent organization, the C. I. O.

The first report of your committee on H. R. 3, was based entirely on a letter from the Attorney General and on testimony of two of his subordinates. The committee did not, however, take into consideration previous statements of the Attorney General, which had raised distinct objections to this type of bill.

For example, in a letter written late in 1940 to Gen. Robert E. Wood, chairman of the board of Sears, Roebuck & Co., the Attorney General said:

*

*

** * *

It would create a grave national problem if the employees of this country in any great number were to decide to discriminate against the aliens who happen to be working for them. Because the borders of so many countries are now closed, it is impossible for most of the aliens who are now here to leave the United States even if they wished to do so. To deprive them of their employment, therefore, is often to deprive them and their dependents of their sole means of livelihood, and to leave them helpless. It is important for all American citizens to remember that probably a numerical majority of aliens in this country are related by blood or marriage to American citizens, and in large numbers of cases constitute their sole means of support. A blanket discrimination against aliens not only violates the American sense of fairness but frequently constitutes in its practical effect a discrimination against American citizens. I am making public this answer to your letter because the questions which it raises affect so vitally those traditions of economic freedom and security which all of us cherish and which for centuries have been drawing aliens to our shores.

* * *

H. R. 3, in providing for the imprisonment of aliens whose deportation is pending, would obviously work the hardships upon them and their families that the Attorney General feared in 1940.

The C. I. O. maritime committee takes issue with the statement of Representative Hobbs that under this bill Harry Bridges, president of the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, and director of the C. I. O. for California, "is already taken care of."

The statement is a clear indication of the antiunion discriminatory character of this bill. Harry Bridges is the democratically elected leader of 30,000 workers in his own union. He is the recognized leader of hundreds of thousands of American workers in other unions and other industries on the west coast. He has been entrusted by the C. I. O. with the task of organizing unorganized workers in California and guiding them toward better living and working conditions.

This has been shown in repeated affirmations of trust and confidence. in Bridge by the entire C. I. O. In its three conventions, the entire Congress of Industrial Organizations has unanimously pledged support of Bridges and his leadership. It has repeatedly gone on record in protest against the 7-year campaign of west-coast employers and other antilabor groups to exile Bridges.

President Philip Murray, as recently as March 15, 1941, of the C. I. O., urged all C. I. O. affiliates, officials, and members to resist the current attempt to deport Bridges, saying:

It would seem to be clear that the present proceedings against Harry Bridges resulted merely because of an attempted appeasement of the attacks which have come from antilabor sources and are primarily intent upon destroying the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union and thereby undermining organized labor as a whole.

I would like to give the reporter the official text of that for insertion in the record.

Bridges has been already tried and acquitted on the charges now being pressed against him in the current deportation hearings. This acquittal is a direct refutation of Representative Hobbs' statement that his bill, H. R. 3, was designed to "take care of Bridges."

The discriminatory nature of the bill is further revealed by section 302 of title 3. This section states:

Any alien who shall act in the United States in behalf of any foreign govern ment or foreign political party or group, including, without limiting the foregoing, the Communist Party of the United States of America, the Partito Nazionale Fascista, the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei, the Kyffhaeuser Bund, the German-American Bund, or any organization successor to any one of them, shall be deported unless there is substantial reason to believe that such alien's activities are not deleterious to the national safety of the United States. The section is sinister in itself. It could be used against any member of a trade-union affiliated with any international body. It is well known that trade-unions have international affiliations.

The A. F. of L., for example, is affiliated with the International Federation of Trade Unions, which certainly falls under the definition of "any foreign political party or group."

Both the C. I. O. and the A. F. of L. have affiliates in Canada. A spirit of fraternity between the workers of all countries has been characteristic of the labor movement since its earliest beginnings. To penalize individuals who happen to be aliens for fostering these ties of friendship between people of the United States and other nations attacks not only the traditions, but also the highest ideals, of the organized labor movement.

This section of the bill, of course, names certain specified organizations. However, both the bill and the testimony on which the com