« ÎnapoiContinuați »
of Colombia, to receive instruction at the United States Military Academy, for the consideration of the Congress with a view to its enactment into law.
There is no general law on the subject, and special acts are required in each individual case to permit foreigners to attend the academy.
It will be observed that the resolution provides specifically that no expense shall be incurred by the United States, and that the beneficiary thereof selected shall be immediately withdrawn should he fail to master the course of instruction or be deficient in conduct. Sincerely yours,
Patrick J. HURLEY,
Secretary of War.
MEDAL OF HONOR TO EDWARD V. RICKENBACKER
JANUARY 27, 1930.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House and
ordered to be printed
Mr. SPEAKS, from the Committee on Military Affairs, submitted the
[To accompany H. R. 325]
The Committee on Military Affairs, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 325) authorizing the President of the United States to present in the name of Congress a congressional medal of honor to Capt. Edward V. Rickenbacker, introduced by Mr. Clancy, having considered the same, report thereon with the recommendation that it do pass.
A similar measure was reported in the Seventieth Congress and passed the House on February 26, 1929. The report made then is made a part of this report, as follows:
(House Report No. 2568, Seventieth Congress, second session) The Committee on Military Affairs, to which was referred the bill (H. R. 12674) to authorize the President of the United States to present in the name of Congress the congressional medal of honor to Capt. Edward V. Rickenbacker, having considered the same, report thereon with the recommendation that it
The records of the War Department show that Captain Rickenbacker is originally credited with 25 victories against enemy airplanes and balloons, which record has won for him the sobriquet of the American "ace of aces.
During the war he shot down 21 enemy planes and 4 balloons. Included in his many citations for valor in battle Captain Rickenbacker was awarded the distinguished service cross for extraordinary heroism in action. Seven bronze oak leaves were given him in lieu of additional distinguished service crosses for deeds in action, which the War Department describes as “extraordinary heroism.”
In addition to the distinguished service cross and oak leaves, Captain Rickenbacker has been decorated by foreign countries. He was awarded two Croix de Guerre and the French Légion d'Honneur. He was awarded the Croix de Guerre with palm May 9, 1918, and was awarded the Légion d'Honneur under presidential decree and Croix de Guerre with palm under orders of November 30, 1918. Each of these decorations were accompanied by citations setting out Captain Rickenbacker's disregard of danger and his bravery under fire.
Congress awarded a congressional medal of honor to Col. Charles A. Lindbergh for his flight across the Atlantic; to Commander Richard Byrd and his mechanic, the late Floyd Bennett, for their flight to the North Pole. Altogether 90 congressional medals of honor were awarded during the Great War and only 1 to a fighting a viator, Frank Luke, who was dead when it was awarded.
Luke shot down 18 planes and balloons; Captain Rickenbacker shot down 21 planes and 4 balloons.
Rickenbacker fought with planes and equipment far inferior to those used by Colonel Lindbergh or Commander Byrd in their flights. Captain Rickenbacker and his men were not permitted to use parachutes which increased the danger of his heroic work. His opponents, the Germans, had the very best of equipment and were all permitted to use parachutes.
Colonel Lindbergh, Commander Byrd, and all aviators of note favor the award of a congressional medal of honor to Captain Rickenbacker. Colonel Lindbergh issued a public statement in which he said Rickenbacker deserved the medal.
From facts laid before this committee and from records of the War Department it has been shown that Captain Rickenbacker, formerly captain in the Air Service of the Army of the United States and commander of the famous “Hat-in-theRing” Squadron, displayed unusual heroic courage and skill as an aviator during the World War in that on April 29, 1918, near the town of Montsec, France, he attacked an enemy Albatross monoplane, and after a vigorous fight, in which he followed his foe into German territory, he succeeded in shooting it down near Vigneulles-les-Hatton Chatel; that on May 17, 1918, he attacked three Albatross enemy planes, shooting one down in the vicinity of Richecourt, France, and forcing the others to retreat over their own lines; that on May 22, 1918, he attacked three Albatross monoplanes, 4,000 meters over St. Mihiel, France. He drove them back into German territory, separated one from the group, and shot it down near Flirey; that on May 28, 1918, he sighted a group of two battle planes and four monoplanes, German planes, which he at once attacked vigorously, shooting down one and dispersing the others; that on May 30, 1918, 4,000 meters over Jaulnoy, France, he attacked a group of five enemy planes, and after a violent battle, he shot down one plane and drove the others away; that on September 14, 1918, in the region of Villency, he attacked four Fokker enemy planes at an altitude of 3,000 meters, and after a sharp and hot action he succeeded in shooting one down in flames and dispersing the other three; that on September 15, 1918, in the region of Boisdewaville, he encountered six enemy planes, who were in the act of attacking four Spads which were below them, and undeterred by their superior numbers he unhesitatingly attacked them and succeeded in shooting one down in flames and completely breaking the formation of the others; that on September 25, 1918, near Billey, France, while on voluntary patrol over the lines, he attacked seven enemy planes (five type Fokker, protecting the two type Halberstadts) and, disregarding the odds against him, he dived on them and shot down one of the Fokkers out of control and attacked one of the Halberstadts and sent it down also.
All of the foregoing acts of remarkable heroic courage and skill were at the unusual risk of his own life and a tribute to the characteristic valor of an American citizen.
In recognition of his great achievements and contribution the advancement of aviation and to his country, your committee is of the unanimous opinion that Captain Rickenbacker should be awarded the congressional medal of honor.
The following letter from the National Secretary of the Reserve Officers' Association of the United States is quoted for the information of the House: RESERVE OFFICERS' AssociaTION OF THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, D. C., May 5, 1928. Hon. ROBERT H. CLANCY,
House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN: For your information the following is submitted:
At a meeting of the national council of the Reserve Officers' Association of the United States, held in the city of Washington, D. C., April 29, 1928, the following resolution was unanimously adopted:
“Resolved, That the Reserve Officers' Association of the United States hereby indorse and recommend for passage the bills introduced in Congress by Senator Millard Tydings and Congressmen Royal C. Johnson, Clarence J. McLeod, and Robert H. Clancy, to confer the congressional medal of honor on Captain Eddie Rickenbacker, Air Service Reserve, known as the American ace of aces, who in France, against an armed enemy of the United States, did perform in action certain deeds of heroism far above and beyond the call of duty. Very sincerely yours,
ORVEL JOHNSON, National Secretary. Q
RESALE PRICE BILL
JANUARY 27, 1930.-Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
Mr. MERRITT, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com.
merce, submitted the following
(To accompany H. R. 11)
The Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 11) to protect trade-mark owners, distributors, and the public against injurious and uneconomic practices in the distribution of articles of standard quality under a distinguishing trade-mark, brand, or name, having considered the same, report thereon with an amendment, and as so amended recommend that
H. R. 11 is substantially in accord with a report of a subcommittee made to this committee in the Seventieth Congress. Legislation on the subject of this bill has been under consideration for years by this committee and its predecessors. Extensive hearings have been held, and the subject has been most carefully considered and debated many times in committee. The committee now reports and recommends the passage of an amended bill, which, as amended, is as follows:
Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following in lieu thereof:
That no contract relating to the sale of a commodity which bears (or the label or container of which bears) the trade-mark, brand, or trade name of the producer of such commodity, and which is in fair and open competition with commodities of the same general class produced by others, shall be deemed to be unlawful, as against the public policy of the United States, or in restraint of interstate or foreign commerce, or in violation of any statute of the United States, by reason of any agreement contained in such contract,
That the vendee will not resell such commodity except at the price stipulated by the vendor.
Sec. 2. Any such agreement in a contract in respect to interstate or foreign commerce in any such commodity shall be deemed to contain the implied coddition
(a) That during the life of such agreement all purchasers from the vendor for resale at retail in the same city or town where the vendee is to resell the com. modity shall be granted equal terms as to purchase and resale prices;
(b) That such commodity may be resold without reference to such agreeinent
(1) In closing out the owner's stock for the purpose of discontinuing dealing in such commodity or of disposing, toward the end of a season, of a surplus stock of goods specially adapted to that season;
(2) With notice to the public that such commodity is damaged or deteriorated in quality, if such is the case; or
(3) By a receiver, trustee, or other officer acting under the orders of any court, or any assignee for the benefit of creditors.
Sec. 3. Nothing contained in this act shall be construed as legalizing any contract or agreement between producers or between wholesalers or between retailers as to sale or resale prices.
Sec. 4. As used in this act
(1) The term "producer” means grower, packer, maker, manufacturer, or publisher.
(2) The term "commodity" means any subject of commerce.
When discussion of the legislation on this subject first began the bills presented were entirely different in form and effect from the bill now reported. Originally, violations of the agreements were made misdemeanors, and to them various penalties were attached. The means authorized under the bills might be used to harass violators of the agreements in many ways.
All such remedies and punishments have been eliminated, and the aggrieved party under the contract authorized by the bill has simply a civil remedy.
In brief the bill permits a contract between vendor and vendee, in special classes of commodities, that the vendee will not resell the commodity specified in the contract except at a stipulated price. It guards the rights of other retail dealers in the same town, and also permits the vendee to sell at his own price to close out his stock when ceasing to deal in the commodity specified, or in disposing of seasonal goods at the end of a season. He may also sell freely when goods are damaged.
The bill specially guards against agreements as to selling prices between producers, or wholesalers, or retailers.
It will thus be seen that, with proper safeguards, the bill restores the liberty of contract which has existed under the common law from the earliest times and until the enactment of the Sherman Antitrust Act in 1890.
There existed, and perhaps exists to a considerable extent to-day, the erroneous assumption that at common law all restraints upon the alienation of personal property were invalid. That this assumption is erroneous is shown with his accustomed learning and clarity by the Hon. James M. Beck in an oral argument delivered in the Supreine Court of the United States in 1918 in the case of the Boston Store, of Chicago, against the American Graphophone Co. and others. Tho following quotations from that argument are applicable to this case:
It is not and never was the law that all restraints on alienation, whether complete or partial, were invalid at common law.
The erroneous assumption to the contrary arose out of a misconception of the following passage from Coke on Littleton, section 360:
"And so it is, if a man possessed of a lease for years, or of a horse, or of any other chattell reall or personall, and give or sell his whole interest or propertie therein upon condition that the donee or vendee shall not alien the same, the same is void, because his whole interest and propertie is out of him, so as he hath no possibilitie of a reverter, and it is against trade and traffique, and bargaining and contracting between man and man.
Coke, in the context of this very passage, however, and Littleton, in the section of his Tenures, on which it is based, both stated that the rule referred only