prescribe a statute of limitations for any given State. I have always thought the statute of limitations to be the law of the forum.

Mr. KAHN. That is the custom, I think, in the United States

courts.*

Mr. SANDERS of Indiana. I think, however, Gov. Montague, that since this statute deals with this fund which is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States

Mr. MONTAGUE (interposing). Yes; I see how that would make a difference; that may be another question; but is that aspect of it cared for by this bill?

Mr. SANDERS of Indiana (continuing). Since this proposed law would deal with the funds exclusively within the jurisdiction of the United States Government, probably the method of procedure in any State court could be prescribed by Congress, just like when we passed the liability act, and other United States laws, to be enforced in any State, we prescribe a statute of limitations. I believe that, as a matter of law, we would have the right to bar the running of the statute of limitations; we would have a right to provide any sort of remedy to reach this fund that we wanted to.

Mr. KAHN. Yes; I think so.

Mr. SIMS. Would we have a right to revive a dead liability, so to speak, that died before the Alien Property Custodian took charge of this property?

Mr. SANDERS of Indiana. I think so, because we owe no duty except the one prescribed by international law. We may not do it in the case of these citizens of Germany, because we do not want them to confiscate the funds of our own citizens.

Mr. SIMS. We can not do it, except in the case of German citizens. Mr. SANDERS of Indiana. But this is the property of German citizens, which is in the hands of the Alien Property Custodian; and I think we have an absolute right to deal with the property in the hands of the Alien Property Custodian; we could use it all if we wanted to.

Mr. KAHN. I think we can; I think we have complete jurisdiction over it.

Mr. SANDERS of Indiana. I think we have a perfect right to deal with that in any State of the Union.

The CHAIRMAN. But I think Congress would be very finical about passing such an enactment, if it felt that citizens of the United States had any right to any part of this fund belonging to the alien enemy. I think that consideration would influence Congress more than the technical laws of any State.

Mr. KAHN. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. However, the laws of California require a foreign corporation to get a certificate in order to do business in California, do they not?

Mr. KAHN. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And as one of the conditions of taking out a certificate to do business, the foreign corporation has to file annually a statement of its business, does it not?

Mr. KAHN. I think it did.

The CHAIRMAN. So that if your State requires the filing of annual statements, you would have there a record as to the financial transac

tions of these three companies, which might indicate whether or not they were doing a profitable business in the State of California.

Mr. KAHN. Yes; I am under the impression that that is the law of California. We have a State Insurance Commissioner, and the companies make reports to him. He gives them authority to do business in the State; when he is satisfied of the correctness of the reports, he issues a certificate to them.

Mr. SIMS. Mr. Kahn, if the agents of those companies had made to those insured persons what were then believed to be honest representations, to the effect that they would not be able to pay in full, and made compromise settlements; and afterwards it turned out that the conditions were better than the agents supposed they were, it would hardly be an act of fraud, and while good faith would require them to pay in full, that would not vitiate the settlement that was made, would it?

Mr. KAHN. That does not enter into this matter. It was not a case where they were better off than they supposed they were; they knew that they were better off than they represented themselves to be; but in order to compel-not to induce, but to compel the insured man to accept what he could get, they made fraudulent statements as to their actual standing financially.

Mr. SIMS. Then they were not deceived, but absolutely made false statements and procured a financial benefit thereby?

Mr. KAHN. Absolutely.

Mr. SIMS. The statutes of limitations ought not to run against a man who makes such a false representation as that, but our power to remove it is a different question.

Mr. KAHN. That is the position of our people that those representations were fraudulent.

Mr. SIMS. Were false?

Mr. KAHN. That they were false.

Mr. SIMS. And known to be false?

Mr. KAHN. Of course, at the time those insured people did not know that they were false, but subsequently, one of the agents of one of these companies pointed out wherein the statements that had been made to the insured were false.

Mr. SIMS. One of the agents who had participated in making the statements himself?

Mr. KAHN. No-well, probably in adjusting the claims, he might have been led to believe that the condition of affairs was as he had been told by the managers of the company; and he went to those insured people and induced them to make settlements; subsequently, he found out that those statements that had been given to him were false and fraudulent.

Mr. SIMS. That is, had the statement been made that the home companies in Germany were insolvent?

Mr. KAHN. Practically; something of that sort; at any rate, that they were not able to pay 100 cents on the dollar.

Mr. SIMS. Well, evidence of what they did with German risks and German liabilities at the same time, in Germany, would be very good evidence as to whether they were practicing fraud here in making those representations.

Mr. KAHN. Well, they seem to feel, and this agent is ready to show, that the companies at the time they made the statements that

they were unable to pay, were amply able to meet the lawful demands of the insured.

Now, I want to say, finally, that I have taken up the matter with the Attorney General. Mr. Brodhead and I called upon him and pointed out the situation to him. He recommended a modification of the bill so as to make only the money available for the payment of these claims that was the residue after the claims that had not been barred by the statute of limitations have been paid.

Mr. SIMS. That is, against the same companies?

Mr. KAHN. Against the same companies. And Mr. Brodhead carried on further interviews with Mr. Garvan, the present Alien Property Custodian. So far as I know, they had no objection to the passage of the legislation.

Mr. SIMS. Well, they are protected in whatever Congress does.

The CHAIRMAN. I had a communication from the Attorney General in relation to this bill. I submitted it to him, and he, in brief, advised us as follows [reading]:

It would appear advisable to postpone any consideration of this bill until after the final termination of the war. Further legislation providing for final disposition of enemy property which has been seized by the Alien Property Custodian is required by the provisions of section 12 of the act, and the change in section 9 proposed to be made by the bill in question is a matter intimately associated with the disposition of this enemy property.

I am of the opinion, therefore, that no action upon this bill should be taken, except in connection with legislation providing for the final disposition to be made of enemy property seized by the custodian and held by him and by the Treasurer of the United States.

This was a report made on the 7th day of November, 1919, on your new bill, H. R. 10103.

Mr. KAHN. Yes; I understand.

The CHAIRMAN. Since that letter from the Attorney General was written this committee has had hearings on two bills, introduced by Representatives Winslow and Butler, relating to women who had married enemy aliens and whose property had been seized by the Alien Property Custodian.

Three days ago I received a letter from the Attorney General stating that, on the request of the Secretary of State, he thought it would be advisable to amend section 9 of the trading-with-the-enemy act, in order to meet the very crying needs of people in Alsace-Lorraine, who are now a part of France, but who were enemy aliens during the war, and there were thousands of them; and he was to submit his views further after conference with the Secretary of State. If that should come in, it would also affect the same section of the act that your bill relates to, and this whole matter could then be thrashed out.

Mr. KAHN. Well, I would appreciate it very much if you could send me a copy of the letter of the Attorney General of November 7, and also notify me about the other amendment of section 9 which will be sent to you.

I

I will try, if you will give me a few days' time in advance, to induce Mr. Solinsky, who represents some of these claimants, to come here; he knows the situation much better than I do. As I say, have not had a chance to look into it very fully, because I was expecting Mr. Brodhead to make the argument before this committee. The CHAIRMAN. Yes; we understand the situation.

Mr. KAHN. If I can have ample notice I would like to do that; and I feel quite sure that Mr. Solinsky will be glad to come to Washington to present the matter more fully than I have been able to present it.

The CHAIRMAN. Should the Attorney General, at the instance of the Secretary of State, draft any proposed legislation along this line, and a bill is introduced, I will be glad to transmit a copy of the bill to you, and you can look it over and see whether you want to amend that bill, so as to take care of the special matters which are covered by this bill of yours.

Mr. KAHN. That will be very satisfactory to me; and I thank the committee, Mr. Chairman, for its courtesy.

(Thereupon, at 11.40 a. m., the committee adjourned.)

On behalf of Mrs. Lydia H. Burgstaller, a lady of American birth, married to a subject of the former German Empire and now residing with her husband in Germany, may I ask you to record my earnest approval of the measure now under consideration for the relief of ladies in the position of my client, whose property in this country has been turned over to the custodian. The amount of moneys and securities turned over by me to the custodian exceeds $100,000, and I am to-day in receipt of an earnest appeal from her for the loan of so trifling a sum as $1,000. My client is in dire need, so much so that I have shipped food to her. Please acknowledge receipt hereof.

BENJAMIN F. FEINER,

100 Broadway, New York City.

LETTER SUBMITTED BY FLORENCE WHITTELL ALBERT.

Hon. SAMUEL E. WINSLOW,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MARCH 11, 1920.

DEAR SIR: I, Florence Whittell Albert, was born in California in April, 1882. My father, Alexander Pope Whittell, was born in New York. His father was Irish; his mother, American, of English parentage. My mother, Jennie A. Whittell, was born in San Francisco, Calif. Her mother was Irish and her father English.

I met my husband, a German subject, when traveling in India, and was married to him in Paris at the American church by Rev. Mr. Morgan, in March, 1909. A marriage contract was made in which my husband renounced all rights to my property or any that I might possess. This marriage contract was executed by Monsieur Picard, 17 Bis Rue la Boitie.

My property, which is now confiscated by the Alien Property Custodian, was left by my grandfather to my father in trust for me. No portion of the capital or income has ever been used in Germany. I feel sure that when you know the facts in the case you will see the injustice of keeping my property from me and will see your way clear to returning the same to me. I have never felt that by my marriage to a foreigner I changed my nationality. I am and have always been a true and loyal American.

Very truly, yours,

FLORENCE WHITTELL ALBERT.

LETTER SUBMITTED BY HON. WILLIAM I. SCHAFFER.

Hon. THOMAS S. BUTLER,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR THOMAS: I am in receipt of a cablegram from Mrs. Hilprecht, in which she says:

"Prof. Hilprecht resided in Philadelphia 28 years, till 1914. We intend to return and resume our residence there immediately after ratification of peace." Will you bring this to the attention of Chairman Esch and any of the members of the committee that you may run across?

With best regards and much appreciation of your courtesy while I was in Washington, I am,

Sincerely, yours,

W. I. SCHAFFER.

LETTER SUBMITTED BY HEINRICH BLUN.

5 KATHARINENSTRASSE, BERLIN-HALENSEE, January 10, 1920.

To the Congress of the United States of America, Washington, D. C. SIRS: I have the honor to submit to you the following: On September 14, 1912, died at Munich, Germany, Mr. Max Riegelman, a citizen of the United States of America. His last will contained the following disposition:

66

Fourth. I hereby revoke and cancel the last full paragraph of paragraph numbered second of my said last will and testament, which, in effect, gives and bequeaths to my nephew, Heinrich Blun, and my nieces, Paula Blun Haase and Eugenia Blun, a one-tenth part of my estate in equal shares, and with reference to said one-tenth part of my estate I hereby direct as follows: I give and bequeath to each of my said nephew and nieces, to wit, to Heinrich Blun, Paula Blun Haase, and Eugenia Blun, the sum of $1,000 out of said one-tenth part of my estate, the balance I give, devise, and bequeath to my executors and their successors named in my last will, to have and to hold the same in trust as follows: To invest or reinvest the same in the manner provided in the first full paragraph of paragraph numbered second of my said last will and testament, for the investment of my estate in the event of my decease prior to my wife; to collect the annual rents, income, and profits of said trust fund, and to pay over to net annual rents, income, and profits thereof in at least semiannual installments to my sister-in-law, Anna Blun, the wife of my wife's deceased brother, Julius Blun, during the term of her natural life; and on her decease, or on her decease before me, to pay over the principal of said trust fund, and any unpaid rents, income, and profits to my said nephew, Heinrich Blun, and my nieces, Paula Blun Haase and Eugenia Blun, in equal shares absolutely and forever; and in the event of the prior decease of any of them, their issue shall take in equal shares per stirpes and not per capita, the share their parent would have taken, had such parent survived; and in the event of the decease of either of my said nephew or nieces leaving no issue, him or her surviving, then the survivors of my said nephew and nieces shall take the share of such deceased nephew and niece in equal shares."

Thereupon the executors of this last will, the American citizens Emil Carlebach and Joseph Haberman, both of New York City, took possession of this sum of $12,000 and paid the annual interests thereof, amounting to $555, in two monthly rates to my mother, Mrs. Anna Blün, in Berlin. The last time this was done on the 15th of October, 1916. Owing to the outbreak of the war between America and Germany these remittances could not be continued and, in consequence thereof, my mother, who was in want of this money for his livelihood, was obliged to contract debts which now must be restored.

The capital is deposited at the bankers J. & W. Seligman & Co. of New York. The interests accumulated up to the 9th of December, 1918, amounted to $1,122.29. On this day the Alien Property Custodian has sequestered this sum. Since this day the interests due have increased by $555, so that the total is $1,677.29. The executors are not allowed to hand over the money to my mother without a special permission of the authorities.

On September 18, 1918, I applied to the Alien Property Custodian for suspension of the sequestration, but he referred me to the Congress which has the