151 



not within the province of the executive branch by agreement or 

 treaty, with the approval and consent of the Senate, to give away any 

 material belonging to the United States. I think we have a sovereignty 

 beyond the Continental Shelf and, therefore, it would take the ap- 

 proval of both Houses, the full Congress, to effect its disposal. I am 

 sure they will never get the approval of the House, because we are too 

 close to the people to do any such thing. 



Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Mr. Rogers. I certainly agree on the point you are making. I op- 

 pose any attempt to give away our rights already established under 

 mternational law. 



Mr. Pelly. My point is it is not a case where necessarily we are 

 going to do it at once. Right now, as Dr. Cain has said, we want to 

 stay away from this whole subject. It is a little delicate and touchy. I 

 think we ought to have a firm position right from the start and indi- 

 cate that we have been given sovereignty if we can develop minerals 

 beyond the Continental Shelf, and that we intend to assert that sover- 

 eignty, and m no way should the United Nations call for additional 

 studies and guidelines as to how we can develop those. That is our 

 busmess, it seems to me. 



Thank you. 



Mr. Rogers. I might comment further on that. I think almost all the 

 members of this committee hold this very strong feeling, and to those 

 of you who are in actual contact, helping the Department of State 

 come to some decision, I think this committee would like you to know 

 that we will back up those who take this position strongly with the 

 Department of State. I am sure this committee will make its feelmg 

 well known. 



Dr. Cain. Thank you. 



Mr. Rogers. Mr. Reinecke. 



Mr. Reinecke. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 



Dr. Cain, you mentioned you would like to preserve the status quo. 

 I think we have to be careful m saying that because the status quo 

 is not a very static thing today, and with what is going on in New York 

 right now I feel, rather than just remain in status quo attitude, we 

 should take a very aggressive attitude toward at least giving ourselves 

 the benefit of every conceivable doubt that we possibly can. 



I believe in your position you probably have to wear numerous hats. 

 Particularly I refer to page 7 of your testimony where you mention the 

 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act which, according to the act, is 

 pretty vague. It apparently gives you jurisdiction over anything that 

 a particular State seems to think was held in sovereignty at the time 

 it became a member of the Union. I do not know what California 

 thought back in 1848, but I am sure if we want to give ourselves the 

 benefit of the doubt and take for the sovereignty and possession of the 

 United States any of those lands, we could make a pretty good case for 

 it, at least to the point of energetically opposing any restrictions at the 

 present time. 



Dr. Cain. Mr. Chairman, if I may further explain my intention 

 when I said to stand on the status quo, and not upset the applecart. 

 What I meant was don't get involved in any new commitments with 

 respect to international aspects of this problem. 



Mr. Reinecke. This is true, but let us not turn our backs on any 

 outstanding commitments or concepts that we have. 



