1932 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14165

Floyd 0. IDbbard, Snytier. James W. McKay, Stonewan. Leroy L. Stryker, Vinita.

PENNSYLVANIA

Mary K. Schambach, Beaver Springs. Edward J. Durbin, Brockway. J. Elmer Young, Delaware Water Gap. Samuel J. McMains, Leechburg. Thomas L. Lebo, New Bloomfield. Benjamin P. Dawkins, Oakmont. Horace H. Hammer, Reading. Harry Olldorf, Stroudsburg. William H. Deppen, Sunbury. William H. D. Moyer, White Haven.

RHODE ISLAND

Peter L. Creighton, Harrisville. SOUTH CAROLINA

Henry N. Folk, Bamberg. Henry J. Bailey, Springfield.

SOUTH DAKOTA

Benjamin D. Kidman, Big Stone City. Leonard D. Walters, Bruce. Willis W. You ells, Revillo. Helen E. Becker, Turton. Olin A. Hart, Volin. John F. Whittemore, Yankton.

TENNESSEE

Henry I. Smythe, Bristol. Jasper A. Berry, Bullsgap. Byron C. Lynch, Centerville. Alice B. Ralston, Eagleville. Robert T. Johnson, jr., Elizabethton. Orville E. Bogart, Erwin. Joseph W. Callis, Germantown. Filbert G. Mcillwain, Holladay. James H. Clonts, Isabella. Lulu M. Divine, Johnson City. Rennie G. Connelly, Lyles. William McD. Guinn, Mosheim. Paul E. Walker, Ridgely. John T. Christian, Smithville. Simon C. Dodson, Sparta. Joseph M. Patterson, Watertown. Dewey F. Winnett, Woodbury.

TEXAS

William B. Hamilton, Laredo. VIRGINIA

Claude Neale, Saluda. WASHINGTON

Coy R. Kern, La Conner.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TUESDAY, JUNE 28, 1932

The House met at 12 o'clock noon. The Chaplain, Rev. James Shera Montgomery, D. D.,

offered the following prayer:

Holy Spirit, Faithful Guide, rise up in the chambers of our souls and crown us there, that we may be in alliance with the wisest and the very best things. 0 God, restrain us from all wrong tendencies by the sacredness of duty, by love divine, and by the inspiration of our finest possibilities. Guard all influences which are striving for the welfare and the stability of the Republic. 0 let our labors glow and palpitate in real genuine service. Bless all uncomplaining courage and heroic achievement. May our first and lasting joy be to serve the people, who have honored us with their confidence. 0 God of our fathers, do Thou bless and inspire every Member of this Congress with those simple yet beau-

tifu1 and glorious virtues of which we caught the first glimpse when our hands were. folded in prayer at our mother's knee. Amen.

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved.

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate by Mr. Craven, its principal clerk, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment bills and a joint resolution of the House of the following titles:

H. R. 406. An act to validate a certain conveyance heretofore made by Central Pacific Railway Co., a corporation, and its lessee, Southern Pacific Co., a corporation, to Pacific States Box & Basket Co., a corporation, involving certain portions of right of way in the vicinity of the town of Florin, county of Sacramento, State of California, acquired by the Central Pacific Railway Co. under the act of Congress approved July 1, 1862 02 Stat. L. 489), as amended by the act of Congress approved July 2, 1864 03 Stat. L. 356);

H. R. 922. An act for the relief of John Heffron; H. R. 927. An act for the relief of the estate of Franklili

D. Clark; H. R. 996. An act for the relief of Mildred B. Crawford; H. R.1133. An act to provide for the relinquishment by

the United States of certain lands to the city of Coeur d'Alene, in the county of Kootenai, in the State of Idaho;

H. R. 1226. An act for the relief of Edna M. Gilson; H. R. 1383. An act for the relief of certain United States

naval officers; . H. R. 1700. An act for the relief of Walter S. West; H. R.1804. An act for the relief of Frank Woodey; H. R. 1903. An act for the relief of Harrison Simpson; H. R.1962. An act for the relief of Noble Jay Hall; H. R. 2418. An act concerning the claim of Jacob Landry; H. R. 2514. An act for the relief of the estate of Samuel

Schwartz; H. R. 2606. An act for the relief of Edward Christianson; H. R. 2695. An act for the relief of David Albert Robeson; H. R. 2707. An act for the relief of William Alexander

Keys; H. R. 3624. An act for the relief of Minnie Hopkins; H. R. 3644. An act for the relief of Lewis A. McDermott; H. R. 3725. An act for the relief of the First National

Bank of Brenham, Tex.; H. R. 3726. An act for the relief of the Fanners State

Bank of Georgetown, Tex.; H. R. 4059. An act for the relief of Rosamond B. McManus; H. R. 4071. An act for the relief of W. A. Blankenship; H. R. 4233. An act for the relief of Enza A. Zeller; H. R. 4264. An act for the relief of Lieut. CoL H. H. Kipp,

United States Marine Corps, retired; H. R. 4743. An act to amend an act entitled "An act to

provide for the promotion of vocational rehabilitation of persons disabled in industry or otherwise and their return to civil employment," approved June 2, 1920, as amended;

H. R. 5007. An act for the relief of Marie E. McGrath; H. R. 5059. An act for the relief of Mrs. Johnnie Schley

Gatewood; H. R. 5595. An act for the relief of Harry Manning Lee; H. R. 5971. An act for the relief of Grover Cleveland

Ballard; H. R. 6003. An act for the relief of A. L. Marshall; H. R. 6334. An act for the relief of Lieut. M. A. Sprengel; H. R. 6336. An act for the relief of George W. Steele, jr.; H. R. 6444. An act authorizing the Secretary of the Navy,

in his discretion, to deliver to the custody of the Alabama Society of Fine Arts, the silver service presented to the United States for the U.S. S. Montgomery;

H. R. 6599. An act to amend the act entitled "An act to authorize the construction and procurement of aircraft and aircraft equipment in the Navy and Marine Corps, and to adjust and define the status of the operating personnel in connection therewith," approved June 24, 1926, with reference to the number of enlisted pilots in the Navy;

14166 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JuNE 28 · H. R. 6735. An act to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to fix the clothing allowance for enlisted men of the Navy;

H. R. 6860. An act for the relief of Florence Northcott Hannas;

H. R. 7308. An act for the relief of Amy Turner; H. R. 7411. An act for the relief of Alex Bremer; H. R. 7793. An act to secure the departure of certain aliens

from the United States; H. R. 8306. An act for the relief of D. M. Leypoldt Co.; H. R. 9004. An act for the relief of Agnes C. Reder; H. R. 9058. An act to authorize the Secretary of War to

accept on behalf of the United States a tract or parcel of land for park purposes, to the Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park;

H. R. 9369. An act to set aside certain lands around the abandoned Bowdoin well, Montana, for recreational purposes under a lease to Phillips County Post, No. 57, of the American Legion, Department of Montana;

H. R.10829. An act relating to the naturalization of certain women born in Hawaii;

H. R. 12678. An act to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the east branch of the Niagara River at or near the city of Niagara Falls, N.Y.; and .

H. J. Res. 408. Joint resolution providing for the filling of vacancies in the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution of the class other than Members of Congress.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed with amendments, in which the concurrence of the House is requested, bills and a joint resolution of the House of the following titles:

H. R. 4230. An act for the relief of Genevieve M. Heberle; H. R. 6337. An act for the relief of Capt. Chester G. Mayo; H. R. 7449. An act for the relief of the estate of Jacob D.

Hanson; H. R. 7939. An act to authorize the presentation of a dis

tinguished-flying cross to Russell N. Boardman and John L. Polando, and Wiley Post and Harold Gatty, and for other purposes;

H. R. 8750. An act relative to restrictions applicable to Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma;

H. R. 8817. An act to provide for fees for entry of a publication as second-class matter, and for other purposes;

H. R. 10022. An act making appropriations for the Executive Office and sundry independent executive bureaus, boards, commissions, and offices, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes; and

H. J. Res.138. Joint resolution for the relief of the State of Idaho.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed bills and joint resolutions of the following titles, in which the concurrence ·of the House is requested:

S.1308. An act to amend the Code of Law for the District of Columbia, approved March 3, 1901, as amended, by adding a new chapter relating to guardians _for incompetent veterans, and for other purposes;

S. 1863. An act to authorize and direct the transfer of Widow's Island, Me., by the Secretary of the Navy to the Secretary of Agriculture for administration as a migratory~ bird refuge;

S. 2824. An act to amend the act of the Legislative Assembly of the District of Columbia creating the office of steam~ boiler inspector for the District of Columbia;

S. 2859. An act validating application for entry upon public lands;

S. 4381. An act authorizing the President to transfer and appoint Lieut. Morris Smellow, United States Navy, to the grade of passed assistant paymaster, with the rank of lieutenant, in the Supply Corps of the United States Navy;

s. 4497. An act to add certain lands to the Boise National Forest;

S. 4509. An act to further amend the act approved February 25, 1920, entitled "An act to promote the mining of coal, phosphate, oil, oil shale, gas, and sodium on the public domain";

S. 4522. An act to authorize the conveyance to the State of Tennessee of certain land deeded to the United States for the Great Smoky Mountain National Park and not needed therefor;

S. 4591. An act to amend the act of March 2, 1929, conferring jurisdiction upon certain courts of the United States to hear and determine the claim by the owner of the steamship W. I. Radcliffe against the United States, and for other purposes;

S. 4616. An act imposing upon· consignors of liquid fuels the duty of making monthly reports in certain cases to the Bureau of Mines of the Department of Commerce, and imposing penalties;

S. 4661. An act to repeal an act entitled "An act to legalize the incorporation of National Trade Unions," approved June 29, 1886;

S. 4710. An act to amend the act approved February 25, 1920, as amended, entitled "An act to promote the mining of coal, phosphate, oil, oil shale, gas, and sodium on the public domain";

S. 4712. An act authorizing the sale of certain lands no longer required for public purposes in the District of Columbia;

S. 4735. An act to authorize the acceptance of relinquishments by the State of Arizona and the city of Tempe, Ariz., to certain tracts of lands granted by the act of April 7, 1930, and to direct the Secretary of the Interior to issue patent to said tracts to the Salt River Valley Water Users Association;

S. 4747. An act to provide for the entry under ·bond of exhibits of arts, sciences, and industries, and products of the soil, mine, and sea;

S. 4818. An act to authorize the transfer of certain lands in Bernalillo County, N. Mex., to the city of Albuquerque, N.Mex.;

S. 4851. An act to amend section 5202, United States Re~ vised Statutes, as amended (U. S. C., title 12, ch. 2, sec. 82), and for other purposes;

S. 4874. An act to grant a right of way or easement over lands of the United States within the Upper Mississippi River Wild Life and Fish Refuge to the Savanna-Sabula Bridge Co., a corporation, for the construction, maintenance, and operation of a highway between Savanna, m., and Sabula, Iowa;

S. 4898. An act amending an act entitled "An act authorizing the State of West Virginia, by and through the State Bridge Commission of West Virginia, or the successors of said commission, to acquire, purchase, construct, improve, maintain, and operate bridges across the streams and rivers within said State and/or across boundary-line streams or rivers of said State," approved March 3, 1931;

S. J. Res.101. Joint resolution directing the President of the United States of America to proclaim October 11, 1932, General Pulaski's Memorial Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; and

S. J. Res.178. Joint resolution authorizing the Secretary of War to receive for instruction at the United States Military Academy at West Point, Julio Rodriguez Arrea, a citizen of Costa Rica.

The message also announced that the Senate insists upon its amendments to the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 418) entitled "Joint resolution authorizing the distribution of Government-owned wheat and cotton to the American National Red Cross and other organizations for relief of distress," disagreed to by the House, agrees to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. McNARY, Mr. NoRRIS, and Mr. KENDRICK to be the conferees on the part of the Senate.

The message also announced that the Senate insists upon its amendments to the bill <H. R. 10884) entitled "An act to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to adjust reimbursable debts of Indians and tribes of Indians," disagreed to by the House; agrees to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and ap-

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE· 14167 points Mr. FRAZIER, Mr. SCHALL, and Mr. ASHURST to be the conferees on the part of the Senate.

The message also announced that the Senate had ordered that the conferees on the ·part of the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the House of Representatives to the concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 29) authorizing the printing and distribution of copies of the Federal laws relating to the veterans of various wars be discharged from its further consideration and that the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendments of the House of Representatives and agree to the same.

The message also announced that the Senate had ordered that the House of Representatives be requested to return to the Senate the bill <H. R. 11267) entitled "An act making appropriations for the legislative branch of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes," together with all accompanying papers.

The message also announced that the Senate agrees to the amendments of the House to the amendments of the Senate numbered 22 and 135 to the bill (H. R. 11361) entitled "An act making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes."

The message also announced that the Senate had ordered that the House be requested to return to the Senate the bill <H. R. 10829) entitled "An act relating to the naturalization of certain women born in Hawaii."

AMELIA EARHART PUTNAM

Mr. HILL of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the joint resolution <S. J. Res.165), authorizing the President of the United States to present the distinguished-flying cross to Amelia Earhart Putnam, insist on the House amendment and agree to the conference asked with the Senate.

The Clerk read .the title of the Senate joint resolution. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the

gentleman from Alabama? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none and appoints the following conferees: Messrs. HILL of Alabama, FITZPATRICK, and JAMES.

INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. WOODRUM. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill (H. R. 10022) making appropriations for the Executive Office and sundry independent executive bureaus, boards, commissions, and offices for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, with Senate amendments, disagree to the Senate amendments, and ask for a conference.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. Mr. LAGUARDIA. Reserving the right to object, I

notice that an amendment, a proviso put in by the House which would prohibit the Shipping Board from making loans to any corporation based on a postal contract which has not been approved by the Comptroller General, was stricken from the bill by the Senate. I am sure that that was done in the other body under a misapprehension of the facts, or not having all of the facts. It simply means that loans might be made by the Shipping Board, the basis of which is a postal contract under the provisions of the merchant marine act, and yet that contract not having been approved by the Comptroller General. I know that the conferees, the gentleman from Virginia, will look after the views of the House, and I trust the gentleman will bear in mind that very important proviso, which I believe will prevent, not a saving, but something like $3,000,000 being squandered by the Umted States Government.

Mr. WOODRUM. I am in sympathy with the amendment and will do what we can to defend it.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Virginia? [After a pause.] The Chair hears none, and appoints the following conferees: Messrs. WOODRUM, WRIGHT, and WASON.

Mr. WOODRUM. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the conferees just appointed may have until midnight to-night to file a conference report on the bill, H. R. 10022.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Virginia?

There was no objection. APPROPRIATIONS FOR VETERANS' RELIEF

Mr. LOZIER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks on. the bonus, and also to extend my remarks in the REcoRD, showing an allocation of the various amounts appropriated for veteran relief as between the veterans of the various wars.

Mr. MOUSER. Reserving the right to object, I do not object to the gentleman extending his own remarks, but the gentleman has quite an extensive speech in the RECORD on that question. I do not object to the table, but the gentleman will have extended his own remarks twice on that question. The gentleman has already extended his remarks on the bonus, under the rule granting him that right.

Mr. LOZIER. This is a mere revision, an inconsequential revision of my former remarks on the bonus.

Mr. MOUSER. If the gentleman will give the tables as to what we are paying in costs, that would be illuminating.

Mr. LOZIER. I have no intention of duplicating my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri?

There was no objection. Mr. LOZIER. Mr. Speaker, much misinformation is in

circulation as to what the World War is costing the United States Government in all forms of relief provided for veterans and their dependents. It is frequently stated that the Government is paying approximately $1,000,000,000 annually for relief of World War veterans and their dependents. This statement is far from the truth, as I will proceed to demonstrate.

In December President Hoover sent to Congress the estimates by his Director of the Budget, and, among other items, was one calling for an appropriation of $1,072,064,527, of which $983,160,000 could properly be classified as intended for the relief of veterans and their dependents. The House lopped off $33,922,205, reducing the appropriation to $949,-237,795. It is believed that an additional $50,000,000 will have to be appropriated in December, which will bring the total to $999,237,795 for the fiscal year of 1933.

But of this amount $20,850,000 was intended for the civilservice retirement and disability fund, which reduces the amount to $978,387,795. which is the total proposed to be expended for pensions and veterans' relief of every kind and character from July 1, 1932, to June 30, 1933. But of this amount approximately $240,129,450 will be used to pay pensions to soldiers <and their dependents) of other wars, viz, the Mexican War, Civil War, Spanish-American War, Philippine insurrection, Boxer rebellion, Indian wars, and pensions to those who served in peace time in the Regular Army and Navy. Deducting the amounts required to pay pensions granted on account of former wars, we have left the sum of $738,258,345, which represents the amount that will be paid in the coming fiscal year for the relief of World War veterans and their dependents.

Now, this $738,258,345 will be distributed as follows: 1. For all forms of direct compensation, including

death and disability payment, retirement pay-ments to disabled emergency officers, etc...: _______ ~356, 250,000

2. Hospital and domiciliary facilities_______________ 10, 877, 000 3. Administration costs, including personnel, half of

which is in hospitals and homes________________ 104, 131, 345 4. VVar-rlsk tnsurance ______________________________ 117,000,000 5. Adjusted-service certificate fund_________________ 150, 000, 000

Total--------------------------------------- 738,258,345

But of this amount, $117,000,000 is to be used to pay death benefits under war-risk insurance contracts, which are legal obligations of the Government and which must be paid and can only be avoided by repudiation, which is unthinkable, and $150,000,000 are to be used to pay adjusted-service certificates that mature by death of the veterans or as loans on

14168 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 their certi:f!cates as heretofore authorized by law. So these two items--$117,000,000 and $150,000,000-aggregate $267,-000,000 and represent legal obligations of the United States Government, for the payment of which the faith and credit of the United States Government has been solemnly pledged. These $26'7 ,000,000 must not be considered as a bounty to be given or withheld at the will or pleasure of the Government, but this sum is to be applied in payment of obligations of the Government that are just as legal as the Liberty bonds or other Government securities.

Now deducting the $267,000,000 from the $738,258,345 we have $471,258,345 as the total net cost to the United States Government of the World War veterans and their dependents for the fiscal year of 1933~ exclusive of the $267,000,000 applied on the fixed and irrevocable obligations of the Government.

Excluding the $267,000,000 fixed and irrevocable obligations of the Government, we find that World War veterans' relief will cost the American people in the fiscal year of 1933 as follows: All forms of direct compensation, including death

and disability payment, retirement payments to disabled emergency o·m.cers, etc ___________________ $356, 250, 000

Hospital and domiciliary facilities_________________ 10, 877, 000 Administration ccsts, including personnel, half of

which is in hospitals and homes_________________ 104, 131, 345

Total cost of World War veteran rellef exclusive of war-risk insurance and adjusted-certificate retirement fund__________ 471, 258, 345

As compared with $240,129,450 costs for pensions resulting from the Mexican, Civil, Indian, Spanish-American Wars, Philippine insurrection, and Boxer rebellion.

Of course, the $267,000,000 that will be paid in 1933 on account of war-risk insurance and adjusted-service certificates are a part of the cost of veteran relief on account of the World War, but those amounts are fixed and irrevocable obligations of the Government for the payment of which we are legally and morally obligated to make provision to the same extent as it is necessary to ·make provision to discharge maturing Liberty bonds or other Government securities.

I have made this analysis and survey of our expenditures for relief of veterans (and their dependents) of all wars so we may know what proportion of this expenditure of approximately $1,000,000,000 goes to the relief of veterans of the World War and their dependents and what amounts are paid to veterans of former wars.

Wide publicity has been given to the statement that 26 per cent of our entire National Budget is expended for the relief of World War veterans and their dependents. This is not true. The fact is that 26.1 per cent of our estimated total Government expenses for the coming year will be expended for the relief of veterans and their dependents, not of the World War alone but for the relief of veterans of all wars

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri?

There was no objection. Mr. HOPKINS. Mr. Speaker and colleagu~. I want to

make a calm statement and as nearly impartial as an American can make about a system that openly attempts to destroy the type of government set up by our forefathers and protected and preserved by many great Americans up until the present day.

I am not going to try to make an oratorical or an emotional appeal to you to-day. I am simply going to record a few known facts for thinking Americans to consider and understand. In the main I am going to use original-source material and quote from statements of communists in official positions under direct appointment from Moscow and from official communistic publications.

The difficulty in talking about Russia does not arise from lack of information but rather from the lack of accurate information.

MAIN OBJECTIVES OF COMMUNISM

First, let us arrive at the primary objectives of communism and thereby define the term.

TO DESTROY RELIGION

The first object of communism is to destroy religion. Let me quote Mr. William Z. Foster, the candidate for President on the communist ticket, when he testified before the special congressional committee:

Mr. FosTER. Our party considers religion to be the opium of the people, as Karl Marx has stated, and we carry on propaganda for the liquidation of these prejudices amongst the workers.

• • • • • Many workers join the Communist Party who stlll have some

·religious scruples or rellgious ideas; but a worker who will join the Communist Party, who understands the elementary principles of the Communist Party, must necessarily be in the process of liquidating his religious beliefs, and, if he still has any 11ngerings when he joins the party, he will soon get rid of them.

Let me also quote from the testimony Qf Mr. M. J. Olgin, editor of the communistic daily newspaper, the Morning Freiheit, New York:

Mr. OLGIN. I agree perfectly with what Marx said about religion; that religion is the opium for the people.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you belleve in abolition of all religion? Mr. OLGIN. I believe in enlightening all the people so they may

stop believing what don't exist. • • •

The right to vote is denied all clergymen, according to the Russian constitution <Art. IV, ch. 13, par. 65, div. cD.

The decree affecting the church and state, paragraph 12, reads as follows: "No church or religious society has the right to own property. They have no rights of a judicial person."

TO DESTROY INDIVIDUALISM AND PRIVATE INITIATIVE

and their dependents, less than 18 per cent being chargeable Communism has as one of its objectives the abolition to the relief for World War veterans and 8 per cent being of private ownership and individual initiative and substitutes chargeable to the relief for veterans of the Mexican, Civil, nationalization of all resources and energies. This can be Spanish-American, and Indian Wars, Philippine insunec- more clearly understood by reading some official publica-tion, and Boxer rebellion. tions of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.

It may be of interest to add that there are on the rolls While testifying before the congressional investigating of the Veterans' Administration 1,349,812 beneficiaries of committee, Mr. Louis Bebrits, .editor of the Uj Elore, of pensions, compensation, and disability legislation, as follows: 'New York. when questioned by the late Mr. Eslick, a member war of 1812-------------------------------------------- 8 of the committee, gave this testimony: ~iexican war___________________________________________ 547 Indian War-------------------------------------------- 9,753 Civil War ---------------------------------------------- 193, 721 Spanish-American War --------------------------------- 239, 860 Regular Establishment --------------------------------- 22, 571 world War--------------------------------------------- 883,352

EXTENSION OF REMARKS

Mr. DE PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks by printing in the RECORD a speech made by President Hoover recently at Howard University.

Mr. UNDERHILL. Mr. Speaker, I object to that. COMMUNISM-OUT OF THEIR OWN MOUTHS

Mr. HOPKINS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my own remarks and to include two small quotations from the Russian constitutio~

Mr. EsLICK. If your idea of the new state would come into being at once, a change from our form of government to the soviet form o! government, would you pay the landowner and the merchant and tbe other property owner anything for his holdings?

Mr. BEBB.ITS. The landowner, the property owner, will not get anything. I hold it that property owning, in my opinion, is the result of robbing generations of the people.

Mr. EsLicK. You would take away lands, merchandise, banking? Mr. BEBJUTS. Yes. Mr. ESLicK. All of these forms of industry? Mr. BEBIUTS. Yes. Mr. EsLICK. You would make no compensation whatever to the

owners? Mr. BEBRITS. No. Mr. EsLICK. But suppose the capitalist class and individual cor

porations refused to give it up, then how would you take it away from them except by force?

Mr. BEBI'.ITS. All revolutions are working with force.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14169 Mr. Esucx:. And you would go to the extent of kllling h1m 1n

order to take his property, would you not, 1! it became necessary? Mr. BEBRITS. I guess he will be wiser than to say he will stand

and get k1lled.

Now, let me quote subdivisions (a), (b), (c). and (e) from chapter 2 of article 1 of the Russian Constitution:

(a) For the purpose of realizing the socialization of land, all private property in land is abolished, and the entire land is declared to be national property and 1s to be apportioned among husbandmen without any compensation to the former owners, in the measure of each one's ability to till it.

(b) All forests, treasures of the earth. and waters of general public utility, all implements, whether animate or inanimate, model farms and agricultural enterprises, are declared to be national property.

(c) As a first step towa.rd complete transfer of ownership to the Soviet Republic of all factories, mills, mines, rail ways, and other means of production and transportation, the Soviet law for the control by workmen and the establishment of the Supreme Soviet of National Economy 1s hereby confirmed, so as to assure the power of the workers over the exploiters.

(e) The transfer of all banks into the ownership of the Workers and Peasants' Government, as one of the conditions of the liberation of the tolling masses from the yoke of capital, is confirmed.

It is of great interest to note the law concerning " Inheritance" as set up by official decree. The following is an exact quotation of Article I of this decree:

DECREE ABOLISHING INHERI'f.ANCE I. Inheritance, whether by law or by will, 1s abolished. After

the death of an owner, the property which belonged to him, whether movable or immovable, becomes the property of the Government of the Russian Socialist Soviet Federative Republic.

NoTE.-The discontinuance and transfer of rights of utilization of farm lands is determined by the rules provided in the fundamental law of the socialization of the land.

Let me quote further from the Russian Constitution, AIticle IV, chapter 13, paragraph 65, subdivisions (a), (b), (c), (d):

65. The following persons enjoy neither the right to vote nor the right to be voted for, even though they belong to one of the categories enumerated above, namely:

(a) Persons who employ hired labor in order to obtain from it an increase in profits.

(b) Persons who have an income without doing any work, such as interest from capital, receipts from property, etc.

(c) Private merchants, trade and commercial brokers. (d) Monks and clergy of all denominations.

TO BRING ABOUT REVOLUTION IN THE UNITED STATES Communists hope and plan to bring about a forcible revo

lution in the United States and thereby overthrow our Government, putting in its place a " red " government backed by the" red" army. Constantly propaganda along this line is sent throughout the United States. The following quotations are of interest along this line:

The program of the Communist Party, as established by the Comintern by a decision of the Sixth World Congress, September 1, 1929, at Moscow, as appears 1n the International Press Correspondence (Inprecor), an omclal organ of the Comintern, includes the following paragraph:

"The communists consider it unworthy to dissimulate their opinions or their plans. They proclaim openly that their designs can only be realized by the violent overthrow of the entire traditional social order ...

When W. Z. Foster, communist candidate for President of the United States, made his acceptance speech on May 25, 1928, he said in part as follows:

"Our party, different from the Socialist Party, creates no illusions amongst the workers that they can vote their way to emancipation, that they can capture the ready-made machinery of the state and utillze it for the emancipation of the working class. On the contrary, we must ut111ze this campaign to carry on widespread and energetic propaganda to teach the workers that the capitalist class would never allow the working class peacefully to take control of the state. That is their strong right arm and they will fight violently to the end to retain it. The working class must shatter the capitalist state. It must build a new state. a new government, a workers and farmers' government, the soviet government of the United States. No communist, no matter how many votes he should secure in a national election, could, even if he would, become President of the present Government. When a communist heads a government in the United States, and that day wlll come just as surely as the sun rises, that government will not be a capitalistic government, but a soviet government, and beb.fnd th~ government will stand the red army to enforce the dictatorship of the proletariat."

The following excerpt is taken from the hearings held by the congressional investigating committee. Mr. William z.

Foster, communist candidate for President in 1928, was answering the questions:

Mr. FosTER. I, of course, do not say we derived our theories from the Declaration of Independence; but the Declaration of Independence says that when a government demonstrates that it no longer represents the interests of the masses, it is not only the right but the duty of these masses to dispose of that government and to establish one that will represent their interests--to abolish that government.

The CHAIRMAN. That is, what you advocate 1s a change of our republican form of government and the substituting of the soviet form of government?

Mr. FosTER. I have stated that a number of times. The CHAIRMAN. Now, if I understand you, the workers 1n this

country look upon the Soviet Union as their country; 1s that right?

Mr. FosTER. The more advanced workers do. The CHAIRMAN. Look upon the Soviet Union as their country? Mr. FosTER. Yes. The CHAmMAN. They look upon the soviet flag as their flag? Mr. FosTER. The workers of this country and the workers of

every country have only one fiag and that is the red flag.

The following testimony of Mr. Louis Bebrits, editor and chief of the Uj Elore, a revolutionary communist daily printed in Hungarian in New York City, given before the congressional committee, is both interesting and alarming to an American reading it:

Mr. BEBRITS. I am always fighting against capitalism and seeking to overthrow capitalism and to get a soviet government.

Mr. BAcHMANN. Yes; and you would go to the extent of using force and violence the same as they did in Russia when the Russian provisional government was overthrown and the communist took control?

Mr. BEBRITS. I can not imagine a revolution without the same methods as the Russian workers and farmers used! "

CONSCRIPT, CONVICT, OR FORCED LABOR

Much has been said and a great deal written about "forced," "conscript,'' and "convict" labor in Russia. Certain United States custom courts have refused to allow products coming from Russia to be shipped into the United States on the ground that they were wholly or in part produced or manufactured by conscript or convict labor.

The Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act of 1930 prohibits the im~ portation of any such products and sets up the principle that it is wrong to sell "convict-made" goods in competition with goods made by " free " labor.

The Russian trading corporation, A.mtorg, has denied the use of forced labor. Certain so-called liberal-minded men who have sympathies for Russia have expressed doubt as to the use of forced labor being used in Russia. Admittedly it is a . difficult proposition to prove, but I want to present today some evidence from Russia's own publications to show that there certainly is ground for the belief that a great amount of Russian labor is forced labor and that this country would be justified in refusing to admit into this country any Russian exports produced by such labor.

The Russian Constitution, Aiticle I, Chapter II, paragraph 3, subdivision f, reads:

(!) Universal obligation to work is introduced for the purpose of eliminating the parasitic strata of society and organizing the economic life of the country.

Of course, there is nothing really objectionable in this section, but the real test comes in its application. By decree this section has been construed to mean that the government may assign to the individual the specific job to be done regardless of his own choice.

If the laborer rejects that job his food card is taken from him, and, as food is a national monopoly, this deprives the laborer of the chance to live unless he is wealthy enough to buy his food at the. private stores where prices are many times higher than at the government commissary. Thus, if a man refuses to do the specific piece of work assigned him by the government he is practically made a waif on society. It is estimated that there are 3,000,000 families of this type in Russia to-day.

Certainly then, in a practical sense, there is "enforced" labor in Russia to-day.

FORCED LABOR IN THE TIM13ER INDUSTRY

Publications emanating from Moscow and considered to be official, as well as strictly censored, indicate that there are

14170 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE JUNE 28 a.t least four forms of labor emplQfed in the timber industry of the Soviet Government.

First. Labor of local peasants. Second. Indentured labor raised within the district or sent

from adjoining or distant districts, or from other "Repub-lics." .

Third. Convict labor (imprisoned) . Fourth. Convict labor (unimprisoned). The laoor of the local peasants in the timber regions is

called, in official language, "self-obligations," or "self-imposed tasks."

When labor is needed for timber projects, meetings are called in each village to decide on whether or not they will accept a labor "contract." Kulaks, priests, and other disfranchised memb~rs of the community are not allowed to attend these meetings or to vote. One-fourth of the population of labor age constitutes a quorum. If the majority of those present vote to accept a. labor "obligation," the "contract" is binding on the entire community. .

Members of the community may then be organized into groups and sent to timber camps or other projects for certain periods of time. Not only are the free members of the community required to go to these camps for work. but particularly heavY burdens are placed on the so-called disfranchised or" declassed" members of the community.

To an American citizen accustomed as he has been for generations to accept or reject labor and to have reserved to himself entirely the right as to where he shall or shall not live, it certainly would appear that these "self-imposed tasks" are in reality forced labor and in some cases would approach slave labor.

If peasants who are bound by these "self-imposed tasks" resist, the penalty is impriSonment, " with compulsory labor up to two years and the confiscation of • • • their possessions."

According to Pravda of January 10, 1931, there were required 900,000 laborers of the type above mentioned for work in the timber camps. The great bulk of these were to be recruited from the peasants under the system I have just outlined. In Izvestia on January 25 (pp. 35, 36), on February 10 (p. 52), and February 28 (p. 99), all in 1931, the rules providing for raising of gangs of indentured lumbermen directed that women be used to replace men on the farms so that men could be released for the timber camps. However, women were also used in timber gangs. On March 15, 1931, Pravda printed articles to the effect that the women gangs in the forests were giving better results in some places than were men.

The operation of the indentured labor system is better understood if we note news statements from Izvestia on October 22 to the effect that 720 local peasants were working under the voluntary agreement, but some " blockheads and wrackers" had been prosecuted for failing in their duty. On January 8, 1931, the Archangel correspondent of Izvestia telegraphed that. "self-imposed tasks" were being "enforced" badly by local authorities. On January 16, 1931, Krasnaya Gazeta stated that an anonymous person at an election meeting in Leningrad dared to present a written question asking when forced labor would be abolished.

The further proof of indentured or forced labor m~ht be found in the published lists of deserters that appeir frequently in the Soviet press (see Za Industrializatsiu, September 25, 28, November 26, 1930; January 16, 18, 21, 24, 26, February 8, 11, 12, 17, 18, 19, 23, 28, March 13, 28, 1931; Trud, August 30; Izvestia, February 13).

If time permitted, I could continue to give original source references to Russian newspapers and magazines showing that many forms of labor in Russia could well be defined as forced or indentured labor. By decrees issued by the Government, men are forced to give up professions of long years' standing to enter other professions needing men of their experience. I believe, however, I have given sufficient information to show that there certainly is considerable basis for the belief that exists to the effect that the Soviet Government employs forced labor at least in the tll:pber camps.

· I am not one of those that feels that the "red peril" is going to effectively undermine our country, yet I certainly feel that full study should be given the problem and proper safeguards set up to at least prevent the shipment into this country of products made by forced, indentured, or convict labor.

THE 1932 REVENUE ACT

Mr. HOPE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to ex-tend my own remarks in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER. Without objection, it 1s so ordered. There was no objection. Mr. HOPE. Mr. Speaker, the 1932 revenue act is un

doubtedly the most burdensome tax measure ever enacted during a time of peace. It is to be regretted that at a time like this it is necessary to put such an additional load upon · the distressed people of this country. Any tax bill would be hard to bear under existing conditions, but the present bill contains so many discriminations and inequalities that it is particularly objectionable.

There are some features about the bill which I like. It very properly increases the tax upon incomes, estates, and gifts to heights heretofore unknown except during the war emergency. It provides for administrative changes which will bring in many millions of dollars from sources which have heretofore escaped taxation. Yet, though the taxes on incomes, both individual and corporate, and upon estates and gifts have been so greatly increased, still these sources are not nearly enough to provide the necessary revenue for the Government. Therefore, it has been necessary to reach out and impose taxes which are going to be felt by every man, woman, and child in the country. It is these taxes which are particularly objectionable and discriminatory.

They include a Federal tax on gasoline, a tax on lubricating oil, a tax on bank checks, an increase in postage rates, a tax upon automobiles, trucks, and motor accessories, including tires and tubes, upon radios, electricity, sporting goods, soap, cosmetics, matches, and many other articles down to the children's candy and chewing gum. These taxes will greatly add to the burden which the farmers of this country are already carrying. The tax on gasoline, on lubricating oil, on checks, on automobiles, trucks, and accessories, and the increased postage rate will all hit the farmer directly and to a greater extent than those engaged in any other business or profession.

All of these discriminations against agriculture could have been avoided if the bill, as proposed by the House Ways and Means Committee, providing for a manufacturers' sales tax bad been adopted. This proposed tax was at the rate of 2% per cent upon all manufactured articles, but it excepted food, clothing, medicines, and farm implements. With these exceptions this tax could not have been burdensome upon the farmer or anyone in moderate circumstances. The House of Representatives, however, refused to follow the committee on this proposal and voted to eliminate the provision for a manufacturers' sales tax from the bill. Likewise a proposal in the Senate to impose a similar tax was defeated. The natural result was that it became necessary to seek other sources of revenue. It was apparent from the beginning that if the manufacturers' sales tax, with the liberal exemptions which were made, was defeated that it would be necessary to impose some of the burdensome taxes now in the bill. Likewise, it has been apparent during all the time this tax legislation has been under consideration that unless Congress was willing to make great decreases in governmental expenditures through the reduction of salaries and the elimination of useless bureaus and commissions that the burden of taxation would have to be further increased.

This seems to be an appropriate point at which to refer to the remarks which I made in the House on Saturday, March 12, 1932, during the general debate on the tax bill At that time I suggested that before passing a general tax bill a much greater effort should be made to reduce expenditures and particularly that the salaries of Government employees should be reduced. A part of my remarks at

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14171 that time, both on the question of reduction of expendi- must be found in order to provide sufficient revenue to tures and the alternatives to the manufacturers' sales tax maintain our national credit. I do not, however, agree follows: that it is necessary to levy the unjust and discriminatory

Mr. HoPE. I am not saying that these salaries are too high, but I do say the employees of the Federal Government in this time of stress ought to be willing to make the same sacrifices that other people in the country are making; and on that basis I justify cuts in Federal salaries at this time. Likewise, it must not be overlooked that the reduced cost of living makes it possible-to decrease salaries at least 20 per cent without making any reduction in real wages as compared with 1927.

Mr. CocHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HoPE. Yes. Mr. CocHRAN of Missouri. Will the gentleman say now, with

such a tax as it is now proposed to force on the masses of the people, that he would st1ll cut their salaries?

Mr. HoPE. I say I would prefer to cut their salaries rather than 1m pose additional taxes on the common people of this country. Federal employees to-day, compared with the farmers and the wage earners of this country, are a privileged class, and I think they should bear a part of the burden of this depression. I further believe that they are patriotic enough to be perfectly willing to do so. However, I did not get up here to discuss Federal salaries. I merely wanted to state that I believe there are some taxes which we might eliminate in this b1ll if our expenditures committee or other appropriate committees in this Congress would reduce Federal salaries in the higher brackets.

Getting back to the bill that is before us, I say frankly I do not like a sales tax. I do not think that any of us like a sales tax. There is an instinctive feeling against it. Yet when we contemplate the taxes it is proposed to substitute for a sales tax I think almost all of us will agree that the manufacturers' taxor sales tax; whatever you want to call it-will be more satisfactory. What has been proposed in the place of a sales tax? A tax on gasoline, for one thing. Members of this House know how popular tbat would be throughout the country. Every one of you have been receiving letters and telegrams protesting against a tax on gasoline. We know that is a field which has already been preempted by the States as far as taxation is concerned. We know that in a great many States they are overdoing it, with the result that they have reached the point of diminishing returns already. We have a problem on our hands in the matter of bootlegging of gasoline at the present time, and it would intensify this problem as well as be unfair to the States to place a Federal tax of 1 cent a gallon on gasoline.

It has been proposed that we increase postage rates 1 cent on first-class matter. It you want an unpopular tax, I suggest that you adopt that. It there is going to be any unpopularity so far as a manufacturers' tax 1s concerned, you are going to have that multiplied ten times the moment you increase postage rates.

An automobile tax has been proposed. You know the protest that would come regarding that. You know and I know that such a tax is discriminatory, and it would be putting a tax on an industry which 1s already bearing more than its proper share of taxation.

Then there has been a proposal to put a tax on bank checks, which, in my opinion, would be the worst nuisance tax which could be devised. You members here from rural districts, how do you think your farmer constituents will appreciate having this tax deducted from their meager cream checks?

After studying all these proposals, I am unable to see how any substitute which has been proposed for the sales tax would in any way be a more popular or equitable tax, or one which could be any more easily borne by the people of the country.

It will be noted that when the manufacturers' sales tax was eliminated it became necessary to adopt every one of the substitutes which I mentioned above. It was such taxes as these I was seeking to avoid when I supported the manufacturers'. sales tax. Likewise, it was the avoidance of such taxes as these which I had in mind when I supported all of the various economy programs which have been proposed in Congress, most of which have not been adopted.

The result is that the people of this country, particularly the farmers, are going to feel the burden of taxation during the next fiscal year as never before in our history. Every one of these taxes, although paid by the manufacturer, will be passed on to the consumer because they are too large to be absorbed. The small 2¥4 per cent tax, however, would in most instances, especially in these days of intense competition, have been absorbed by the manufacturer, and the consumer would never have felt it.

I am in entire agreement with those who feel it is essential that the Budget be balanced. I realize that in times like these when all incomes, both great and small, have shrunk to undreamed of proportions that even by increasing the rates tremendously, as has been done, we can not hope to realize enough from income taxes to balance Federal expenditures. I realize that other sources of taxation

taxes contained in this revenue act. EXTENSION OF REMARKS

Mr. UNDERHILL. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. UNDERHILL. When is the proper time to request

that all Members have the privilege of extending their own remarks in the RECORD for five legislative days?

The SPEAKER. That is in order at any time. Mr. UNDERHILL. Then, I make that request now, Mr.

Speaker, in order to save time. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have five legislative days in which to extend their own remarks in the RECORD.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Reserving the right to object, the gentleman limits it to five days. The general procedure is that Members have permission to extend their own remarks up to the last issue of the RECORD.

Mr. UNDERHILL. Five days after adjournment. I will amend my request to that extent.

Mr. SNELL. Limiting the extension to his own remarks. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr.

UNDERHILL] asks unanimous consent that all Members of the House of Representatives be permitted to extend their own remarks in the RECORD until the printing of the final issue of the RECORD of this session of Congress. Is there objection?

Mr. STEVENSON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, and I am not going to object, I want to draw the attention of the Members who are getting these extensions to the fact that the printers and the people concerned with the RECORD are being very much embarrassed now by the delay of Members in handing in their remarks that are to go in the RECORD, and I want to impress on them the fact that the RECORD is not going to be kept open indefinitely, and if they do not file their remarks in a reasonable time the RECORD will be printed without them.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right to object, on previous occasions it has been held that such a request includes not a single extension but such extensions as a Member may desire to make of his own remarks.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman's interpretation of the rule is correct.

Mr. TILSON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, is it thoroughly understood that these extensions are of the Member's own remarks and that this will not open the RECORD to all sorts of insertions, editorials, and other kinds of articles?

The SPEAKER. That was the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts, and the Chair thought he repeated it as accurately as was possible. The Chair will state the request again.

The gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. UNDERHILL, asks unanimous consent that all Members of the House of Representatives may be permitted to extend their own remarks in the RECORD until the printing of the final RECORD of this session of Congress. Is there objection?

Mr. LA¥13ERTSON. I object. RESTRICTIONS APPLICABLE TO FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's desk the bill <H. R. 8750) relative to restrictions applicable to Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes in Oklahoma, with Senate amendments, disagree to the Senate amendments, and ask for a conference.

The SPEAKER; The gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. HoWARD] asks unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill <H. R. 8750) with Senate amendments, disagree to the Senate amendments, and ask for a conference. The Clerk will report the bill by title.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection.

14172 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JuNE 28

The Chair appointed the following conferees: Messrs. HOWARD, CARTWRIGHT, and LEAVITT.

ADDRESS OF PRESIDENT HOOVER AT HOWARD UNIVERSITY Mr. UNDERHILL. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my objection

to the request of the gentleman from illinois. Mr. DE PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

to revise and extend my remarks by inserting ther~in a speech made by President Hoover.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. DE PRIEST. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to extend

my remarks in the RECORD, I include the following speech of President Hoover, Friday, June 10, 1932, at Howard University:

[From the Washington Post, Saturday, June 11, 1932) HOOVER PRAISES HOWARD UNIVERSITY IN ADDRESS AT GRADUATION

EXERCISES

It is an inspiration to come into this great institution of higher education for the Negro race.

Nothing that the Federal Government has done reflects more credit upon it for the meeting of an obligation than this institution to bring to a great segment of our population the means of overcoming handicap for which they were not responsible and of leveling upward for them an equal opportunity to share 1n the full measure of citizenship with its brethren of other races.

It is vital in a democracy that the public opinion upon which it rests shall be an informed and educated opinion.

The Negro race comprises 10 per cent of our population, and unless this 10 per cent is developed proportionately with the rest of the population it can not pull its proper strength at the oars of our pressing problems of democracy.

To provide this development requires trained leadership, and I conceive that to be the functioning of Howard University. You are providing here professional training in all those fields to which the community naturally looks.

For leadership--religion, law, medicine, education, science, and art.

You are providing this professional training to men and women of the colored race, to your own best talents, your own leaders by natural endowment. Through the instruction which they receive here, your natural leaders become trained leaders, and this training is of the same kind and of equal etliciency with that which is provided for the natural leaders of the white race.

By this process the colored people are being integrated fully into the broad stream of the national life, sharing in the obligation and opportunity for political service, for economic advancement. for educational development of the individual, and for enjoyment of all the benefits of science and art and general culture, including skilled medical service, more beautiful home surroundings, and a share in the intellectual progress of mankind.

These things are the natural rights of the citizens of a republic. The Federal Government has nobly acknowledged its duty to provide them here.

I congratulate the graduating · class upon completing their studies with credit, and I congratulate the Negro race upon your efforts to prepare yourselves for leadership in their development. I wish you well in your careers upon which you now embark.


Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in the RECORD and include therein the speech made in Chicago by Senator BARKLEY at the Democratic National Convention.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? M1·. UNDERHILL. Mr. Speaker, I object.

PRIVATE CALENDAR The SPEAKER. By special order of the House this is

Private Calendar day. The Clerk will call the first bill on the Private Calendar.

CHARLES P. SHIPLEY SADDLERY & MERCANTILE CO. The Clerk called the first bill on the Private Calendar,

H. R. 6219, for the relief of Charles P. Shipley Saddlery & Mercantile Co.

Mr. MOUSER and Mr. PATI'ERSON objected. Mr. GUYER. Will the gentleman from Ohio reserve his

objection? The SPEAKER. The gent:leman from Ohio and the gen

tleman from Alabama object. The Clerk will call the next bill.

FRANK MARTIN

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 7199, for the relief of Frank Martin.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, and in full settlement against the Government, the sum of $3,168.50 to Frank Martin for injuries received when struck by a United States mall truck: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

FRANK R. SCOTT The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 7309, for the relief of

Frank R. Scott. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object,

I would like to state to the author of the bill my reason for making this reservation of objection, if he is interested. The report from the War Department is unfavorable and included in the claim is a claim for business losses. I had in mind that I would not object if the amount could be limited to the actual medical and hospital expenses. If the gentleman will accept an amendment providing that the amount shall be $750 rather than $1,283, I shall not object; otherwise, I will be forced to object.

Mr. LONERGAN. Mr. Speaker, I will accept that amend-ment.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Frank R. Scott the sum of $1,283. Such sum shall be in full satisfaction of all claims against the United States on account of damages sustained by him on January 24, 1928, when United States Army truck No. 214243 collided with his automobile at a place known as Halls Hill, in the town of Killingly, in the State of Connecticut: Provided, Tha~ no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. In line 6, strike out the figures "$1,283" and insert the figures "$750."

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio offers an amendment, which the Clerk will report.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MousER: On page 1, line 6, strike ou~

the sign and figures "$1,283" and insert in lieu thereof the sign and figures " $750."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read

a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table. PRESSING NATIONAL QUESTIONS-PRESENT MATERIAL PROBLEMS

Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-mous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. NELSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have already

outlined the fundamental principles that must guide us in the solution of our present national problems. I now wish to discuss these problems and the remedies. Obviously my treatment must be condensed, because I wish to diagnose the


more serious evils with which Congress has had to deal this session. I will first consider those that affect more directly our material prosperity-the current depression, high taxes, and excessive railroad rates and fares.

THE DEPRESSION

The most pressing problem facing the country to-day is, undoubtedly, this much-talked-about depression which came down upon us like a " ghost at a feast." It did not come by chance. Even the French atheist Voltaire admitted that " chance is a word void of sense; nothing exists without a cause."

If we could trace the successive steps of causation, we should see that present conditions have come as the most natural consequence of individual and national disregard for fundamental moral laws. Those who do not admit the operation of immutable laws are, nevertheless, subject to them. Shaking our fist at the thundercloud will never drive it away. Whether we like it or not, we have brought this depression upon ourselves. It rests with us all to get rid of this scourge by facing the reasons for its presence and by correcting the moral errors we have made.

Sifting the evidence before us, we find four causes primarily responsible for this calamity: First, the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few; next, the World War, third, dishonest business manipulation; and, lastly, inordinate extravagance on the part of the American people, and of local and Federal Governments.

CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH

For 40 years I have watched this concentration of wealth. As the owner and editor of a newspaper, when on the threshold of political activities, I decided my stand mainly on this issue. In my editorials I warned against the evils resulting from concentration of wealth through combinations, trusts, and monopolies.

To-day statistics show that 4 per cent of our people own 80 per cent of our national wealth. The Mellon brothers are reputed to own and control approximately $8,000,000,000, or one-fiftieth of our national wealth. Think of this -enormous wealth in the hands of two men, while millions of our citizens have next to nothing. And we are told that the Mellon fortune does not compare with the Rockefeller fortune. The Rockefeller and. Morgan interests hold 341 directorships in 112 corporations-banks, railroads, insurance companies, and the like. It is a recent boast of one of this group that 12 men, of whom he is one, control the business of the United States. The American Federation of Labor predicts that 80 per cent of the Nation's corporate wealth-industries, transportation, mining, power, and so forth-will be, by 1950, in the hands of 200 corporations. Huge fortunes amassed by the few and their gigantic corporate control violate the basic principles upon which our democracy is founded, that of justice, and equality of opportunitY for all. A handful of men, by exerting the pressure their enormous power carries, can, at will, throw us into a financial panic, or even into war. They did, in fact, plunge us into the World War.

OUR ENTRY INTO THE WORLD WAlt

Not satisfied with investments at home, these owners of great fortunes, the admitted controllers of our business world, hurried to Europe at the outbreak of the World War to make loans to the allied powers at exorbitant interest rates. They also sold munitions and other war materials to these countries at huge profits. When Europe became financially exhausted, to continue their money-grabbing and to protect their interests, they dragged us into war.

I opposed our participation in the world's greatest armed conflict and I voted against it. I could see the real reason we were being railroaded into that European quarrel-it was purely a matter of money, although camouflaged with the claim that it would make for everlasting peace. I could see nothing ahead but distress, and so stated at the time I voted against war. My predictions have been abundantly verified.

Immediately after the war there was a tremendous inflation in all values. Prosperity seemed limitless. American war profits were listed at $32,000,000,000. But as the boom was not the product of an bonest effort, it could not last.

So itS end came with the 1929 deflation, affecting the entire country-in fact, the whole world. All that Uncle Sam seemed to be able to rescue from under the ashes of the erstwhile prosperity brought about by the European conflagration are the war loans-foreign and national--debt can_cellations, worthless stocks, increased armaments, and greater preparation for future wars.

DISHONEST BUSINESS

When we thought we were prosperous we indulged in an orgy of dishonest business manipulations that beggars description. There can be no more flagrant example of destruction of the people's confidence than the stock-gambling debauch in which investors lost, through short selling, $17,-000,000,000 in the stock of 25 of the leading industries; the average depreciation was 83 per cent. All together, more than $57,000,000,000 were lost in stocks.

Eagerness to get rich quickly generally overreaches itself and ends in bankruptcy. There is latent in every power a spark which, if the power is abused, ignites a retributive fire. The suicide of Ivar Kreuger, the Swedish match king, uncovered the fact that $250,000,000 worth of foreign bonds which had been sold in this country were entirely worthless. The receivership of tlie Insull utilities combine has endangered the savings of thousands of our citizens who had invested in its watered stocks. Mention must also be made of the enormous flotation by international bankers at huge profits of bonds of South American republics and European governments which have proved to be substantially without value. The most disastrous agency of this dishonesty was the stock exchange.

Twenty million Americans of every financial stratum, many of them heads of families, sought to enrich themselves by taking a plunge in Wall Street. Now their savings are gone and they are left with the empty sack to hold.

My first campaign platform, in 1906, contained a plank recommending regulation and control of the stock exchange. I saw then ·their dishonest dealings and believed that thP.y could lead only into such widespread corruption as has in recent years been prevalent. In 1921 Congress enacted legislation, which I supported, to regulate future trading in grain. The Senate Committee on Banking and Currency has been conducting investigation of " bull markets " and " bear raids," which I hope will result in preventing a 1-ecurrence of this form of swindling the general public wholesale. But this belated investigation will not put back into the pockets of the people the billions of dollars that have been lost nor restore confidence in the stocks and bonds our great industries have to sell.

INORDINATE EXTRA VAGANC!

The general public's contribution to the current depression has been the madness for pleasure and luxury that resulted from the bubble of prosperity. Movies, night clubs, football, baseball drew great crowds at all times. Plea~ure and luxury were set above thrift. High-powered salesmanship and installment credit facilities lured us to indulgence · in the most expensive of automobiles and radios. Billions of dollars went into luxuries. . Gratification of desires and appetites has robbed us of our one-time prudence and economy and set us helpless on the lap of hard times.

Not alone individuals, but even governments-National, State, and municipal-went on a spending spree. Less than 20 years ago the combined income and earnings of the American people were $34,000,000,000, and governmental expenditures amounted to $2,900,000,000, or 8% per cent. In 1930 the combined income and earnings of our people were $71,000,000,000, of which the Government took 18.6 per cent. Out of every $5 Americans in the aggregate earn, $1 goes to pay the expenses of government. The per capita cost of all government-Federal, State, and municipal-has increased from $13.56 in 1890 to $105.20 in 1928.

THE REMEDY

In our frantic effort to end the depression, all kinds of remedies are suggested. Each special interest has its special scheme to bring back prosperity. In the coming political campaign, there will be a bedlam of remedial policies inspired more or less by self-interest. None of these, how-

14174 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 ever, will cure our economic il1s; at most, they will be mere palliatives. Our trouble is too deep-rooted. To e1fect a permanent cure we must rid our body politic of the venom of greed and graft; we must be honest and just in our business dealings and in our relations with other peoples and nations; we must practice prudence and thrift.

Practical suggestions for meeting the evils I have just enumerated can not be here discussed in full. To meet the concentration of wealth the Government can use its taxing power and also strengthen and enforce more rigidly our antimonopoly laws. Measures to prevent or avert wars will be discussed more fully under the heading" Our Next War." Dishonest business practices can be curbed by a strict regulation of the stock exchange and by providing severe penalties for the sale of worthless securities. And, finally, the antidote for extravagance is practice of thrift by the people and rigid economy in the expenses of government. All of these remedies, however, can only be effective and of permanent results if the needed reforms begin with the people themselves. The powers of government without the support of the people are not only limited but in many instances ineffective.

With our Nation infected, as has been for years past, with a cancer nourished by concentrated money power, war-inflamed greed, unprecedented gambling, and inordinate self-indulgence and extravagance, we can not wonder that a calamity such as this depression has come. It is the divine way of correcting abuse. If this economic plague had not engulfed us now, conditions would have become worse. In spite of its severity, it is our cure. Just as the knife in the hand of the surgeon rids the human body of disease, so does an experience like the present, administered by Providence, tend to remove evil practices from the body politic. No appropriation of money by Congress will bring about lasting relief. We must pay the penalty of our wrongdoing in full, and when fully paid, this depression will pass away.

It has been well said that-The destiny of a people is determined by their willingness to lay

to heart the lessons of national chastisement and to use these as stepping-stones to purer life.

HIGH TAXES

Let us now consider the subject of tax relief. Taxes are an evil, but a necessary evil; they represent the price we must pay for the protection of life and property. At this session Congress has been brought painfully face to face with this problem. In all my legislative experience I have never known a more difficult task to adjust properly than that of trying to balance the Budget by raising sufficient taxes in these times of depression.

No one wants to pay a tax. Certainly no one has written to me expressing his willingness to pay taxes. Some humorist has said that the best method of collecting taxes is that by which the goose may be plucked of the greatest number of feathers with the least possible number of squawks. There has been plenty of squawking by the people at this session-squawking over salary cuts, sales tax, income tax, inheritance tax, and the so-called nuisance taxes. This squawking generally takes the form of-

Uncle Sam, Uncle Sam, don't tax me, Tax the fellow behind the tree.

When the tax bill was before us there was organized one tremendous wail of woe throughout the country over high taxes. But, I repeat, a tax be it high or low is the price we have to pay for the protection of our lives and properties.

CRIME INCREASES TAXES

That crime is on the increase and assuming dreadful forms is apparent to everybody. The press is full of· accounts of it. When a police officer, as in my home city, is taken for a ride and brutally murdered, his body thrown into a sand pit; when banks are held up throughout my district by bandits in open daylight; or when outlaws invade the home of a banker, remain there all night, and at the point of a gnn compel him to open the bank in the morning; when little children are taken· from their cribs by kidnapers and

murdered---of which outrage the Lindbergh case 1s the most notorious example-the cry goes up to Congress and the State legislatures for more laws. more severe punishments, and relentless pursuit of the wrongdoers. This comes right back to the people in taxes in sums that range from thousands to millions of dollars.

PRINCIPLES OF TAXATION

In trying to raise taxes Congress should make the laws conform to moral principles. It is unfortunate that because of the failure of lawmakers in the past to adopt fixed standards and principles taxation has come to be largely arbitrary. Committees select certain persons or kinds of business to be taxed and these organize themselves into groups to fight the tax. So it comes to be a question, not of principle but of power, influence, organized votes to coerce and control Congress.

In a speech some years ago I stated what, as a result of my studies, I believed should be the principle of Federal taxation. Taxes should be levied according to the ability to pay them. Ability to pay depends upon property possessions. Or taxes should be levied according to the amount of protection of life and property accorded by the Government. As local and State governments levY taxes on tangible property, the Federal Government should depend mainly upon the three following sources: Income tax, inheritance tax, and corporation taxes. This would place the Federal tax directly upon those who have the means to pay, proportionate to the protection they receive, and would tend to check the menace of tremendous fortunes and the concentration of the wealth of the Nation more and more in the hands of the few. But these large taxpayers are powerful, well organized, and bring a constant pressure upon Congress. They demand that the National Legislature levY what is known as "sales tax," which shifts the burden at once upon the people.

The leaders of both parties in the House yielded to the pressure of organized wealth and brought in a sales tax in the form of manufacturers' tax. The manufacturer was virtually called upon to put the tax into the article and add it to the price of the goods sold. But the manufacturers' tax was defeated and we caused to be adopted instead higher income, inheritance, and corporation taxes, adopting also the so-called sales tax to a very limited extent and only temporarily, and without establishing the principle of this tax in our taxation system.

It is this shifting of the burden of taxation that is one of the chief elements causing the poverty of the many and the increase of the wealth of the few. It is this lifting of the burden of taxation from the backs of those best able to bear it and loading it upon the masses of the people that is causing unrest and discontent with the capitalistic system in this country. Our capitalists are very unwise in opposing fair and equitable taxes, because injustice jeopardizes the capitalistic system itself. Senator CouzENS, himself a multimillionaire, showed wisdom and the right spirit when he offered an amendment to the tax bill in the Senate to increase the income taxes, especially in the higher brackets, to meet the present emergency.

When I was leader of the progressive group in the House we agreed with the conservatives on a tax bill that was considered generally the fairest ever enacted by Congress.

EXCESSIVE RAILROAD RATES

When we look into the matter of railway fares and rates what do we find? The principle of solidarity grossly violated. More inequalities, more concentration of wealth into the hands of a few. There is much clamor for help for the railroads, but who is greatly concerned whether or not the farmers and shippers and the traveling public get assistance or relief from excessive railroad rates? Everyone knows that unless rates are equitably adjusted so that both carrier and shipper may operate with reasonable and fair profits, both soon suffer. The Good Book taught us long ago that " no man liveth to himself and no man dieth to himself."

The railroad interests were too greedy for profits to recognize this law of an ordered universe and went blindly against it in making rates that were almost prohibitive. Not content with these rates they succeeded in getting the Esch-Cum-

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14175 mins bill passed through Congress. It was backed by railway security holders and railway executives. The men most responsible for the enactment of this measure were punished with defeat when they came up for re-election. If the people were always alert and informed as to what their Representatives in Congress were actually doing for or against them, or were not doing, they could make the best possible contribution to good government. But they, too, must be actuated by fairness and interest in the general good. If greed is paramount, advantage is turned to disadvantage, gain to loss.

This is what happened with the recapture and valuation features of the Esch-CUmmins law, which are now about to be scrapped for something more advantageous to the railroads. These interests would like to have the La Follette valuation plan nullified because it makes the value of the property and not watered stock the basis of rates. The railroad interests have always chafed under this restraint. Provision was made that all profits in excess of 6 per cent on property value should be set aside for the use of the railroads, one half to be held by the roads as a trust fund for specified purposes and the other half to be held by the Government as a contingent fund for the use of weaker roads in times of emergency. The main defect of the law was the so-called guaranty clause, which many thought would insure the railroads a fair return of 6 per cent. While it was not so stated in words, it was expected to operate that way in fact.

Now it is proposed that instead of valuation, an intangible and indefinite " barometer of earnings " be adopted as the basis for rate making. The Interstate Commerce Commission is to be guided only by their individual judgment and by reports supplied by the railroads as to their investment and earnings. This is an unsound and unscientific course of procedure.

But this is not all that is sought by railroad interests. Under the provisions of a bill reported favorably by a committee in Congress, $360,000,000 due the Government in recapture liabilities, according to an estimate by the Interstate Commerce Commission, would be handed over to these interests. Moreover, $10,000,000 already paid to the Government on account of the three hundred and sixty millions, upon which the railroad interests have no claim whatever, would be returned to them.

Although I was not on the committee considering this bill, having made an extensive study of the subject, I saw that the bearings were largely one-sided, and the whole procedure was but a plea by special interests for more privilege. I noticed also that all the facts had not been brought before the committee ·and before Congress. Knowing what they were and their value if produced, I wrote to the Interstate Commerce Commission calling for statistics showing how much was due the Government by each road, rich or poor.

Much had been said about the "poor roads" that could not afford to pay what they owe the Government. Commissioner Eastman told the committee that he presented these statistics at my request, which showed just how many millions of dollars some of these "poor roads" had made annually in profits; how the dividends paid to their stockholders ranged from 100 to as high as 400 per cent. These were cold, hard facts to dispute.

This was much too big a question to dispose of during this busy session. when Members of Congress and the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce had so little time to give it careful study. I filed a statement with the Rules Committee, objecting to the rule that was asked for. I believed that the committee which had the bill under consideration should have time to give it careful and expert thought. My study of the subject, printed in the RECORD of May 21, 1932, sets forth the history of the legislation and . the essential facts in the light of the statistical data supplied by the commission and the hearings before the committee. For the present, at least, attempts to force the measure through the House were st-opped.

Organized interests like the railroads, with an army of the most skillful attorneys, are not easily put down when they s~t out to get benefits for themselves. They will continue

to press their claims at the next session. The people are unorganized, often indifferent and uninformed. They are, therefore, wholly at the mercy of these efficiently organized and highly financed groups unless the representatives whom they delegate to serve them are on guard, informed, and have the courage to stand for the general good on sound principles. Nothing else will save our country from vested tyranny.

ENCROACHM.EN'l' UPON LmERTY

I now wish to point to the evils that more directly affect our liberties-the fury of partisanship, the arbitrary rules of the House, and the eighteenth amendment to the Constitution. I shall treat them in the order mentioned.

THE FURY OF PARTISANSHIP

Let us look at the evil of partisanship. Politics bas a good and a bad meaning. In its rightful meaning it is the art of government, but in its bad meaning it stands for the selfishness of partisanship, filled with fury, unfairness, and prejudice. That is why George Washington so denounced party fury in his Farewell Address and warned the country against it.

It frequently shows itself in Congress by dividing Members strictly on party lines. I select as illustration an election case in this Congress, that of Kunz v. Granata. It came from Chicago. The report of the committe~ was divided along party lines, the Democrats in favor of KUNz and the Republicans supporting Granata. The argument on the floor was likewise divided along party lines. The vote was strictly a party vote. The Republicans lost, and · Granata was unseated. The principle that had been violated here was the principle of truth. The committee did not send for the ballots, so there was no definite way of determining who had been rightfully elected.

I have been chairman of committees on elections, and I have been astonished at times at the unfairness of party action in close contests. As a member of one of these committees some years ago, I decided in favor of a Democrat from North Carolina, Mr. DauGHTON. It was clear to me, from the evidence, that he had been elected. But I was called to the office of the Republican floor leader and there met the Republican national committeeman from North Carolina. He came to insist that we report for the Republican and oust Mr. DauGHTON, the Democrat. Of course I did nothing of the kind and told the floor leader that I would not decide a case upon partisan grounds. Mr. DauGHTON is now a ranking member on the Ways and Means Committee. At this session he led the Democrats who were opposed to the sales tax and is one of my lifelong friends.

As chairman of the committee, I wrote the report on an election case where Mr. LAGUARDIA's election was contested. He was opposed by a Tammany Hall Democrat. The members of the committee unanimously agreed to my report and LAGUARDIA was seated. In this session he led the progressives of both parties in the sales-tax fight.

Some years ago, when I was chairman of the progressive group and the party division in the House was very close, there was a contest between Chandler and BLOOM, a Republican and a Democrat. I was not on that Elections Committee, but suspecting unfairness in the report agreed upon by the Republicans, I · decided to intervene. Familiar with the rules that govern such cases, I studied this one. Although Mr. Chandler was my friend and we had been fellowmembers of the Committee on the Judiciary, I told the Democrats that I would argue the case. which I did. and the House seated SoL BLooM, a Democrat. May I add that he has been a very useful Member of Congress and is now the director of the George Washington Bicentennial Commission. These three Members were seated because I stood for justice rather than politics, notwithstanding party pressure.

I have illustrated the evil of partisanship from election cases and might give innumerable examples of party division in voting on legislation. Generally I have found that party leaders, whenever special interests are intensely concerned in subjects such as the tariff, taxation, and rules of the House, resort to party feeling and the plea of party regularity. This is especially true with reference to legis-

14176 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 lation advocated by· the ·administration that may be in power. Sometimes members are coerced by calling a party caucus. More often they are made subject to the spur and whip of party leadership. Obviously, right and truth and the public interest do not run along party lines. Members should stand for principles and be loyal to the best interests of their constituents.

So profoundly have I been impressed by long experience with the evil effects of partisanship and its harmful consequences that I have been driven to the position of independence even at the risk of my political life.

There is, I admit, a proper place for party action, and this is limited to the organization of the Houses of Congress, and in so far as possible we must yield individual opinions to unity of action. No Member should be compelled, however, to accept the moral standards of another Member contrary to his conscience and good judgment, simply because that other Member temporarily happens to occupy a position of leadership in the party. Country and the common good must prevail over party regularity and partisan success.

I know of no selfish interest more powerful than partisanship. When that gets into a man he becomes so prejudiced that he can not see what is right; he can not· see the truth at all and he comes almost to hate a political opponent.

Party action is, at times, necessary and useful. I act with my party whenever I can do so conscientiously, for I believe in discharging party duties also. But I can not bring myself to do that which I know is wrong just because party leaders urge it. The principle of solidarity calls for cooperation in government as well as in any field affecting the common good.

The proper course to pursue is to stand by the will of our constituents and to do what is right as our conscience gives us to see the right.

RULES OF THE HOUSE

May I now further illustrate by taking up the rules of the House. These rules were amended at this session in several ways, especially by giving power to the minority to compel committees to make reports to the House on bills before them.

The interest of the people in fair and just rules of procedure is very clear, because these rules can be so drawn by shrewd and crafty Members that they concentrate legislative power in the hands of a few. Such was the case years ago when I began the fight against the so-called Cannonism, which was the use of arbitrary powers by the Speaker. Mr. Cannon was only a Member from Tilinois; his constituents should have no more power in Congress than my constituents, but what did I find when I began the contest to curtail the Speaker's arbitrary powers and to reform the rules of the House?

As Speaker, this one Member was the czar of the House. He was not only the presiding officer but also chairman of the Rules Committee. He and two other Members made up this committee, which is the controlling factor in arranging the program of legislation. It is one of the most powerful committees of the House to-day. I know this because I was once a member of it. The Speaker appointed all committees, membership and chairmen. If they did not do what he directed them to do, he would punish them by taking them o:ff the committees. My late colleague, Mr. Cooper, lost his chairmanship on the Committee on Insular Affairs because of a disagreement with the Speaker. He had not only this power but controlled the right of recognition. No one could make a speech or offer a motion without first having seen him privately and obtained promise of recognition.

I organized the fight and directed it for three years. Finally, as insurgent Republicans, combining with the Democrats, we won. The new rules made the Speaker an impartial presiding officer. We gave larger rights to committees to present legislation to the House; took from the Speaker the appointment of committees, refused him a place on the Rules Committee, and made this committee much larger and more represeatative.

It is interesting to not~ however; that when evil is checked in one way it comes up again in another form. So, gradually a few leaders got together, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, the chairman of the Committee on Committees-the Steering Committee-and the Speaker, and they centralized the legislative power so that a few men ruled the House. When the progressives held the balance of power in the House they elected me leader of the group. We immediately took up the task of organizing the House, bent upon doing away with this new form of bossism. In order to get a vote on the rules, we held up the election of Speaker for three days. We did succeed finally in securing some good rules. But when we lost power the discharge rule was so changed that the committees could continue to sit on legislation.

At this session the rule giving the right to get a vote on any bill before a committee, if 145 Members sign the request, was restored. But reformed rules or methods are not in themselves effective, for these can be made use of by Members of low as well as lofty principles. In this session this rule has been exclusively used by minorities for selfish ends.

This matter of reform of rules will go on to the end of time, for when an evil is checked, soon it reappears disguised in another form and the fight is on again. Law and rules can not do everything if we do not change the principles in the hearts, the minds, and consciences of men. Therefore, it is clear to me as an old Member that we must raise our moral standards or popular government will be repudiated. Freedom, equality, and justice must prevail or free government can not exist in our lawmaking bodies. Lust for power is the most dangerous desire of the human heart. Down with every dictator!

THE EIGHTEENTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITU"l'ION

Two stubborn facts are before us for thoughtful actionwhat shall we do with the eighteenth amendment and the Volstead law enacted to enforce it, and how shall we carry out the express will of the people.

I can approach this question from an entirely independent point of view, for the simple reason that while I was a Member of Congress when the eighteenth amendment was adopted, I was not when the Volstead law was passed. Having voted against our entry into the World War, I was defeated for reelection. I was not, therefore, in Congress when the Volstead law was enacted.

What shall we do with this law and the eighteenth amendment? Let us not lose sight of the fact that we have but two ways of changing the situation brought about by this amendment and the Volstead law-by resorting to violence or by peaceful means. As Lincoln clearly and courageously stated in his first inaugural address-

This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing Government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it.

I wish to say .here that it is not my purpose to give my personal views as to the merits or faults of the eighteenth amendment and the legislation enacted to enforce it. I must consider the wet and dry question now in the light of our rights and duties as citizens and of our responsibilities toward the institutions of our own creation.

Since I am sure no one would advocate violent methods to do away with the eighteenth amendment, we must direct attention to the orderly and constitutional way of dealing with this amendment. Whether we believe in it or not, it has come to be a part of the Federal Constitution, the charter of our liberties.

This is the provision popularly known as the eighteenth or prohibition amendment:

After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territories subject to the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

Its validity has been repeatedly upheld by the United States Supreme Court and bas become, therefore, an integral part of the supreme law of the land. The people of th~

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14177 State of V/isconsin, through their duly elected representatives in the legislature, gave their formal assent to this enactment.

In a democracy like ours the Constitution and the laws enacted pursuant thereto are the expression of the will of the majority. Only by respecting the will of that m~ority can our Government and our institutions survive. To disregard that will would be tantamount to inviting disorder and chaos. As William Penn rightfully said:

Government is free to the people under it when the laws rule and the people are a party to those laws; and all the rest 1s tyranny, oligarchy, and confusion.

What can we hope to accomplish by nullifying a constitutional provision? Even if it were set aside by a large number . of the people and this action of the people were supported by a law of Congress, it would not be recognized as valid by the United States Supreme Court. No President has ever tolerated or ever will tolerate nullification of law.

Abraham Lincoln urged every lover of liberty to-swear by the blood of the Revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country, and never to tolerate their violation by others.

In the days of Andrew Jackson there was an attempt to nullify a law of Congress by one of the States. He forcibly declared against such attitude in the following language:

I consider • • • the power to annul a law of the United States, assumed by one State, incompatible with the existence of the Union. contradicted expressly by the letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, inconsistent with every principle on which it was founded, and destructive of the great object for which it was formed.

During the administration of President Washington we find another instance of an attempt to nullify a law. In the early days of our Government an excise law on domestic spirits was enacted by Congress. The principle of excise was disputed as interfering with State rights and working injury to the farmers of western Pennsylvania. The collection of taxes was actively opposed in four counties; revenue officers were molested; buildings were burned. 'Vashington saw that to permit individuals, or even a large section of the country, to annul a law because it was not favorable to them was dangerous to the welfare of the Union. He promptly called the militia of four States and established the supremacy of the law, and probably preserved for us the Union. The same responsibility rests upon us to-day-200 years after the birth of George Washington.

'What do we see as the result of the unprincipled and dangerous attempts to nullify the supreme law of the land in our day, or of its utter failure of enforcement in many States?

On the one hand, we see irrepressible speak-easies and bootleggers infesting the country, and lawless concerns that take the form of gangsters and racketeers that terrorize law-abiding citizens to such an extent that they practically defy the power of city governments to cope with them. On the other hand, we witness everywhere a growing disregard for law. Even the lawmakers themselves go so far as to attempt nullification.

For this deplorable state of affairs are responsible, in part, the men who in the United States Congress and in the State legislatures have been loud in their advocacy of the virtual nullification of the eighteenth amendment by their refusal to provide the means for its enforcement; notwithstanding the fact that these very men have subscribed, or acquiesced, through duly chosen delegates to their respective party conventions, to the following pledges:

Republicans: · The people through the method provided by the Constitution

have written the eighteenth amendment into the Constitution. The Republican Party pledges itself and its nominees to the observance and vigorous enforcement o! this provision of the Constitution.

Democrats: Speaking for the National Democracy, this convention pledges

the party and its nominees to an honest effort to enforce the

LXXV--893

eighteenth amendment and all other provisions of the Federal Constitution and all laws enacted pursuant thereto.

Both the Republican and Democratic parties will, it is reported, adopt platform pledges recommitting the control of the liquor question to the States; but both should, with equal assurance, stand for the sanctity of our Constitution and for respect for the laws of the land.

We are confronted with a question of graver consequences than is realized by those who clamor for nullificaticn, and those in Congress who have attempted to render void a constitutional amendment. They seem to ignore the fact that human society is so constituted that certain rules of conduct are essential to insure the protection of human rights. Rights and duties are correlative. We ca.n not justly claim the right of protection of life and liberty, of home and property, if we are not ready, as the great commoner of illinois expressed it, to "swear by the blood of the Revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country and never to tolerate their violation by others."

It is on questions of this kind that we must make every effort to see both sides of the subject and to arrive at some common, practical method of a€tion. It is a subject like this that leads to sharp divisions, strife, and dissensions, and even to war. If any method proves to be unworkable, then common sense dictates that we try another method. Let us also calmly face the facts before us.

Repeated attempts have been made in both Houses of Congress directly or indirectly to amend the Volstead law by declaring beverages containing 2.75 per cent of alcohol by weight as nonintoxicating. In the absence of a binding decision on the matter, we are forced to seek the counsel of scientists for a determination as to what is and what is not intoxicating.

On one side there are such eminent doctors as the late Harvey W. Wiley; Arthur D. Bevan, professor of surgery, Rush Medical College, and a former president of the American Medical Association, and other authorities testifying that 2.75 per cent by weight beer is intoxicating. On the other side, equally eminent doctors such as Yandell Henderson, professor of applied physiology, Yale University; William G. Morgan, dean Georgetown Medical School and also former president of the American Medical Association, and others, who have expressed the opinion that beer containing 2.75 per cent alcohol by weight is not intoxicating.

Notwithstanding scientific, legal, commercial, and other opinions given as to the toxic action of beverages containing 2.75 per cent alcohol by weight, how many from observation or from experience would take the responsibility of swearing that it is their firm conviction that so much alco· hoi in a beverage is not intoxicating?

It would be well to recall at this point what Lincoln con· sidered his duty under his oath of office as a Member of the Federal Congress. He said:

All Members of Congress swear support to the whole Constitution • • •. I have always hated slavery, but we have no right to interfere with it because it is in the Constitution, and we are both by duty and inclination to stick by that Constitution in all its letter and spirit from beginning to end.

The form of oath prescribed by law for Members of the House of Representatives is as follows:

I, --, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, .and that I well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which 1 am about to enter. So help me God.

How then, can a Member of Congress be expected to take the risk of violating his oath of office by accepting a view that is not founded on certainty, an oath publicly avowed and solemnized by an appeal to Almighty God?

In 'Wisconsin and other States that have repudiated the eighteenth amendment and refused to enforce it, it is quite apparent that public sentiment no longer supports it. This leaves a most unfortunate condition, for it is a nullification of national law by a sovereign State itself; and as the

14178 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 struggle goes on, the attempt to deny to these sovereign States the right and responsibility of dealing with the evil of alcoholic intoxication must inevitably intensify those aforesaid evils. Moreover, it must forcibly tend to take up more and more of the time and energy of Congress, now much overburdened with the multitude of problems that press upon the country for solution.

Therefore, as an enemy of the saloon and as one who has stood for temperance all his life, I see no other wise course to pursue than that the liquor problem go back to the States. Manifestly where a State repudiates the eighteenth amendment and the Volstead law it can far better grapple with the liquor problem, if permitted to do so, than the National Government.

I voted for the eighteenth amendment, as did the late Senator Robert M. La Follette, because we stood then, as I stand now, for representative government. When it is evident that a majority, or very nearly a majority, of the people ask for the right to pass upon legislation or upon a constitutional amendment I believe that they should be given that privilege and be required to assume the resultant responsibility. For the National Government 'to refuse the people this right must inevitably lead to most serious national evils that not only would threaten the well-being and safety of our citizens but also endanger the perpetuity of our form of government.

That the legislatures and not Congress should solve the problem of liquor regulation i&. so self-evident that by almost common consent all political parties and factions of parties in Wisconsin and in the United States, generally, have declared for such action as not only right in principle but the wisest and most effective means for the solution of this perplexing problem.

This reasonable attitude is wholly in keeping with the spirit of our democratic form of government and has been taken repeatedly by the leaders interested in the subject of prohibition, irrespective of their personal opinion as to the merits or demerits of the amendment itself. This was the position taken at the time of the adoption of the

, eighteenth amendment by the Rev. Edwin Dinwiddie, legislative superintendent of the National Anti-Saloon League, appearing before a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said:

We are simply asking that Congress, under the terms of the Constitution, give the people a chance to vote on this proposition by a referendum through their State legislature. Congress, therefore, is not asked to pass on the policy of prohibition or nonprohibition, license or no license.

Likewise, Rev. D. James Cannon, Jr., representing the Methodist Episcopal Church South, set forth the right of the people to express their views on any question when demanded by any considerable number, in the following words:

It does not seem to me that in view of the general trend of political thought in our day, whenever it becomes evident that a large percentage of the people desire an opportunity to express themselves upon a great question, the body in whose hands is committed the right to decide whether the people shall have that opportunity could at least divide the respons1bU1ty with the people as to the decision of that question.

In 1917, Senator MoRRIS SHEPPARD, the legislative sponsor of the eighteenth amendment, said:

The Member of Congress who will not vote for the submission of a constitutional amendment to the decision of the States, where it belongs, unless he personally believes it should become a part of the Constitution, usurps the function of the States, arrogates to himself and to the Federal Government a prerogative that belongs to the States and violates the very essence of sovereignty.

The author of the enforcement act, Senator JoNES, expressed his opinion on the subject thus:

Mr. President, the real question presented to the Senate upon this joint resolution is, Shall the people rule?

I believe it is my duty as a Senator to vote to submit an amendment to the State legislatures when there is a strong, matured, widespread sentiment and demand from the people for such an amendment. . To refuse to do so is to act as the master rather than as the representative of the people.

But aside from every other consideration, any Member who stands for the principles of representative government,

whatever may be his personal belief, wish, or hope, must consider himself bound by the instructions of his State and more especially by the instructions of the constituents of the congressional distlict he represents, consistent with his oath of office.

EVll.S THAT AFFECT OUR NATIONAL LIFE

I wish to discuss briefly the evils that affect directly our national life and well-being-the burden of the abuse of our pension system and the impending peril of the next war.

OUR PENSION SYSTEM

If it were for no other reason than for the safety and permanency of the pension system itself it would be my clear duty to direct attention to the danger involved in an indiscriminate and appalling increase in pension relief and compensation. The mountainous growth of our pensions is menacing the certainty of Government aid to the men disabled in their country's service who are wholly dependent upon this relief. But more than that, it is threatening in more than one way the perpetuity of our Government, for there is a limit to the burden a democracy can bear. Veterans, as patriotic in time of peace as in war time, are raising their voices in warning against this very real danger. My two sons and a son-in-la·w are World War veterans. I quote the words of a Member of Congress who is himself a ~orld War veteran:

I submit • • • that this Is an appall1ng picture; that as we look forward into the future and see the mounting annual cost incident to existing statutes, you must become convinced that we must change some of the provisions in the existing law; that we must modify and revamp the statutes w:Wch grant benefits to veterans of past wars; that we must do it fairly and honestly, without depriving the real war casualty of any benefits to which he may be entitled, without destroying the entire structure.

If we fall to do this, the effect may well be destruction of our Government. No democracy can stand the burden which is now imposed upon ours. I know that were the ex-service men themselves to become aware, to be made cognizant of what has been done they are sufficiently patriotic to rise up and say, "This thing must stop."

And he adds: Were I to take any other position I would consider that I, as

an individual, were unworthy of the uniform I once wore; that I were unworthy of the flag which I once followed. • • •

As a Member of Congress I have supported pension legislation for nearly 25 years, for I am a friend of the soldiers of all wars. When I was made chairman of the Committee on Invalid Pensions, I decided to make a thorough study of the pension system. A scientific research was made of the history of pensions in the United States and the practices of other countries. The theories upon which pensions and compensations were based received careful consideration, for unless founded on sound principles and kept working in harmony with them, a pension system must inevitably collapse from its own inherent weakness. We studied carefully the change proposed at the outbreak of the World War from pension to other methods of compensation; the practices and justification of private pensions; Congress as an agency for pensions; the relationship of veterans' organizations to pension legislation; the line of demarcation between pensioners and nonpensioners; the cost of pensions for all wars; the probable cost of compensation for all wars on the basis of Civil War practices; methods of securing economy in the present pension system, soldiers' homes and the benefits they confer.

This research was done by the staff of the committee and my own research assistants with the cooperation of the Veterans' Bureau and the Bureau of Pensions. This survey will be an aid in a further scientific consideration of the whole question of pensions. This is of vital importance, both to the veteran taxpayer and to the general citizen taxpayer, as well as to the welfare of the pension system itself. The perpetuity of this system depends upon the restraint we now exercise in keeping it on a just basis and within reasonable bounds.

The investigation of which I have just spoken revealed a real need for more uniform and systematic pension legislation. Wide discrepancies exist in the manner and methods of administering relief to veterans of former wars as com-


pared with those of the World War. The situation is fertile with possibilities for dissatisfaction and agitation for special legislation as well as violation of the fundamental principle of relief. Some of these inequalities were minimized in a bill which I introduced. As chairman of the committee I was gratified that my Civil War pension bill was passed without a dissenting vote, and it met with the approval of the veterans. Letters of commendation came from many directions. The commander in chief of the Grand Army of the Republic sent his approval in a telegram saying: " Right on time. God bless you."

Although we are merely on the threshold, as it were, of pension relief, it has already become an alarming burden. The peak of relief expenditures for any war is not reached for many years after. the war. For the Revolution, the height was reached 65 years after the war; for the Mexican War, 42 years after. If we look to the past for the lessons of the future, we should be safe in saying that we may expect the high point for the World War to be somewhere about the average number of years, which is about 54 years, and that would bring the World War peak in pensions about 1974.

In a very recent report submitted by the Veterans' Administration it is estimated that considering all the forms of relief, disbursements for all purposes, including loans made to veterans of the World War secured by their adjusted-compensation certificates, approximately $16,512,000,-000 had been paid up to March 31, 1932. With this as a basis, it is computed that the disbursements as of the close of the fiscal year of 1942, will approximate $28,389,599,000, an average disbursement of $1,200,000,000 yearly for the next 10 years.

Records show that there were more than twice as many soldiers and sailors in the World War as in the Civil Warmore than 4,000,000 of them. In addition, there are the widows and other dependents to be taken into consideration. This should make us ·pause and consider what we are leading ourselves into if we open the floodgates too wide.

Few people realize the alarming increase in veterans' relief. There is an increase from two hundred and fifty-three million in 1931 to three hundred and sixty-six million in 1933. It rolls and grows like a snowball. The total amount paid by the Government in veterans' relief for all wars

·exceeds $16,500,000,000. Of that amount $5,390,000,000 has been paid in benefits to veterans of the World War. This means that within the past 10 years one-third of the total cost of relief for all wars has gone to the veterans of the latest war-the World War. What must we expect if we have another war? If our Government sees fit to be as liberal with the World War pensioners as with pensioners of previous wars, if we are so unfortunate or so unwise as to get into another war, and if the pyramiding of pensions continues, the result is well-nigh incomprehensible. It must surely spell ruin to the whole system. We are spending more than a billion dollars annually in pensions. It is costing us about $2,000 a minute.

Of the 4,200,000 men who served their country in the World War, more than 3,000,000 are not receiving pension relief. They are not now clamoring for this perpetual drain upon the Treasury in the form of compensation. TheY are peace-time patriots as well as war-time patriots. They are taxpayers and realize that the burden falls back upon the individual in every community. The agitation comes from a few professional patriots who plead the cause of the veterans in theory, but in fact are looking for their own profits. A war veteran said that he had checked up on a man and found that he had written to Members of Congress 25 letters a day for five weeks. This is unfair to the great body of veterans who are reasonable in their demands and who realize that to cripple the Government's paying power is to destroy the pension system and their own good, and to place our Government in a worse dilemma than it is i!l now.

That there is injustice done in the denial of aid and compensation to some who are both worthy and needy, is undoubtedly true in a number of cases. This must neces-

sarily be true in a system so huge as our pension system, and where we have no scientific plan. And it is no doubt true, also, that there are those receiving compensation who are not needy. It is generally admitted, however, t:1at Uncle Sam has been most generous, more so than most countries, in giving pensions to the men who offered their lives at their country's call. It is right that we should be generous; our veterans deserve it. God alone knows all that it must have meant to our boys to be sent to the front to destroy or be destroyed, to kill or be killed. It should never have happened; and I am proud to say that it did not happen with my vote. It must never happen again. There is a better way. If there is not, then man has made very little progress in civilization in spite of his much boasting. But until we find that better way, the moral way, the Christian way, we must patiently carry these almost unbearable burdens of pension relief and war expenditures.

But in the meanwhile lest it break with its own strain, we must guide the system and guard it and make it serve the needy and weak veterans while it is also protecting the strong. This is a big task, a delicate task. It demands the thoughtful attention and cooperation of ·every high-minded citizen and the fearless support of every true statesman. Let us learn this lesson, too: That wars cost more in pensions when peace has come than they cost in actual warfare. Truly when we sow the wind we must reap the whirlwind.

OUB NEXT WAR

Let us now turn from the consideration of present problems and take a glimpse at the immediate future, for, as has been rightfully said, " to-morrow will soon be to-day."

In the light of our recent history the most vital factor related to our country's future welfare is a prayer{ul consideration of our next war. May a merciful heaven forbid it! Surely it is our highest desire as a people to prevent or postpone another such national calamity or world catastrophe, and to this end, as a national lawmaker, I pledge my most earnest endeavor. The mere mention ·at this time of war may seem preposterous and even ludicrous. Yet, the elements that cause wars are ever present--economic and racial discrimination, commercial and political rivalry, and, beyond national frontiers, competitive arming.

It is absolutely certain that war and peace are effects resulting from underlying causes. Therefore, the only way to direct our future for peace is to control these causes. If these contain in any large measure the elements of ambition, selfishness, greed, they will produce war; if they contain elements of amity, tolerance, and justice, they will produce peace. These elements are to be found in human nature and determine human conduct. It is illuminating to note how selfish interests at home and abroad study the character and moral standards of public men to use these men's weaknesses to serve their own needs. This is especially apparent in the gradual shifting. of President Wilson from his attitude toward peace to his final attitude toward war. He was essentially an idealist. By working on our very ideals, on our ambitions, and on our love for power, this metamorphosis is often, slowly, but surely, accomplished.

At the beginning of his Presidency I was strongly proWilson; at first because of his progressive stand and later because of my belief that he was opposed to our entry into the World War. My first disappointment came in December, 1915, when Representative Buchanan. of Illinois. and others were indicted by the Department of Justice for alleged conspiracy to violate the Sherman antitrust law by making speeches to labor in opposition to war. PI·eviously I had been informed of his differences with the President.

Representative Buchanan replied to the in~ctment by impeaching for official crimes and misdemeanors the distl'ict attorney of New York who had charge of the prosecution against him. The impeachment charges were referred to the Judiciary Committee, and I was appointed by the chairman as one of a subcommittee of three to go to New York to investigate the conduct of this Federal official. We found this official corrupt. While there I came into the atmosphere of the profiteers who were swarming the New York

14180 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 hotels. Conditions for them looked desperate. The war had been fought to a draw, and it was becomjng evident that neither side of the European struggle might be able to pay the profits they expected from their loans and their bills for munitions and other war materials. They were behind the propaganda for war.

During the investigation and immediately following it the newspapers carried the report that the leaders of Congress were stirred up over the fact that the President had invited the Democratic chiefs to the White House to sound them out on the question of intervention in the World War.

I at once made a careful inquiry upon my return to the House and was told by leaders that the President had so sounded them out. Congress wished to hush the matter up speedily lest this suggestion get into the minds of the public, so the report was informally denied; nevertheless, it was only too true. From this time on. a year at least before we entered the war, I learned from many sources, through the somewhat vague but persuasive trend of events. that the President was rapidly veering the ship of state toward intervention.

It has therefore been very interesting to me to read the published accounts containing State papers and the biographies of the leading participants in the war. because they ·now make clear that which I did not then quite understand. We know now that the President not only had a committee at work at home on war plans, but through Colonel House he had entered into an agreement with the allied leaders of France and England to intervene at the opportune time. This is disclosed in interviews with Colonel House himself, in a series of magazine articles. I will quote briefly a sentence or two from the colonel's letters.

On October 17, 1915, he confirmed his conversations with Sir Edward Grey, a British statesman, by writing thus:

What I want you to know is that, whenever you consider the time is propitious for this intervention, I will propose it to the President.

On February 7, 1916, Colonel House reported that he " had a complete understanding as to the immediate future , with Briand and his colleague and that he " again told them that the lower the fortunes of the Allies ebbed, the closer the United States would stand by them."

In a letter dated February 9, 1916, Colonel House wrote to Wilson:

It was finally understood that in the event the Allies had some notable victories during the spring and summer, you would not intervene; and in the event that the tide of war went against them or remained stationary, you would intervene. This conversation is to go no further than between Briand, Cambon, and myself, and I promised that no one in America should know of it excepting yourself and Lansing.

On February 10 Colonel House cabled to Wilson: We finally agreed that it would be best for you to demand

that the belligerents permit you to call a conference for the discussion of peace terms. We concluded this would be better than intervention (on the submarine issue) and it was understood, though not definitely agreed upon, that you might do this within a very short time--perhaps soon after I returned.

On February 23. Sir Edward Grey finally embodied the gentleman's agreement in the following memorandum marked " Confidential ":

Colonel House told me that President Wilson was ready, on llearing from France and England that the moment was opportune to propose that a conference should be summoned to put an end to the war.

These documents clarified many things that happened in Congress at that time: The indictment of Buchanan, the armed neutrality bill, which was denounced by La Follette and others. including myself, as intended directly to bring us into war. When this bill was before the House I made predictions which have since been verified.

I have related this experience to point out that the human factor of protection is exceedingly weak. and uncertain at best.

In the light of the facts and experiences just related, let us consider the ways that we can pursue and the means within ow· reach that will lead us to and secure for us what we all era ve-enduring peace.

To avert, or at least postpone. war we must know its causes. The annals of all armed conflicts among nations record as the outstanding of all causes greed for power and material wealth. The divine right of monarchs became discreditecL and their absolute power gave way to the mightier power of the peoples they rulecL but the principal cause for wars remained essentially unchangecL although disguised in the less abhorrent and even patriotic pretext of selt-preservation and self-defense. Thus we now observe that. after the World War. which as far as this country is concerned was said to have been waged to end wars. nations are again vying with one another in devising and constructing implements of war and in training the very best of their youth and their manhood how to devastate wealth produced by the labor of their fellow men and ~w to destroy human lives more swiftly and efficiently.

Since nations are but aggregations of human beings, their actions and reactions are motivated by similar causes. It has been rightfully said that it takes two to create a quarrel. If a physically strong man and a physically weak man should have a disagreement, the logical and natura.! thing that would occur is that the weaker man will resort to the power of his intelligence to attain, if not full victory, at least a fair deal. But if both were armed, the consideration of physical disadvantage would disappear, and instead of a peaceful argument a fight would immediately ensile. It is so with nations. Therefore, arming under pretext of selfdefense is one of the .most powerful causes of war.

Greed for wealth. an age-long cause of quarrels among individuals and nations, has also donned the brighter and less odious disguise of self-preservation. Those who have amassed riches in this country, who have come to control the economic life of the Nation and have spread their interests far beyond the national frontiers, insisting on protection not only at home but also abroad, afford another cause for the next and future wars.

Selfishness. which is at the bottoni of greed for power and wealth, and which is responsible for racial discrimination and trade rivalry, also comes to us in the flambuoyant disguise of nationalism. causing resentment and even hatred among the peoples of the world.

It is obvious. therefore, that the virus of war is in the very life arteries of our body politic, in our subconsciousness as individuals. It is especially fitting, therefore, to emphasize the plea that we not only prepare but act to avert or at least to delay the next war.

Now. bearing in mind our experience in the World War and considering what scientists and military-minded people have done and are doing since the close of that great conflict. let us visualize what the next war will be.

Rear Admiral Sims says that if we have another war " we will use gas • • • and we won't care how. when. or why."

French experts claim they have at their disposal 1,000 deadly gases. British technicians say that there are now gases a thousand times more powerful than anything used in the past. Our own experts aver that if the Germans had had 4,000 tons of the gas-generating liquid recently discovered by chemists and a few hundred airplanes, the entire American Expeditionary Forces would have been annihilated in 10 or 12 hours.

In addition to gases there are the disease germs. Scientists are now engaged in the diabolical task of finding the best and most effective method of disseminating these germs from the air that the slaughter of human lives, of combatants and noncombatants alike of the enemy country, may be accomplished in the swiftest fashion and on a larger scale than has ever before been accomplished. It is said that by this means a whole nation can be wiped out in a day.

Electricity will also contribute powerful death-dealing and destructive devices. It is claimed that rays are now available that can dissolve wood, stone, or steel and are able to pierce a wall at a distance of 7 miles and kill.

All these efforts are along the lines of thought of the war experts of the world, who are bent on waging the wars of the future on a " wholesale scale instead of • • •

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14181 thinking so much about viduals at a time."

methods which kill a few indi- fore due the compensation promised the men, now in dire

Again there is the money factor. Implements of war, equipment and supplies foc the combatants, transportation, and hospital facilities are not available without money. So the people will again be called upon to give, keep on giving "until it hurts."

And, finally, there is the aftermath. Whether the country is victor or loser, the people will have to pay. There will be thousands, even myriads of men with dependents killed or disabled for life; economic and social demoralization and chaos worse than the present depression and criminal exploits; starvation and taxes eating up the product of years of toil and the yield of present and future generations. From what we know of the consequences of the World War we can draw a mental picture of the aftermath of the next war.

But, can we do anything to prevent the next war? I am neither a fatalist nor an optimist, yet I have enough confidence in the better nature of man to assert that by a proper cultivation and development of that better nature, the next war may be postponed or made less likely to happen, at least so far as the American people are concerned.

I said that war is the effect of underlying causes, and that we must control these causes if their effect is to be averted. All these causes can be summarized in this one word-greed. As you all know, this word denotes ambition, desire to possess power or material riches irrespective of the means to be employed to attain that ambition or satisfy that desire. Unbridled ambition or desire is necessarily attended by envy, disregard of the rights of others, intolerance, dishonesty.

The fundamental remedy lies not in the innumerable panaceas proposed by many, not even on peace treaties, or the League of Nations, but in the observance of the Golden Rule. Let every man be fair to his fellowman; teach the individual not to covet that to which he is not rightfully entitled: train minds to condemn inequalities and not to seek advantages at the expense of others: in short. let us hold under control our appetites. It is never too late to detour from the wrong to the right road, not even to start all over again.

Here, I deem it especially opportune to make my plea to the mothers of our country, upon whom rests the grave responsibility of molding the character of our future citizens, to begin the task of erecting the edifice of an enduring peace by laying its foundations from the very moment that the baby utters the first syllables and simplest words, and let this task be carried on in the schools and churches, and continued in connection with all activities of the citizenry.

In the meantime let us make use of the most expedient remedy within our immediate reach. It is within the power of the electorate of the country to avert the next war by electing Representatives who will refuse to enact laws seeking to protect interests beyond our national frontiers while neglecting or denying that protection to interests that are right at home; by declining to support candidates for seats in our law-making bodies who bring war nearer our own doors by increasing appropriations for warfare or refusing to reduce them.

The past war should be accepted as sufficient evidence of the fact that arming in times of peace brings war. The nations were engaged in a mad race for naval and military supremacy just before the World War. If none had been armed, there could have been no war. Yet there are those who insist on the policy of preparing for war to avert war. Peoples are being taxed almost beyond human endurance to invite war rather than to prevent it.

Right now we are spending $2,000,000 a day for the maintenance of our Army and Navy, at a time when nearly one-third of our population is on the verge of starvation; when our farm crops do not bring in return enough to compensate the investment and labor that is being put into their production; when the Government refUies to pay be-

neec:L who risked their lives at their coWltry's call. God grant that the next" carnival of hell" may be averted

or long postponed for our beloved country! ECONOMY BILL

The SPEAKER. The Chair lays before the House the following privileged resolution:

Ordered, That the House of Representatives be requested to return to the Senate the bill (H. R. 11267) entitled "An ac~ making appropriations for the legislative branch of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, together with all accompanying papers.

Mr. BYRNS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the request of the Senate be complied with, and on that motion I move the previous question.

The previous question was ordered. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, a parliamen-

tary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Is the motion debatable? The SPEAKER. It is not. The previous question has been

ordered. The question is on agreei:pg to the resolution. The resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider the vote by which the resolution

was agreed to was laid on the table.

HILDA BARNARD

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5276, for the relief of Hilda Barnard.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay to the legal guardian of Hilda Barnard, out of any money 1n the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $1,386.80, 1n reimbursement of the penalty imposed by the collector of customs and paid by said Hilda Barnard on September 6, 1929, for failure to declare articles entered in the port of New York on August 12, 1929, upon her return from Europe, when she was insane and otherwise suffering from a mental disease which rendered her incapable of understanding the nature and consequences of her action in failing to make a proper declaration.

Mr.-COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike out the last word, and I ask unanimous consent to be permitted to proceed out of order for three minutes.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Missouri asks unanimous consent to proceed out of order for three minutes. Is there objection?

There was no objection. ECONOMY BILL

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, in my opinion, tbe House made a very grave mistake when it did not agree to the request of the Senate to reappoint conferees on the economy bill. It is true that some of the conferees of the House on the Democratic side are out of the city, but there are two Democratic members of the Economy Committee who are present, and I think they could be trusted by the House as its conferees in connection with the measure. I think the House could trust the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. BYRNS] and myself to look after its interests.

As I pointed out to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. McDUFFIE] when that bill was before the House, there were certain injustices in the bill, inserted by mistake, and he admitted the mistake, tha:t should have been corrected. The Government departments have requested certain changes. There is language in the bill which I understand will prevent the intent of Congress from being carried out.

My contention has always been that discriminations should be removed from the bill and that is just what the Senate sought to do in asking for a further conference. If the changes are not made, there will be general dissatisfaction and it will no doubt interfere with the morale of the service. Why give to one set of employees what you do not give to another group? We should make the furlough provision plain so that the administrative officers will understand what Congress intended. Congress intended that a 15-day

14182 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 leave was to be granted where the furlough plan did not apply. There are about five provisions in the blll that should be changed, and it will not interfere with the intended savings.

I think it was the duty of the House to accept its responsibility and make the changes the Senate desired, or at least give the Senate an opportunity to do so or be heard.

So far as I am concerned, there was no feature in that bill where money was involved that I would not have agreed to, but it is the language in the bill that should be changed, and I believe it is a bad precedent for the House of Representatives to refuse to appoint conferees when the other body requests it.

How would the House take it if the Senate refused to appoint conferees if the request had been made?

There is no doubt about the final passage of the bill. That is admitted, and if that be the case, why should there be objection to changing certain language that would enable the officials to understand what we intended?

I can not agree that the absence of the two original conferees warrants the action the House is taking. We are indeed unfortunate if the absence of two men is to prevent us from properly discharging our duties. I say to you, the Senate will not forget this uncalled-for procedure. I do not criticize the members of the Economy Committee who are absent. They have worked hard day and night, but there are other members of the Economy Committee who have likewise worked hard and they are here to-day ready to do their duty if called upon by the House to serve. I am certain that within an hour every difference could be ironed out, the necessary changes made, with not a dollar reduction in the total amount that the bill seeks to save. This bill should carry language that every official will understand and that the Comptroller General will understand. I submit that this is no way for the House to legislate.

Mr. BYRNS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for two minutes.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. BYRNS. Mr. Speaker, I seldom disagree with my

friend from Missouri, but I want to say I heartily approve of what was reported to be the intended action with reference to the refusal to appoint any other save those conferees who had previously considered the economy bill. Any other course would have been an unusual parliamentary procedure and in a certain sense a reflection.

The chairman of that committee, the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. McDUFFIEJ-and I say this with the utmost deference to every other member of the committee-has done more work, has labored more assiduously with respect to this bill than possibly any other member of the committee-certainly more than myself. In my judgment, he is more familiar with all of its details than any other member of the committee, and I think it would have been a very grave mistake to have appointed a new conference committee without the gentleman from Alabama being a member.

So I may say, with all due deference to my friend from . Missouri, although he referred to me as one of the Democratic members of the committee who is present, I think the gentleman from Alabama is better fitted to represent the views of the House and with the views of the Economy Committee than any other Member, certainly, on this side of the Chamber. ·

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. BYRNS. Yes. Mr. LAGUARDIA. This is not a House of personality, this

is a House of rules, and the rules are absolutely clear that under such circumstances new conferees must be appointed; and permit me to say, with all due deference to the conferees, at no time were the conferees in sympathy with the view of the House.

Mr. BYRNS. I differ with the gentleman because, as a matter of fact, the House, by an overwhelming vote, adopted the report of · the conferees.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes; when it was jammed down their throats.

Mr. BYRNS. Well, the gentleman can say that; but I presume every Member here acted on his own responsibility and understood what he was doing.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. How about the vote of the House when the bill was sent to the Senate? There was no mistake about that.

Mr. BYRNS. It went to the Senate and the Senate re· quested the return of the papers and the House did the cour· teous and proper thing a moment ago when it complied with the request of the Senate and sent the papers back to the Senate. This was also the usual thing, I may say to the gentleman.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. The gentleman knows that not only will every department of the Government be crippled, but next year we will have to make up for this situation by passing deficiency appropriations. It is an unsound bill and is absolutely cruel.

Mr. BYRNS. There are many features of the bill with which I am not in accord, but the House could do no less than accede to the request of the Senate.

[Here the gavel fell.] HILDA BARNARD

The bill <H. R. 5276) was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. Lll.L.IAN G. FROST

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 440, for the relief of Lillian G. Frost.

Mr .. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. ELLINGSON & GROSKOPF (INC.)

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 800, for the relief of Ellingson & Groskopf (Inc.).


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money 1n the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the Pacific Creditors' Association, Marshfield, Oreg., the sum of $147, which sum represents the amount due Ellingson & Groskopf (Inc.), morticians, of Marshfield, Oreg., for funeral services rendered in connection wlth the burial of Allee Johnson, an Indian woman, such expenses having been authorized by the United States Government Indian superintendent at Salem, Oreg., on April 26, 1928.

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. E. H. FLAGG

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 816, for the relief of E. H. Flagg,

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker. I object to the consideration of this bill.

Mr. BUTLER. Will the gentleman reserve his objection a moment?

Mr. EATON of Colorado. I will be very pleased to reserve the objection.

Mr. BUTLER. I really can not see on what ground my friend objects to this bill.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. I will be pleased to tell the gentleman. The report submitted with the bill shows that this $1,000 is asked as a fee to an informer in a case which was dismissed, and in the suit, apparently brought by the claimant here in 1903, 29 years ago, it was taken under advisement by the court on the 25th day of April, 1903, and no decision has yet been rendered. It seems improper to come to the Congress and ask for payment of any of this informer's money, if any is due, without bringing here the decision in the pending case.

Mr. BUTLER. That is the reason I asked my friend to withhold his objection, because with all courtesy to him, he apparently has not carefully read the record in this case.

The facts are that the statute gives one-half of the recov· ery in a case of this kind to the man who brings the proceeding at his own risk, as the claimant did in this particular case. He brought the proceedings in the Territorial Court of Alaska and the court decreed a recovery of $2,000, one-half of which, under the statute, absolutely belonged to

1932 ·coNGRESSIONAL RE-CORD-HOUSE 14183 the plainti.1f in the case. The money was actually paid in to the clerk of the court by the defendant in the case and a stipulation was entered dismissing the case. Then the defendant, from whom the recovery was obtained. filed some sort of petition, not an appeal, as was his right and remedy if he were dissatisfied, asking for the return of the money in the Federal court. Evidently the court there paid no attention to it, and in the meantime the clerk of the court transmitted to the Treasury of the United States the fUll amount, including the one-half which belonged to the claimant and had been adjudged to him.

This is all set forth in the report of the Treasury Department, and I trust my friend will not object to a claim which is as clear, under the law, and under the decision of the court which had jurisdiction, as this one.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. What is the gentleman's answer to this question? In the report it says, "A hearing was had on these last-mentioned pleadings upon April 25, 1903, and the same was taken under advisement by the court, but the court evidently did not make any decision on the matter."

Mr. BUTLER. The court had made a decision adjudging and ordering the payment of the sum of $2,000, one-half of which, under the statute, belonged to the claimant after the $2,000 was paid. Instead of appealing, the defendant did bring some sort of proceedings in court, and that was transmitted to the Treasury Department, with affidavits, which were ignored by the Treasury Department.

~d act within the 1-year period .required by sections 17 and 20 thereof: Provided, That no benefit shall accrue prior to the enactment of this act."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be read a third time,

was read. the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

STATE, JUSTICE, DEPARTMENTS OF COMMERCE AND LABOR APPROPRIATION BILL

:Mr. OLIVER of Alabama presented a conference report on the bill <H. R. 9349) making appropriations for the Departments of State and Justice and for the judiciary, and the Departments of Commerce and Labor, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, for printing in the RECORD.

LEWIS 0. WICK

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill (S. 2569) authorizing adjustment of the claiin of Lewis 0. Wick.


Be ft enacted, etc., That the Comptroller of the United States 1s hereby authorized and directed to adjust and settle the claim of Lewis 0. Wick for assisting 1n the seizure and forfeiture of a large quantity of opium from unknown parties in June, 1930, and to allow in full and final settlement of said claim an amount not in excess of $500. There 1s hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $500, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the payment of such claim. Mr. EATON of Colorado. The gentleman from Oregon

know_s the facts and has personally examined the records and is satisfied that this man is entitled to this sum? The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the

third time, and passed; and a motion to reconsider laid on my the table.

Mr. BUTLER. Yes. Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw

objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted., etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury 1s author

ized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to E. H. Flagg, St. Helens, Oreg., formerly deputy collector of internal revenue, the sum of $1,000, representing one-half the sum of $2,000 paid by the J. S. Kimball Co .. in full satisfaction of the claim of the United States and the said E. H. Flagg against said company, for violation of the internal revenue laws of the United States, to the clerk of the United states District Court for the District of Alaska, second division, at Nome, Alaska, on December 3, 1901.


A motion to reconsider the vote was laid on the table. ELIZABETH B. DAYTON

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, S. 904, for the relief of Elizabeth B. Dayton.

The SPEAKER pro tempore <Mr. BYRNS). Is there objection?

Mr. STAFFORD. I have no objection, if the gentleman will consent to the customary adopted form in such cases.

Mr. PITTENGER. I shall be glad to do so. I thought the bill was in proper form.

Mr. STAFFORD. This bill would enable the claimant to receive proper compensation from the date of the injury. It is customary to authorize an investigation as to whether the injury was within the compensation act.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That sections 17 and 20 of the act entitled

"An act to provide compensation for employees of the United States suffering injuries while · in the performance of their duties, and for other purposes," approved September 7, 1916, as amended. are hereby waived in favor of Elizabeth B. Dayton, formerly an employee of the United States Shipping Board.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: "That the United States Employees' Compensation Commission

is hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of Elizabeth B. Dayton as to whether she suffered an injury while employed in the United States Shipping Board some time in the year 1928, compensable under said act and after the date o! its enactment, in the same manner and to the same extent as 1! said Elizabeth B. Dayton bad made application for the benefits of

F. M. PETERS AND J. T. AKERS The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill

(H. R. 5005) for the relief of F. M. Peters and J. T. Akers. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

present consideration of the bill? Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object.

The department in its letter to the committee indicates that these two postmasters were negligent, and therefore that they should be required to pay the amounts for which refunds are asked in this bill

Mr. PITTENGER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. COLLINS. Yes. Mr. PITTENGER. The committee went into that matter

very carefully and fully, and there are additional facts not set forth in the Post Office Department letter.· The facts are that these two men complied with the regulations laid down by the department, and in complying with those regulations did everything they could, everything that was required of them; and since those irregularities developed, the department adopted regulations which they wanted to follow and tried to folow before but were forbidden to do so by the inspectors.

Mr. COLLINS. Let me read from the report. We find a letter from Harold N. Graves, executive assistant to the Postmaster General, in which this statement is made:

An investigation disclosed that proper supervision was not given to the work of former clerk Hensley, and that this omission contributed directly to the numerous embezzlements by Hensley that otherwise would not have been possible without early detection. There was no check made on the funds handled by him, nor was advantage taken of numerous complaints received from the public, constituting ready clues to irregularities and defalcations.

Under these circumstances the amounts that are charged against this postmaster should not be remitted.

Mr. PITTENGER. Will not the gentleman permit an explanation at that point?

Mr. COLLINS. That is a part of the committee's report. Mr. PI'ITENGER. Of course, the committee always at

taches the report of the department. The explanation and answer to that is this: That under the regulations laid down by the department which these men were required to follow, this man, who had charge of this C. 0. D. work, had exclusive charge of it, and there was no way to check up and detect the irregularities. After these irregularities were .

14184 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 discovered the department adopted new regulations. Those complaints were investigated, but the only man who knew anything about the irregularity was the clerk himself~ The complaint never reached anybody else 1n that particular post office where a check up could be made.

Mr. COLLINS. In reply to that statementMr. PITTENGER. But that is the fact. Mr. COLLINS. Not according to the report of the Post

master General, because we find this further statement in his report. Referring to the complaints from the public, he says:

These complaints were simply turned over to the embezzler for treatment, notwithstanding the complaints bore directly on him.

So it seems that instead of making an investigation and doing those things that prudent men would do 1n order to prevent such things, they are alleged to have aided him in doing it by turning over to him complaints made against him. Under those circumstances I feel constrained to object.

Mr. PITI'ENGER. Those complaints came in and the postmaster checked up with the only man who had charge of that particular work, the only man who could have charge of those collections and remittances, under the regulations of the department; and this particular clerk, of course, showed to the postmaster that his accounts were regular, that there was some mistake, and there was no way to go back of that under the regulations then in force.

Mr. COLLINS. I have an abundant sympathy for these two officers, but there must be some sort of accountability in public office, and the Congress ought not to remit penalties where a public officer has been negligent or derelict in his duty. Under the circumstances I shall have to object.

Mr. PITI'ENGER. Let me say to the gentleman that I appreciate his viewpoint and am in sympathy with it. The only trouble is that the principles he has laid down do not apply to the facts in this particular case. Going further, these men never were under any legal liability to turn that money over to the Government. The Supreme Court of the United States, in a case on all fours, has so held.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I object.

EXCHANGE OF POTASSIUM-BEARING LANDS IN UTAH

Mr. COLTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill H. R. 5062, to authorize the exchange of potassium-bearing lands in Tooele County, Utah, between the_ United States and private owners, with Senate amendments thereto, and concur in the Senate amendments.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Utah asks unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill H. R. 5062 with Senate amendments thereto and concur in the Senate amendments. The Clerk will report the Senate amendments.

The Clerk read as follows: Page 3, line 18, after "also," insert "north half section 4!' Page 3, line 21, strike out "21,323.84" and insert "21,647.96.'' Page 3, line 24, strike out all after "following:" down to and

including "less" in line 9, page 5, and insert "northwest quarter, south half southwest quarter, and southeast quarter section 17; lots 1, 2, 4, northeast quarter, east half northwest quarter, southeast quarter southwest qu~"'ter, south half southeast quarter section 18; all section 19; all section 20; all section 29; lots 1, 2, 3, northeast quarter, east half northwest quarter, northeast quarter southwest quarter, southeast quarter section 30; lots 2, 3, 4, southeast quarter northwest quarter, east half southwest quarter, west half southeast quarter section 31, in township 2 south of range 18 west. Also lots 3, 4, 5, sputheast quarter northwest quarter section 6, in township 3 south of range 18 west. Also west half section 21; west half section 22; east half, west half west half section 23; all section 25; east half, west half west half section 26; all section 27; west half section 28; south half northeast quarter, northwest quarter, south half section 33; west half southwest quarter, southeast quarter section 84; south. half north hal!, south half section 35, in township 1 south of range 19 west. Also lots 1, 2, 4, south halt northeast quarter, southwest quarter northwest quarter, west halt southwest quarter, southeast quarter section 3; all section 4; lot 1, southeast quarter northeast quarter, northeast quarter southeast quarter, south

· half southeast quarter section 5; east half section 8; all section 9; east half, west hal! west hal! section 10; north hal!, south

hal! southwest quarter sect.ion 13; north hal!, southwest quarter southwest quarter, southeast quarter section 14:; northeast quarter, west hal! west hal!, southeast quarter southwest quarter, south half southeast quarter section 15; east hal! section 17; east half section 20; all section 21; all section 22; northeast quarter, west half west hal!, southeast quarter southwest quarter southwest quarter southeast quarter, section 23; west hal! east half, west half section 24; southwest quarter northeast quarter, south half northwest quarter, southwest quarter, west half southeast quarter section 25; southeast quarter northeast quarter, west half northeast quarter, northwest quarter, south half section 26; all section 27; all section 28; all section 29; east half east half section 80; east half east half section 31; all section 33; all section 34; all section 89 in township 2 south of range 19 west. Also lots 1, 2, 3, 4, ~South half north half section 1; lots 1, 2, S, 4, south half north half section a; lots 1, 2, s, 4, south half north half section 4; lots 1, 2. 3, 4, south hal! north hal! section 6; lot 1, southeast quarter northeast quarter section 6 in township S south of range 19 west, all of Salt Lake meridian and containing 21,654.68 acres. more or less."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. Reserving the right to object, I think

it would be proper to have the gentleman make a very brief explanation of this amendment.

Mr. COLTON. I will be glad to do so. This is a bill authorizing the exchange of certain potash-bearing lands in the State of Utah. The bill was on the Consent Calendar and passed without objection. The Senate made some amendment, which the Geological Survey felt was more in the interest of the Government. In the opinion of the Geological SUrvey, the changes made give to the parties lands less valuable than the lands that the original bill described. So this amendment is really in the interest of the Government, according to the best judgment of the Geological Survey.

Mr. STAFFORD. As I glean from reading the several Senate amendments, they are minor and carry out the purposes of the original House bill.

Mr. COLTON. The gentleman is substantially correct. The SPEAKER pro ·tempore. Is there objection to the

request of the gentleman from Utah? There was no objection. So the Senate amendments were agreed to.

WILLIAM R. COX Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

take from the Speaker's table the bill, H. R. 2633, an act for the relief of William R. Cox, with Senate amendment, and concur in the Senate amendment.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The Clerk read the Senate amendment, as follows: Page 1, line S, strike out "Postmaster General" and insert

.. Comptroller General of the United States."

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York?

There was no objection. So the Senate amendment was agreed to.

JOHNS. SHAW

Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to return to Calendar No. 305, H. R. 1778, for the relief of John S. Shaw, which was called up during the time I was away from here at home. The RECORD shows that objection was lodged. I ask unanimous consent that this bill be called up at this time.

Mr. COLLINS. Reserving the right to object, I feel very kindly toward the gentleman, but every Member who has a bill on this calendar has a right to have it called up and considered. If we begin the practice of returning to bills that have been objected to, we will never give other Members an opportunity to have their bills called. As much as I would like to serve the gentleman, I feel it is my duty to object.

Mr. RAMSEYER. Will the gentleman withhold his objection for just a few minutes?

Mr. COLLINS. I will reserve it. Mr. RAMSEYER. I was unavoidably away when this

particular bill was called up. It is H. R. 1778. The bill simply refers the case of an injury to a rural mail carrier in line of duty to the United States Employees Compensation Commission, so that they may consider it on its merits.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14185 During my entire service in Congress I have only had one other private bill. I am not pleading for sympathy but simply stating facts which I think are unusual, and which ought to entitle me to consideration, in view of the fact that I was unavoidably absent. That may not apply to somebody else's bilL

Mr. COLLINS. Under the circumstances I shall not object, but I want to serve notice upon the membership of the House that I shall object to similar requests.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Iowa?

Mr. STAFFORD. I have no objection to returning to the bill, subject to reservation of objection when it is brought up for consideration.

There was no objection. The Clerk called the bill <H. R. 1778) for the relief of

JohnS. Shaw. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

present consideration of the bill? Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to

object, I would like to have the gentleman explain some reason why this rural carrier is entitled to the benefits of the compensation act. If the gentleman satisfies me that he is entitled to it, then I shall offer an amendment customarily adopted by the House, providing for investigation by the compensation commission.

Mr. RAMSEYER. I shall be glad to inform my friend from Wisconsin. This rural carrier received an injury while in the service and in discharge of his duties as rural carrier, in October, 1918, which resUlted in an abscess on his right . hand, and which, notwithstanding skillful treatment,. spread over his body and left him in a crippled condition. For the last 12 years he has been so crippled that he has been unable to earn anything. He lived in a small town and he did not know of his rights until he saw me about two years ago and I told him I would introduce this bill so as to give him an opportunity to present his case to the United States Employees Compensation Commission. Of course, he must make out his case. This simply waives the statute of limitations.

·Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman state the date when this injury took place?

Mr. RAMSEYER. October, 1918. Mr. STAFFORD. I have no objection, with the substitute

which I will offer considered. Mr. HARE. Reserving the right to object, as I understand

this bill is somewhat similar to a number of bills that have been heretofore objected to by conscientiollii, objectors. I will not object to the bill, but I want to know whether the conscientious objectors are going to be conscientious in this case and not conscientious in the others.

Mr. STAFFORD. Well, I do not think that is well merited by the scrutinizing gentleman from South Carolina, because the gentleman is in error. The fact is we have allowed all of these bills to pass, subject to the customary substitute, and the gentleman from New York [Mr. BLACK], who has been here all the time, will confirm that statement.

Mr. BLACK. Every one of them. Mr. HARE. If I am in error, I stand corrected· and I

shall not object. ' The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be i~ enacted, etc., That the United States Employees' Com

pensatiOn Commission is hereby authorized and directed to extend the benefits of the act of September 7, 1916, entitled "An act to provide compensation for employees of the United States suffering injuries ~hile in the performance of their duties, and for other purposes, as amended, to JohnS. Shaw, former rural mall carrier, United States Post Ofilce Department, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said John S. Shaw had made application for benefits of said act within the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Strike out all after the

enacting clause and insert: " That the United States Employees' Compensation Commission 1s hereby authorized to ~der ana

determine t.he claim of John S. Shaw, who purports to have suffered an mjury whlle employed as rural mall carrier some time in October, 1918, in tl1e same manner and to the same extent as if said John S. Shaw had made application for the benefits of said act within the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof; provided that no benefit shall accrue prior to the enactment of this act."


a third time, was read the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC & MANUFACTURING CO. The Clerk called the next bill, S. 218, authorizing adjust

ments of the claim of the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, in view of all this company has received from the Government in the way of contracts, and so forth, I feel this bill should not pass.

Mr. PITTENGER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PATTERSON. I am pleased to yield to the gentle

man from Minnesota. Mr. PITTENGER. The bill is in the form recommended

by the Comptroller General. I believe after the Comptroller General has finished with all possible objections there surely can not be any from other sources. I think the gentleman will find at the end of the report a recommendation from the Comptroller General that the bill is meritorious.

If there ever was a meritorious bill which has had the careful consideration of the Claims Committee of the House it is this bill. I think the bill ought to pass.

Mr. PATTERSON. I do not like this bill and I have it marked for objection, but in view of the indorsement of the Comptroller General and the appeal my friend, the gentleman from Minnesota, makes I will let the bill pass.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as follows.

Be it enacted, etc., That the Comptroller General or the United States be, and he 1s hereby, authorized to adjust and settle the claim of the Westinghouse Electric & Manufacturing Co. under contract No. TC~1591, dated February 25, 1927, for extra cost of making certain changes directed by the Government in the design of throttle valves, and to allow not to exceed the sum of $999 in full and final settlement of said claim. There is hereby appropriated, out of any moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, a sum not to exceed $999 for the payment of the claim.

The bill was ordered to be read the third time, was read the third time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. PETROLIA-FORT WORTH GAS-PIPE LINE

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 2307, to provide for the settlement of damage claims arising from the construction of the Petrolia-Fort Worth gas-pipe line.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right· to object, I would like to ask the proponent of this bill on what basis he expects this amount to be paid by the United States?

Mr. PITTENGER. Is this Calendar No. 482? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Yes. Mr. PITTENGER. I will say to my friend, the gentleman

from Colorado, that the draft of the bill was prepared by the Navy Department, submitted to the Director of the Budget, and 0. K'd by him. The bill has passed the Senate and has had the careful consideration of the Claims Committee of the House.

The report from the Navy Department is a favorable report. It is my opinion the bill should pass.

Mr. COOPER of Tennessee rose. Mr. EATON of Colorado. I should like to hear from the

gentleman from Tennessee. Mr. COOPER of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, my interest

in this bill is by reason of the fact the distinguished gentleman from Texas [Mr. LANHAM] is unavoidably absent and requests me to look after the matter for him.

As has been stated by the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. PITTENGER], a member of the committee considering the bill, this bill was drawn by the Navy Department. It

14186 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 has the approval of the NavY Department and the Department of Commerce. It has been submitted to the Comptroller General, and the report shows there is no objection to the bill from any of those sources.

The bill simply provides that these claims having been carefully examined by a civil engineer designated as the Government's agent and adjusted by him, the claimants shall have the right to further negotiate their settlement.

These claims were allowed at one time and appropriation made for them, but some controversy developed between a few of those interested, and the settlements were not finally terminated. Therefore, the appropriation lapsed. This is simply to extend the same right that has already been extended and is recommended by all of the departments affected. The Senate has already passed the bill.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Let me ask the gentleman if this is not the situation: The NavY Department under its wartime right used property for a pipe line and offered to adjust the price or the value of the property used with the different property owners. Those who were decent and kind made their settlement and got their money. Those who fought for too big a settlement from the Government are still waiting to get their money and have not got it yet, and they are not even now asking to settle with the Government, but the Government is asking to have a fund of $7,000 set aside so its representatives can still go out and make these people take some money which they do not want to take. Is not that correct?

Mr. COOPER of Tennessee. That is not con·ect. Mr. PITTENGER. That is not reflected in the report. Mr. EATON of Colorado. Is it not a fact the money is

being asked for simply to put in a fund so that officers representing the United States, in the event they can make a settlement, can right then and there pay over the money at the time of making the settlement instead of having these claimants, if they still are claimants, make their settlements with the NavY Department and coming in here afterward and asking for the money?

Mr. COOPER of Tennessee. No; I respectfully submit to the gentleman from Colorado the report indicates clearly that further negotiations have been carried on and that these claimants who were originally not disposed to settle on the basis of the report of this civil engineer now feel disposed to do so. In the meantime the appropriation has lapsed. This is simply an effort to treat these owners as all -the others were treated. There are very few involved.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Can the gentleman say from his knowledge of the matter that the settlement has in fact been made with these people?

Mr. COOPER of Tennessee. That is my understanding from the author of the bill, and it is supported by the report of the bill in this case.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. If the gentleman's statement is based on the report, I can not find it there. I wish the gentleman would read into the RECORD what he relies upon showing that settlement has been made. If it has been, I shall withdraw my objection; but if settlement has not been made and this is an effort to put money in the hands of somebody representing the Government to go out and settle these 15-year-old claims, I am going to object to it, so these people can make their settlement with the Government in the same way other claimants do and ask Congress to appropriate the money on a settled claim. This is not a settled claim, as I see it.

Mr. PITTENGER. The report states that-The extent of the damages suffered was very carefully appraised

and the amounts for payment in compensation were authorized in the individual cases. In the majority of cases the claimants along the line accepted settlement on this basis and executed releases. Some of the claimants refused payment, but several have since signified their willingness to accept the amounts heretofore authorized.

I think that answers the gentleman's question. I think the bill ought to pass.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. From the report my idea is that some of these (:laimants refused to ma!re settlement in order

to secure a higher amount. I think I am right in my position and that these claimants have no right to come here unless they come in like the others, and that whatever appropriation is made shall be in full settlement of all claims and demands against the United States Government instead of making available some money to a settling agent to have with him the next time he sees the claimants.

Mr. COOPER of Tennessee. The bill states that in plain language. It states that positively and definitely, so that there can be no question about that. Supplementing the statement of the gentleman from Minnesota, I will state to the gentleman that it is my information from the author of the bill that these people are willing to make settlement on the basis of the report made by the officer who made the investigation.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. I shall object to all of the bill except section 2, which provides for the payment of the claim of W. S. Wakeman in the sum of $65. I have no objection to that, but I do object to the balance of the bill.

Mr. COOPER of Tennessee. If the gentleman will permit, do I understand the gentleman's proposition· to be that he has no objection to the bill except the provision contained in section 2?

Mr. EATON of Colorado. As I understand section 2, it provides that the Secretary of the NaVY is authorized to transmit to the General Accounting Office for payment the claim of W. S. Wakeman in the sum of $65. I have no objection to that, but I do object to the rest of the bill, which places money in the hands of a settling officer before settlements have been actually made and. permits him to go out to try and settle these 14-year-old claims. I object to that.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. I object.

KATHERINE L. CUSHING

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2548, granting an increase of pension to Katherine L. CUshing.


Be it enacted, etc .. That the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to place on the pension roll, subject to the provisions and limitations of the pension laws, the name of Katherine L. Cushing, widow of Wllliam B. Cushing, late commander, United States Navy, and pay her a pension at the rate of $100 per month in lieu of that she 1s now receiving.

Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, I wish to make the statement to the House that Mrs. Cushing is now dead and the bill should really go off the calendar.

Mr. COLLINS. Under those circumstances it seems to me we ought to reconsider the action just taken.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I move that the bill be laid on the table.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the bill will be laid on the table.

There was no objection. GEORGE B. SPEARIN

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 695, for the relief of the estate of George B. Spearin, deceased.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that this bill go over without prejudice.

Mr. BLACK. What is the gentleman's objection to the bill?

Mr. MOUSER. I can not see why we should pay interest to this claimant because his attorney was negligent.

Mr. BLACK. The attorney was worse than negligent. Mr. MOUSER. And did not comply with the law. We

have been turning down these claims when they did not come within the statute of limitations.

Mr. BLACK. Here is a man who prosecuted his claim before the Court of Claims. He got a judgment, but his attorney failed to file at the proper time, and this is for the payment of interest on the judgment. It so happens that after the successful prosecution of the claim the attorney developed senile dementia. He was not fit to carry on the work and he overlooked making the proper claim at the proper time .

•

1932 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14187 Mr. MOUSER. What does the gentleman mean by senile tains where the camp was. By skimming the tree tops, as

dementia? the forest ranger describes it, he dropped the medicines at :Mr. BLACK. That means he took years and years to the camp. He then undertook to circle round to get out of

prosecute the claim against the Government and finally the canyon, but was unable, at a height of 13,000 or 14,000 went crazy. feet, to gain the necessary altitude to get over the canyon

Mr. MOUSER. Why did not the claimant get another rim. They had one parachute between them, and Schneider attorney? saw it was necessary to land the plane as best he could. He

Mr. BLACK. He probably did not know that. He picked out the only place that looked like a possible landing thought that because the man succeeded he was not crazy. place, because the walls of the canyon were almost straight Maybe he succeeded because he was crazy. up and down-picked out a dry creek bed and undertook

Mr. MOUSER. I am going to ask that the bill go over to bring his plane down among the rocks and bowlders in for the present without prejudice. the creek bed. He brought the plane down, and it is a

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? miracle that both he and the forest ranger were not killed. There was no objection. His plane was ruined, and this claim ~ simply to reimburse

JACK SCHNEIDER this young aviator for the plane that he lost in undertaking this errand of mercy. [Applause.]

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2757, for the relief of Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I have reserved the right Jack Schneider. to object, and I am basing my objection on the report, and

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. particularly upon the statement of the Secretary of the In-Mr. BARBOUR. Will the gentleman reserve his objec- terior. Secretary of the Interior Wilbur rarely, in these

tion? cases, makes a personal report, but in this case he does. He Mr. STAFFORD. I withhold the objection. uses this language in reply to a letter addressed to him by Mr. BARBOUR. Mr. Speaker, I would like to give to the the chairman of the Committee on Claims of the last

House a few words of explanation in regard to this bill, Congress: because it seems to me it is a very meritorious claim. It is This aviator, for a consideration presumably sufficient and satisdifferent from the ordinary run of claims that come before factory, offered his plane and services for a certain flight. He was the Congress. compelled to make a forced landing with resultant damages to

This I · t f 'd t that ha d · th his plane. The hazards necessarily incident to the airplane · C ann grows ou O an acCl en ppene m e journey, including a forced landing, were assumed by him for a

Sierra Nevada Mountains a year ago last summer, in the consideration. I see no obligation on the part of the GovernSequoia National Park. A trail crew, which was composed ment to pay any part of these damages or for loss of time. If, largely of students, was working back on the John Muir without consideration, he had undertaken a flight of mercy to drop

1 d d medicines and supplies to injured men and he had met with this Trail, near Mount Whitney. There was a lands i e an accident, in my opinion, his request for relief would rest upon a three or four of these young men were very badly hurt. very different basis. No negligence on the part of the GovernWord was sent out and the park doctor with a nurse went ment appears. He assumed, for payment, the risk that overtook back into these high mountains, taking about two days by him. horseback to make the trip, and pitched a little shelter tent I do not recommend passage of the bill. for a hospital. One of these boys was so badly hurt that Now, what was the real cause of the accident? All of us his leg had to be amputated, and later on the boy died and are sympathetic with the work that was performed by this his body had to be carried out. The others were in very person who contracted to do this humanitarian service. We bad shape. They sent word down to a doctor at Bishop, are not here to pass judgment as to the amount that is on the east side of the Sierra Nevada Mountains, that they compensatory for the risk undertaken. We have no evidence must have some medicines up there in a very short time in here to show this, except what appears from the director order to attend to these young men. The medicines were of parks, and he is a man that generally does not go wrong not obtainable in Bishop, so they telephoned from Bishop in his recommendations to the Congress on claims, and he to a doctor in Fresno and asked if there was an aviator says: there who would undertake to deliver the medicines for these The reports indicate that Mr. Schneider was of the opinion that young men at this emergency camp hospital that had been the accident was due to carburetor trouble. erected for their care back in the high mountains. Now, what does this aviator wish? He wishes to be re-

The Fresno doctor telephoned the airport there asking if imbursed the full value of all damage done in order to there was an aviator with a plane strong enough to make reestablish his demolished plane. this trip. Jack Schneider was called in by the superin- If this aviator had done this thing as an act of mercy, tendent of the airport and asked if he would undertake the without thought of compensation, that would be one thing. trip. Schneider said that he realized the hazard of the But here we have in this report the fact that he did it for trip; but as it was an errand of mercy, he would go. contract purposes, and the injury was due to the defect in

Mr. PA Tl'ERSON. If the gentleman will yield right his motor. there, will the gentleman tell us something about Schneider? Mr. BARBOUR. The gentleman from Wisconsin will re-Was he employed by the Government? member that he was at an altitude of over 13,000 feet, and

Mr. BARBOUR. He was not a Government employee; and that altitude affects the carburetor, and it is not as effective Mr. Schneider told me, and he has an affidavit on :file here as in lower altitudes. He had no contract with the Governstating, that not a word was said to him about compensa- ment. The Secretary of the Interior says, tion. He said he would have gone without compensation; If, without consideration, he had undertaken a flight of mercy but, naturally, he expected the Government to reimburse to drop medicines and supplies to injured men and he had me·t him, but he has never received a dollar and nobody has with this accident, in my opinion his request for relief would rest ever said a word to him about compensation. upon a very different basis.

Mr. PATTERSON. He was a private individual, piloting That is just what did happen. a private plane. Mr. STAFFORD. Where is there any confirmation of

Mr. BARBOUR. This was a private plane, owned by that? Schneider. Mr. BARBOUR. The affidavit of Doctor Burks. He says

He took these medicines up there. He first fiew over the he got in touch with the superintendent of the airport and mountains and picked up a forest ranger at Bishop, who ·j asked if there was a pilot on the field competent to carry guided him to the camp. It was necessary to attain an medical supplies and drop them to these men, and that the elevation of 13,500 or 14,000 feet, drop down over the moun- superintendent immediately got in touch with Schneider and tains and drop the medicines at the camp. There was no asked him if he would deliver the supplies to these men. landing field there of any kind, as it was in the rough and Schneider said he would. He says to the best of his mountains, and the medicines were attached to a small knowledge and belief there was not mentioned any remuparachute and dropped down into this canyon in the moun- neration for such services as were to be performed by

14188 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 Schneider, nor to the best of his knowledge has he ever received any.

Even if compensation had been offered, he would not, if he received the amount carried in the bill, be overpaid for the job he undertook.

Mr. STAFFORD. The question is whether he contracted to do the work.

Mr. BARBOUR. Here is the affidavit, and it is very short: I, the undersigned, Jack Schneider, transport pilot No. 8395,

make afildavit to the following, to wit: That on September 1, 1930, George T. Johnson, superintendent

of Fresno Chandler Municipal Airport, called me and asked me 11 I would deliver medical supplies to Mount Whitney region. I consented, owing to the fact that it was an emergency case.

I dropped the supplies successfully, and in climbing out o! canyon in which camp was situated the motor 1n my ship failed and I was compelled to make a !orced landing, with the result at damaging my ship to the extent that only a !ew parts could be salvaged.

I did not receive any compensation !or this trip, and at no time was there anything said about getting any compensation.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, in view of the positive statement by the claimant, confirmed by the rather weak statement of the doctor, that there was no compensation paid, and never any intention of making any charge, and in opposition to the statement of the Secretary of the Interior-and I wish to disabuse the Secretary of any criticism, because he can not have knowledge of these minor matters, most of them taken care of by underclerks-I will withdraw the objection.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Further reserving the right to object, was there any personal injury suffered by Mr. Schneider? .

Mr. BARBOUR. There was slight injury, but he is not asking anything for that.

· Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman will not object to an amendment making this in full settlement of all claims?

Mr. BARBOUR. No. Mr. PATTERSON. Reserving the right to object, I notice

something about a claim here for $3,000. Why is it that he is asking for $4,009?

Mr. BARBOUR. The statement he filed called for $3,459.25, on account of the damage to the plane, and $630 for loss of the use of the plane.

Mr. PATTERSON. Were these people that he was trYing to relieve in the employ of the Government?

Mr. BARBOUR. Yes. This happened in Sequoia National Park. · Mr. PATTERSON. I had this marked for objection, but I have been in those mountains and appreciate the situation. I have respect for the gentleman's plea.

Mr. BARBOUR. The gentleman knows it is no place to fly an airplane or to land one.

Mr. PATTERSON. I admit that. There is something that gets pretty close to a fellow there who knows those things, but I do not see why it should be $4,000.

Mr. BARBOUR. There is included in that amount $630 for the loss of the use of his ship and time for six weeks. It seems to me that that is a reasonable charge. ·

Mr. KNUTSON. We are giving him a new ship. Mr. BARBOUR. They are paying him for damages done,

practically giving him a new ship. Mr. KNUTSON. He ought to forego any penalty. Mr. BARBOUR. There is no penalty. Mr. PATTERSON. It seems to me that the gentleman

should be willing to accept $3,500. Mr. BARBOUR. Make it $3,750. Mr. PATTERSON. Very well. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the

consideration of the bill? There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill. as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Jack Schneider the sum of $4,200, being the cost of an airplane, the property of said Jack Schneider, described as a fi.eet trainlng ship, Government License No. NG-705-V, which was completely demolished on September 1, 1930, while makmg a forced landing 1n a ravine 1n the Sierra .Nevada Mountains, about 18 miles west of Inde-

pendence, Call! .. after the said Jack Schneider had denvered certain medical supplies and drugs for the aid of four young men who were injured 1n a rock slide while working on a mountain tran being constructed by the National Park Service near Diamond Lake, in Sequoia National Park, Cal11.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amendment, which I send to the desk.

The Clerk read, as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. PATTERSON: Line 6, page 1, after the

word" of," where it occurs the first time, strike out .. $4,200" and insert .. $3, 750."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following

amendment, which I send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Lines 8 and 9, strike out

the words " which was completely demolished on September 1, 1930."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. Also the further amendment, which I

send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFoRD: Beginning with the comma

following the word .. California," 1n line 11, page 1, insert a period and strike out the remainder of the bill.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following

amendment, which I send to the desk. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Line 6, after "$3,750, ..

insert " 1n !ull settlement o! all claims by reason o! personal injury to and damage to." ·

The amendment was agreed to, and the bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

ROSA E. BROWNING

The next business on the Private Calendar was the bill <H. R. 5920) for the relief of Rosa E. Browning.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to ob

ject, and I regret that the chairman of the Claims Com· mittee is not present; there are many bills coming up for consideration to-day, and this is the first where the committee has failed to incorporate in their report the views of the department. The committee refers to the fact in some of these reports that the department favors it, but we are at a loss to know the views of the department. In pass· ing these bills by unanimous consent we are entitled to have the views of the department. I would like to know what the views of the department are in this case.

Mr. MILLER. The report shows that the department does not recommend the bilL

Mr. STAFFORD. And for what reason? Is not the com· mittee taking unfair advantage of the Holi.Se, though unin· tentionally and unwittingly, when it asks favorable recom· mendation of a bill, small in amount it is true, $500, where it does not present the views of the department? This is a matter involving administration of the Post Office Department, and certainly the Members of the House are entitled to the views of the administration in respect to it.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Maybe it is in the interest of economy, for it costs money to print these small reports.

Mr. STAFFORD. Perhaps it would save the amount of the claim allowed if they would print the yiews of the de· parlment.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. I agree with the gentleman. Mr. STAFFORD. I sometimes believe there is a double

entendre in withholding a letter of the department if it is adverse, so that the House may not have the opinion of the department. We are entitled to it.

Mr. MILLER. May I say this to the gentleman: The clerk of the committee tells me that for some reason they were left off. If he has them here, they ought to be sub· mitted. I have no objection to it.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14189 Mr. STAFFORD. I notice that this is a bill introduced

by the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. HARE]. I always try not to look at the names of the authors of bills, so that I shall not be influenced unconsciously by ties of friendship or otherwise.

Mr. HARE. Mr. Speaker, I have the report here of the Postmaster General in connection with this claim. He goes into considerable detail in describing the fire that occurred which destroyed the post office, and then describes the amount of funds and property on hand before and subsequent to the fire. At the conclusion he says that the department does not consistently recommend action on the pending bill, but the facts in the case are submitted for such action as Congress may desire to take.

Mr. STAFFORD. Now, that is not an adverse report. It is rather friendly. When I read the report, I came to the conclusion that it was a postmistress who took such good care of t:1e postage stamps that she took them home with her every night, thinking it was better to have the postage stamps in her first national bank rather than at the post office, so I have no objection.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I think there should be some limitation of speeches on these bills, especially when there is not any idea of objecting.

Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, the gentleman can demand the regular order.

Mr. MOUSER. I do not demand the regular order, but there should be some limitation on these speeches.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman will agree that I was

right in my adverse criticism that there was no report or letter from the Postmaster General, and I took occasion in a mild way to lecture the Committee on Claims-only in a

· mild way-and I am allowing the bill to pass. Mr. MOUSER. The gentleman studies these bills and

contributes a great deal to the consideration of them, but there are many Members who have been sitting here day after day and week after week waiting for their bills to be considered, and this may be the last day on the present calendar. I do hope we will proceed more rapidly.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted., etc., That the Postmaster General be, and he 1s

hereby, authorized a.nd directed to credit the account o:f Rosa E. Browning, former postmaster at Tillman, S. C., with the sum o:f $580.31, covering a balance o:f a shortage in her accounts believed to be due to loss o:f moneys, stamps, cash-an-delivery packages, etc., when the post otfice was destroyed by fire April 3, 1930.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. REIM.BURSADLE DEBTS OF INDIANS AND TRIBES OF INDIANS

Mr. HOWARD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may have until midnight to-night within which to file a report of the conferees on the bill (H. R. 10884) to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to adjust reimbursable debts of Indians and tribes of Indians.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Nebraska?

There was no objection. ROYCE WELLS

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 6382, for the relief of Royce Wells.

Mr. STAFFORD. Reserving the right to object, may I have some explanation of this matter?

Mr. PITTENGER. I am glad to give it. The report is not complete, although I understand there are documents in the files. There should have been some affidavits and a report along with the printed report. I personally prepared that report and attached those exln"bits; and if there is any error, it is somewhere else, because when it left my office that report was in proper form.

This claim oJ. Royce Wells is a companion claim to the claim of one Orville Paul. The claim of Orville Paul became

a law and a very extensive report was written. I was tempted to incorporate the report on the claim of Orville Paul in this report here. The reason I did not do it was because I wanted to save the Government money. It is a report consisting of seven or eight pages, and it deals with facts which are identical with the facts in this case.

The report in the case of Orville Paul was prepared by a former Member of this House, Mr. Box, of Texas. It was a a favorable report. I do not know why there was delay in passing a bill for the relief of Royce Wells, because his case is on all fours with the other case, except the committee felt that the evidence of the injury was not as great in the Wells case as it was in the other case.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman inform the House as to the present condition of this claimant? The other boy who suffered at the same time had his hand blown off, I understand.

Mr. PITTENGER. I yield to the author of the bill, the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. wn..LIAMS of Missouri. He has not been able to continue any sustained work at all up to this time. He has been able to get a few little odd jobs and has done the very best he could. He is an industrious, honest, straightforward man.

Mr. STAFFORD. How old is he at present? Mr. WILLIAMS of Missouri. He is about 25, I would say.

He was a boy of 10 when this happened. Mr. STAFFORD. The only question in my mind is as to

the amount of injury. Mr. wn..LIAMS of Missouri. As to this case, it is perhaps

unfortunate on account of the fact that the doctor who treated him died shortly afterwards, but the evidence in the case shows, and it is a part of the record, that the doctor' bill and nurse hire was $100, which indicated a ·very serious injury. The auditor of the war loan department, who went down there in December after this happened in May, to make an investigation of it, found that the boy was in bed at that time. His letter shows that the boy still had wounds on his body, burns, and lacerations.

Mr. STAFFORD. Does not the gentleman think that $1,500 is a large amount for a boy who suffered such slight injuries? I am not in the bartering business. I want to be liberal, but when we pay a boy $2,500 for losing his hand that is reasonable compensation, but paying a boy $1,500 for merely having a little jar to his nervous system, seems a little large.

Mr. PITTENGER. Oh, the injuries were serious injuries. He was burned and lacerated, and things have developed to affect his mental condition, as a direct resUlt of that injury. I feel that the figure is too low rather than too high.

Mr. WILLIAMS of Missouri. It shows also, as I have stated before, that he has not been able, during all these years, to do anything more than a few days' work at a time.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted., etc., That the Secretary o:f the Treasury be, and

he 1s hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury of the United States not otherwise appropriated, to Royce Wells the sum of $2,500 in :full settlement for personal injury sustained by reason o:f the explosion of a bomb under the direction o:f the war-loan organization of the eighth Federal reserve district in connection with a Victory-loan drive at De Soto, Mo.

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 6, strike out "$2,500" and insert "$1,500."

The committee amendment was agreed to. The Clerk read the following committee amendment. Page 1, line 7, a.:fter the word" by," insert "Royce Wells by."

The committee amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I move to strike out the

last word. Is any attorney involved in this claim? Mr. WILLIAMS of Missouri. No. Mr. STAFFORD. So it is not necessary to add the at

torney's fee amendment? Mr. WILLIAMS of Missouri. No; it came direct to me.

14190 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 Mr. PITTENGER. If the gentleman will yield, I am per

fectly willing to have the 10 per cent attorney's fee proviso carried in the bill. I think it ought to be on all these bills.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFoRD: At the end of the bill add

the following: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of serviees rendered 1n connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."



WILLIAM J. FLEM!NG

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 7301, for the relief of William J. Fleming.


Be it enacted, etc., That the United States Employees' Compensation Commission be, and it is hereby, authorized to hear, consider, decide, and make an award upon the claim of William J. Fleming for alleged personal injuries suffered by him while an employee of the United States in the year 1918, if and when filed, in all respects the same as though sufilcient notice thereof had been given within 48 hours after the injury, and as though a sufficient claim for compensation therefor had been filed within 60 days after the injury.

With the following committee amendment: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following: "That the United States Employees' Compensation Commission

is hereby authorized to consider and determine the claim of William J. Fleming, on account of injuries sustained by him while employed by the Air Nitrates Corporation at Muscle Shoals, Ala., in the year 1918, in the same manner and to the same extent as if said William J. Fleming had made application for the benefits of the act entitled 'An act to provide compensation for employees of the United States suffering injuries while in the performance of their duties, and for other purposes,' approved September 7, 1916, as amended, within ·the 1-year period required by sections 17 and 20 thereof: Provided, That no benefits shall accrue prior to the approval of this act."

The committee amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read

a third time, was read the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. .

Mr. LAMNECK. It seems to me if the War Department states he is entitled to this claim, this indicates he is entitled to it.

Mr. COLLINS. Had he been entitled to this money it would have been paid a long time ago.

If we are going to insure our public officers against cyclones, floods, rainstorms, lightning, and so on, I think we ought to do it by general legislation.

I am sympathetic toward this man, but the Government is not an insurer against losses by its officers. • Mr. BROWNING. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. COLLINS. I yield. Mr. BROWNING. Is it a fact this man was ordered there

by the Government? Mr. LAMNECK. Yes; and he floated around there for

four days before he was finally rescued. Mr. COLLINS. I am sorry about that. Mr. BROWNING. I think that makes a difference. Mr. COLLINS. If the gentleman can show me any reason

why the Government should pay this claim I will readily acquiesce in its payment, but it seems to me human beings ought to protect themselves by insurance against storms, :fires, and so forth, although they are public officers. There are many other people who lost property in the Galveston :flood. They may not have been public officers, nevertheless they are just as much entitled to help as this man.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. How long ago was it? Mr. STAFFORD. It was a long time ago. Mr. COLLINS. It was in 1900. Mr. LAMNECK. This bill was presented first in the Sev

enty-first Congress, and came to me by inheritance. Mr. COLLINS. It just seems to me to be opening up the

gates for alLkinds of claims. If lightning strikes some one, if he is a public officer then he can recover $5,000 or $10,000, under the theory upon which this bill is based.

Mr. Speaker, I object.

SAMUEL B. INMAN

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5211, for the relief of the heirs of Samuel B. Inman.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Mrs. Amy Dysert the sum of $102.64 and to N. F. Inman the sum of $102.64.


C. H. HOOGENDORN

M.P. CREATH

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 8108, to M.P. Creath for taxes illegally assessed.

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 6982, for the relief of reimburse C. H. Hoogendorn.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I object to the consideration of this bill.

MAX M. MEYERS

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 2922, for the relief of Max M. Meyers.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I wish to inquire if the passage of this bill means the beginning of an avalanche of bills that may or may not be meritorious against the Government on account of the Galveston :flood?

Mr. LAMNECK. I can not answer that. Mr. COLLINS. Is there any precedent for this bill? Mr. LAMNECK. None that I know of. This is a claim

filed by a man who was in the military service down there and lost his clothing. The War Department made a survey and said he ought to be reimbursed, and recommended that he be paid $65.56.

Mr. COLLINS. Why is not the Government just as much responsible to civilians as it is to this military man for losses incurred in the Galveston flood? The Government is not liable for the payment of all claims that may be presented because of this flood.

Mr: COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I object.

PIERRE E. TEETS

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 1261, for the relief of Pierre E. Teets.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. BACON. Will the gentleman reserve his objection? Mr. STAFFORD. I reserve it. Mr. BACON. I do not want to take up the time of the

House unnecessarily, but this is one of the most meritorious bills that has ever come to my attention. This boy is a cripple for life. He can not get about except on crutches which he will always have to use. We are not asking any compensation for him because of his present condition. We are simply asking that his hospital bills be paid, because if a proper medical examination had been made before he left camp he would have been hospitalized at the camp at Government expense. A medical examination was not made before he left camp with the result that a few days after he left camp he was taken to a private hospital where four major operations were performed on him and he had three blood transfusions to save his life. He is now a cripple and a wreck for life. All we are asking is what he would have been entitled to under the law had a proper

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14191 medical exammation been made prior to -the time he left camp.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is not this a case where the boy voluntarily left the camp after the accident?

Mr. BACON. No. He left at the close of the camp and as soon as he did leave camp his condition became worse. A blood culture was taken which showed a very dangerous streptococcic condition. If a blood culture had been taken while he was at camp, he would never have been allowed to leave camp but would have been hospitalized there at Government expense. All we are asking is that his hospital expenses and doctors' bills be refunded to him and these to be determined by the Secretary of War and the Comptroller General.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is it only for hospitalization? Mr. BACON. For hospitalization. That is all, and the

amount he would have been entitled to under the law had he remained at camp.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman now says" and." The gentleman previously laid stress on the fact that the claim was only for hospital expenses, whereas the bill provides for six months' pay and allowances.

Mr. BACON. We are only asking what he would have been entitled to had the proper medical examination been made, which would have disclosed hiS condition before he left camp. In other words, a proper medical examination was not made with the result that he has had to go through this expense himself.

Mr. STAFFORD. Do not the records show that this injury was not traceable to his service in camp?

Mr. BACON. Absolutely not. The records in this case are most complete. The gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. PITTENGER] spent a great deal of time in wading through a mass of affidavits. It is one of the most complete records in any case I have ever seen.

Mr. STAFFORD. In reading the letter written by the Secretary of War, I find he states:

There is some doubt as to whether the fall from his horse had any bearing on his subsequent illness.

Mr. BACON. There is no question at all about that. The medical affidavits, which are numerous, establish that fact beyond any question of doubt.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. It seems to me that the

wording of this bill sets a very bad precedent. Taking the bill with the report, the bill provides for six months' pay and allowances and reimbursement for such amounts as may be approved by the Secretary of War expended by him for medical and hospital treatment. I would be perfectly willing to have a certain amo\Ult recommended, but the Secretary of War says this man has presented bills for medical treatment amounting to $6,543.

Mr. BACON. But here is the point: The Secretary of War and the comptroller together will examine the actual amounts paid for hospital services and pay this boy accordingly.

Mr. STAFFORD. Following the suggestion of the gentleman from Missouri, that he paid out . very large sumsThe gentleman does not want to impose that expense on the Government for something in his system that was not traceable to his service?

Mr. BACON. There is no question but that his illness came from injuri~s received at camp while on active duty.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman says there is no question about it, but the Secretary of War says there is some question.

Mr. BACON. He is entirely mistaken in that, because there are many, many affidavits on file with the committee proving my statements. · Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Why not state a specific

amount? Mr. BACON. If the committee had undertaken to :file

a complete account of this accident with the affidavits that go with it, it would have required 20 printed pages of the report.

Mr. STAFFORD. The amendment seeks to reimburse the claimant for medical and hospital treatment for injuries sustained while on active duty from July 3 to July 17, 1927.

Mr. BACON. The committee suggested a rewording of the bill after a great deal of thoug-ht. I do not suppose any bill has received more careful attention in the Committee on Claims than this one, and the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. PITTENGER] has been most meticulous and painstaking in going over the matter.

Mr. COLLINS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I yield. Mr. COLLINS. It seems that this gentleman was a first

lieutenant and fell of! of a horse in camp. The report of the War Department shows that he did not appear to be very badly injured, and later on there were certain developments which caused him to go to the hospital. He claims a hospital .bill of $10,891.28--

Mr. BACON. But the bill is drawn so as to protect the Governffient in that respect.

Mr. COLLINS. Of which amount $4,348.19 is a claim for loss of income and so on.

Mr. BACON. But the gentleman will see that the bill directs the Secretary of War to pay his actual medical ex~ penses, which must be proved to the satisfaction of the Comptroller ~neral, and all question of compensation for time lost is eliminated.

Mr. COLLINS. Except it is provided he is to be given six months' salary.

Mr. BACON. Under the law he would have been entitled to that had this condition been disclosed by a proper medical examination at the camp.

Mr. COLLINS. The War Department objects to the passage of the bill because, as the department states, it has consistently opposed enactment of special legislation of the type carried in this bill, which would single out an individual of a class for preferential treatment not accorded to others of that class. So I am going to have to follow the War Department.

1!r. BACON. The War Department raises this technical objection to all of these bills; but here was a boy who was serving his country in a patriotic way at this camp and was severely injured. He is a complete physical wreck as a result of this accident, and he can only get about on crutches, and then only for short distances. He is totally incapacitated and is unable to earn a living, and all he· is asking is that his actual hospital expenses be paid to him.

Mr. COLLINS. The gentleman understands that if we begin the payment of claims of this nature it will run into the millions of dollars.

Mr. BACON. The medical officers in this case did not give as thorough an examination as they should have. This is a rare case; and the House need fear no precedent, as a similar case will probably never occur again.

Mr. COLLINS. They are medical officers of the depart-ment. ·

I object, Mr. Speaker. Mr. BACON. In line with the permission given me, I ap

pend hereto part of the report of the Committee on Claims of the House of Representatives giving the full facts in the case:

[House Report No. 809, Seventy-second Congress, first session] PIERRE E. TEETS

Mr. PrrrENGER, from the Commi_ttee on Claims, submitted the following report (to accompany H. R. 1261):

The Committee on Claims, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 1261) for the relief of Pierre E. Teets, having considered the same, report thereon with a recommendation that it do pass with the following amendment:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:

"That the Comptroller General of the United States 1s hereby authorized and directed to certify for payment the claim of Pierre E. Teets, first lieutenant, Field Artillery Reserve, United States Army, for six months' pay and allowances, and reimbursement for such amounts as may be approved by the Secretary of War expended by him for medical and hospital treatment for injuries sustained while under active duty training from July 3, 1927, to July 17, 1927, at Camp Pine. N. Y."

14192 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 STATEMENT OF FACTS

Pierre E. Teets, a first lieutenant in the Field Artillery Reserve, was ordered to active duty at Pine Camp, Great Bend, N. Y., from July 3, 1927, to July 16, 1927. The evidence shows that on July 11, 1927, Lieutenant Teets sustained an injury by his horse falling on him, the injury consisting of bruises on both legs and abrasion of the scalp. At the time they were considered trivial, and it appears no official record was made regarding the accident. A day or two after the accident Teets developed a lesion on the left buttock which was considered by the medical officers at the camp to be a carbuncle. He was given treatment at the camp by the application of ichtheol locally. He left the camp at the close thereof on July 16, 1927.

After proceeding to his home, Teets called in his family physician. This physician continued the treatment. Another doctor was called in for consultation, and it was then determined that Teets was suffering from . " advanced cellulitis." A day or two before his transfer to the Peck Memorial Hospital a blood culture was made which showed positive streptococcic infection. He was hospitalized at the Peck Memorial Hospital on July 30, 1927, 14 days after he left the camp, and remained at this hospital until December 24, 1927. While at the Peck Memorial Hospital Teets underwent four major operations and underwent three blood transfusions in order to save his U!e. The cellulitis was followed by osteomyelitis, which made it necessary to remove bones from his feet, leaving him unable to walk. After leaving the hospital, Teets had to visit Doctor Cochrane at stated intervals for X rays.

At the present time, some of the broken bones in Teets's feet have permanently grown to each other, which do not leave one foot flexible.

While at the time of the accident it was absolutely impossible to foresee any serious results for Teets, and while the only visible injury, except bruises and lacerations, was the development of the carbuncle, streptococcic infection was not suspected. Therefore, he left for home at the close of the time, but immediately took to bed. But that this infection was present is proven by the blood culture that was taken just before Teets's transfer to Peck Memorial Hospital.

On this point the Secretary of War, under date of February 11, 1930, in a letter to the Claims Committee, " 1s of the opinion that the War Department feels the benefit of the doubt should be given to Teets." Had Teets remained at the camp and had he been hospitalized in an Army institution there is absolu.tely no doubt but that he would have received every needed care, without any expense to himself, and also that he would have received the six months' pay and allowances provided for in the act of June 3, 1924.

There can be no question about Mr. Teets suffering from his injuries when he left the camp. Had he remained in camp formedical treatment, or had he entered the hospital instead of going to his home at the close of the camp, as was his privilege, he would have clearly been entitled to the benefits of the act of June 3, 1924. The War Department frankly admits that the infection which led to his illness could have resulted from the bruises and that he was entitled to the benefit of the doubt on this proposition.

The amended blll is intended to give him the benefits of that act. The committee feels that it is only fair to do this. While the War Department report is adverse to the bill, its adverse action is based upon hostlllty to special legislation, and the adverse recommendation is not consistent with the admissions by the War Department to the effect that the infection in this case probably resulted in the disability and illness heretofore set forth.

It ts the opinion of your committee that the department rests its adverse report upon a technicality, namely, the fact that the streptococcic infection was not known at the time Lieutenant

. Teets left camp. The controlllng and important fact in this case has to do with the blood culture which was taken before Teets's transfer to the Peck Memorial Hospital. This infection was disclosed by the blood culture. Had there been a blood culture before he left the camp, undoubtedly streptococcic infection would have been shown to exist. ·

To follow the War Department recommendations would have the effect of penalizlng this man because his preliminary medical examinations did not consist of having a blood culture, which would have shown his real condition. He was performing a patriotic duty for the Government, and your committee is of the opinion that he is entitled to the benefits of the act of June 3, 1924, and that he should not be penalized because he went home in an injured condition instead of remaining in camp and continuing his medical and hospital treatment there for his injury sustained in line of duty. There can be no question as to the facts. Numerous affidavits have been submitted to the committee and are not here set forth in detail. • • •

CLAUDE E. DOVE

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 1834, for the relief of Claude E. Dove.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I shall not object if the amount can be reduced to $5,000, which is the maximum amount we have been paying in death cases; and further, the bill is rather crudely drawn, in that it will need several perfecting amendments. The

date of the accident is not in the bill, there is no stipulation that it is in full payment of all claims and demands, and then there should be the usual attorney's fee provision.

We have been paying in similar cases $5,000, and I do not see any reason why we should go beyond that amount. I think the facts so far as negligence goes, are with the claimant.

Mr. THOMASON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. MOUSER. Yes. Mr. THOMASON. I am quite in accord with what the

gentleman says, that $5,000 is the usual amount and probably an ample amount, but in this case in addition to the death of the wife and mother, the unborn babe was killed, the husband was injured, and the other two children were injured. So it occurs to me, as a matter of justice, there ought to be more than the usual $5,000 paid on account of the death of the wife, where there was the grossest kind of negligence. The man was convicted of negligence and homicide and sent to the penitentiary. He had no brakes on his truck and there was the worst sort of negligence; but, of course, this perhaps is beside the question.

Mr. MOUSER. This is a claim of the husband on account of the loss of his wife and there is involved what her services would be worth. She was not the support of the family.

Mr. THOMASON. No; but the personal injm·y to the husband and the children ought to be considered too.

Mr. MOUSER. The bill simply has to do with the death of the wife. Will the gentleman consent to such an amendment?

Mr. THOMASON. Yes; I consent to. that. There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as

follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Claude E. Dove, of El Paso, Tex., the sum of $10,000 as payment for damages susstained by him on account of the death of his wife, the injury of himself and two sons, caused by collision with an Army truck operated by Sergeant Merlin Brace, of the United States Army.

With the following committee amendment: In line 6, strike out "$10,000 " and insert " $7,500," and in line

8 strike out the word " sons " and insert the word " children."

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment to the committee amendment. In line 6, strike out " $7,500 " and insert "$5,000."

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MouSER to the committee amend

ment: In line 6, strike out "$7,500" and insert in · lieu thereof .. $5,000."

The amendment to the committee amendment was agreed to .

The committee amendment, as amended, was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer another amendment,

adding the words " in full of all claims against the Government of the United States," after " $5,000."

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MousER: After the figures, in llne '6,

insert: "In full settlement of all claims against the Government of the United States."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer another amendment.

At the end of line 10, strike out the period, insert a comma, and add: "on May 24, 1g.29, at El Paso, Tex."

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MousER: In line 10, after the word

"Army," strike out the period, insert a. comma and the words, " on May 24, 1929, at El Paso, Tex."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer a further perfecting

amendment, in line 6, in view of the amendment which has been adopted, reading, "in full settlement of all claims against the Government of the United States," the words " as payment " should go out.

1932 CONGEES_SIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14193 The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MousER: In line 6, strike out the

words " as payment."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer the usual attorney's

fee provision. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MouSE&: After the word "Texas,"

in line 10, strike out the period, insert a colon, and add the following: .

"Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriat.P.d in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of serVI~s rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, a~d upon C?,nviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill, as amended, was ordered to be engro~d and

read a third time, was read the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

KATHRYN THURSTON

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Ct:uendar, H. R. 2916, for the relief of Kathryn Thurston.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. MOUSER. Reserving the right to object, I see that

in this case the claimant has been paid $1,000 by the Railroad Administration functioning during the war, and she has signed a release to that effect. I do not think there is any question about the liability, and the Railroad Administration did not deny it. I think $1,000 was too small an · amount, considering the injury, but there is absolutely no liabillty, in view of the release that she signed. If the gentleman will consent to reduce the amount to $2,500, in view of the serious injury, I" will not object.

Mr. KNUTSON. Was this $1,000 paid in full settlement? Mr. MOUSER. It was. Mr. STAFFORD. Further reserving the right to object,

if we are going to establish the policy of opening up every case where a settlement has been made with the injured person during the operation of the railroads by the Government it is going to cost the Government not only a million dollars but tens of millions of dollars. This will be setting a precedent that will plague us in the future.

Mr. MOUSER. In this case it is a question where the facts in the case were not brought out until later. There was no witness to the death, because the detective was shot and killed. There was no other witness to the death except the robbers themselves. Later on, after the robbers were arrested, the facts in regard to the death of the detective were brought out. There was no question but that the Railroad Administration was not in possession of the facts, and if they had been they would have paid a larger amount. This was an insignificant amount for the death of the detective.

Mr. STAFFORD. The Railroad Administration paid the thousand dollars regardless of the way the death resulted. The Railroad Administration did not base the amount on the way the person was killed, but, rather, on the fact that he was killed.

Mr. MOUSER. Oh, yes. He was in the performance of his duty, and he would not have been killed otherwise. He was engaged in performance of his duty, and it was a precarious duty.

Mr. STAFFORD. If we are going to open up these cases and unearth incidental facts, it is going to cost the Government millions of dollars.

Mr. LAMNECK. The gentleman does not know that the Railroad Administration would not have made a greater settlement at the time of the murder if it had been known that he was actually murdered. But it was nine months after before it was finally discovered that he was murdered.

LXXV--894

Mr. STAFFORD. There is no question but that he died when he was shot, and his widow received a thousand dollars in payment of the death.

Mr. PITTENGER. I investigated this, and I had something to do with it. The facts are that the railroad company at the time they made the $1,000 payment was not in possession of the facts. There was no proof of how he died or whether he was in the performance of his duty. Those facts were subsequently uncovered. This thousand dollars was in the nature of, as you might say, a gratuityat least it was not based on the actual facts, which were brought out later.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, I do not wish to take up the time

of the House unnecessarily. Mr. MOUSER. What is the condition of the widow? Mr. LAMNECK. She is in destitute circumstances. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wis

consin objects. LOTTIE W. M'CASKILL

The next business was the bill (H. R. 5980) for the relief of Lottie W. McCaskill.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Lottie W. McCaskill the sum of $271. Such sum represents the amount paid by the said Lottie W. McCaskill to the United States to cover the shortage in her accounts as postmaster at Cassatt, S. C., caused by the theft in the year 1928, on the night of December 29, of postal funds and stamps, etc., from said post ofllce.


MINNIE D. illNES

The next business was the bill (H. R. 6623) for the relief of Minnie D. Hines.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. BROWNING) . Is there objection?

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object. There is no report from the department on this bill. The bill that just went through unobjected to contained no report from the department. When the chairman of the committee was not present a few moments ago I criticized the committee for not incorporating in its report the views of the department.

Mr. COCHRAN of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I have some knowledge of this case. I know that the matter was taken up with the Department of Justice, and a letter secured by my colleague showing that this money had been collected on the bond and that the prisoner had been apprehended and sent to the penitentiary.

Mr. BLACK. The clerk of the committee calls my attention to the fact that the incomplete report in the former bill was due to a printer's error. That was indicated by a cross mark at the foot of the report. The printer omitted something that he could not find. In this bill I do not understand why the department's report is not with the bill excepting that the report was probably printed in reports in prior Congresses. I think it is a bill that ought to pass.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, from the statement made by the drafter of the report, and that it contains facts which merit approval I withdraw the reservation of objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection; and the Clerk read the bill, as


he is hereby authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $4,000 to Minnie D. Hines, of St. Joseph, Mo., which sum was paid by her to the United states by reason of the forfeiture of the bail bond of Jack Beaver who was later taken into custody and surrendered to the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri and 1s now in jail awaiting trial in said case.

14194 (JONGRESSIONAL ~ECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 5, strike out "$4,000 " and insert " $3,869.60." Page 2, line 1, strike out the period after the word "case," insert

a colon, and the following: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account ot services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The committee amendments were agreed to, and the bill, as amended, was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

MAY WEAVER

The next business was the bill (H. R. 7215) for the relief of May Weaver.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the United States Treasury not otherwise appropriated. to May Weaver, widow of Charles V. Weaver, the sum of $10,000 tor fatal Injuries sustained by him while performing services in removing and assisting post-omce inspectors in the examination and unloading of bombs mailed at the Easton, Pa., post omce on December 30, 1931: ProvicUd, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the con- . trary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 6, strike out "$10,000 " and insert .. 5,000."

The committee amendment was agreed to, and the bill, as amended, ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

JOSEPH VIGLIOTTI

The next business was the bill (H. R. 7278) for the relief of Joseph Vigliotti.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorIzed and directed to pay to Joseph Vigliotti, of Detroit, Mich., the sum of $1,500, being the amount of a bond deposited as security and filed with the inspector in charge of immigration at Detroii and later forfeited !or alleged !allure to produce certain allens tor deportation, the alleged failure being no fault of Joseph V1gl1ottl.


0. H. CHRISP

The next business was the bill <H. R. 8144) for the relief of 0. H. Chrisp.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the right to ob

ject. Here is another one of those cases where we are trying to revive matters that took place during the operation of the railroads by the Government during the war.

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, here are the facts in the case. This man was injured on January 17, 1919. About four days before the two years statute of limitations ran he employed counsel, a former member of this body, and suit was filed . . At that time the law of Arkansas as announced by the Supreme Court was that the proper defendant was the railroad company regardless of the fact that the railroads were being operated by the Government. Suit was filed. The railroad company filed a general demurrer upon the groUnd that it was not the proper party defendant. Then a.n amendment was

offered naming James c. · Davis, director general, a party defendant. The case proceeded to trial. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for $27,500. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the State, but by the time the case reached the Supreme Court of the State of Arkansas, the Supreme Court of the United States in the Alt case, upon which this suit was based, reversed and remanded that case, holding that the director general was the party defendant and not the railroad company. This man was deprived of his claim there simply because the Supreme Court of Arkansas was reversed by the Supreme Court of the United States.

Mr. MOUSER. There is the additional fact that he did not file his suit correctly.

Mr. MILLER. That is correct. Mr. MOUSER. Within the time limit prescribed by the

law wherein suits in damages could be filed. Mr. MILLER. That is true. Mr. MOUSER. So you have the question of the statute

of limitations? Mr. MILLER. The question of the statute of limitations

came up. After he made the director general a party it was too late. The two years had already run.

Mr. STAFFORD. There would be many, many such cases, I fear. I shall have to object, Mr. Speaker, because of the danger of establishing a precedent.

ABRAHAM GREEN

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 84, for the relief of Abraham Green. .

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $800 to Abraham Green, of Manchester, N. H., which sum represents the loss sustained by said Abraham Green on the bail bond of Myer Gallant, who was afterwards captured and returned to the United States omcers by the said Abraham Green; record of said estreatment of bond and the payment of said sum of money on April 7, 1924, are shown in the report and amdavit of the clerk of the United States Court for the District of New Hampshire.


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. EDITH TOLERTON LATHROP

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 1205, for the relief of Edith Tolerton Lathrop.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I object. PERMITTING UNITED STATES TO BE MADE A PARTY DEFENDANT

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5513, to permit the United States to be made a party defendant in certain cases.


Be it enacted, etc., That, upon the conditions herein prescribed for the protection of the United States, the consent of the United States be, and it is hereby, given to be named a party in any suit which may hereafter be brought in the District Court of the United States for the Western District of New York. for the purpose of quieting the title to, determining confiictlng claims to, or removing clouds from the title to the following-described real property:

All that tract or parcel of land situate In the city of Buffalo, county of Erie, and State of New York, being part of the parish tract, bounded and described as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the center line of Amherst Street extended with the United States harbor line, established In 1907; thence east along the center line of Amherst Street 255 feet, more or less, to a point which is 34 feet west from the inner line of the west wall of the Erie Canal, measuring along the center line of Amherst Street; thence south 23° 20' E. parallel to said canal wall, 207.37 feet, more or less, to the southerly line of lot 7, as shown on map recorded in Erie County clerk's omce in tiber No. 242 of deeds, page 298; thence west along the south line of said lot 7 and extension thereof to the United States harbor line, 1907; thence northwesterly along the said United States harbor llne 222.23 feet, more or less, to the polnt or place of beginning; excepting and reserving therefrom a strip of land 22 feet wide lying south of and adjacent to said center line of Amherst Street extending from Erie Canal to the present dock front, for street purposes.

S~:c. 2. Service upon the United States shall be made by serving the process of the court with a copy of the bill of complaint upon the United States attorney for the western district of New York, and by sending copies of the process and b1l1 of complaint by registered. mail to the Attorney General af the United States at Wash-

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14195-lngton. D. C. The United States shall have 30 days after service as above provided, or such further time as the court may allow, within which to appear and answer, plead, or otherwise proceed.

SEc. 3. Except as herein otherwise provided, such judgment may be rendered in any such suit as might under like circumstances be rendered under the laws of the State of New York, if the suit were between private persons, and such judgment may determine the right, title, and interest of the parties to said suit, in and to the above-described real property-.

SEC. 4. No judgment for costs or other money judgment shall be rendered against the United States in any suit or proceeding which may be instituted under the provisions of this act. The United States shall not be nor become liable for the payment of the costs of any such suit or proceeding, or any part thereof.


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. 0. R. YORK

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 6339, for the relief of 0. R. York.

The SPEAKER pro tempore <Mr. BYRNS). Is there objection to the present consideration of the bill?

There was no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, a similar

Senate bill (S. 2335) will be substituted for the House bill. There was no objection. The Clerk read the Senate bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Comptroller General of the United

States is authorized and directed to credit the accounts of 0. R. York, postmaster at High Point, N. C., with the sum of $1,562.63, or so much thereof as may be necessary to cover the shortage in his accounts resulting from the theft, embezzlement, or robbery of funds while in the custody of one William B. Clinard, then a post-office clerk. ·


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. A similar House bill was laid on the table.

MARGARET CROTTY The Clerk called the next bill, S. 83, for the relief of

Margaret Crotty. There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as

follows: -Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Margaret Crotty, the sum of $579.60, being the amount of gratuity pay due her on account of the death of her son, John P. Crotty: Provided, That Margaret Crotty's dependency upon her son. John Patrick Crotty, shall be established to the satisfaction of the Secretary of the Navy.


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. HOMER C. CHAPIN

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 8255, for the relief of Homer C. Chapin.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Homer C. Chapin, the cash value of a $500 Liberty bond deposited by him with the Immigration Service of the Department of Labor in the case of Dimitri Ivanenko, which said bond or the proceeds of which was erroneously covered into the TreaSury of the United States.

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed . .

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. H. FORSELL

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 10405, for the relief of H. Forsell.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay to Miss H. l"orsell, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $196.97 in full settlement against the Government for customs duties paid on two packages of merchandise that were not received by the addressee.


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. ALEXANDER F. SAWHILL

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 6270, for the relief of Alexander F. Sawhill


Be it enacted, etc., That in the administration of any laws conferring rights, privileges, and benefits upon honorably discharged soldiers Alexander F. Sawhill, who was a member of Company C, Tenth Regiment Pennsylvania Reserves, Thirty-ninth Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, shall hereafter be held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the milltary service of the United States as a member of that organization on the 7th day of December, 1863: Provided, That no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time and passed.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. JOHN B. RUSSELL

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 3629, for the relief of John B. Russell.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, will the gentleman explain how the claimant arrives at the damages because he was prevented from marketing garden truck for which he makes claim in the amount of $1,525?

Mr. TARVER. Considerable evidence was submitted to the committee, which I regret to note is not included in the report touching on the subject matter.

At the time of the injury to the claimant many thousands of men were encamped at Fort Oglethorpe during the Spanish-American War and the business of selling supplies there was one of considerable importance to the truck farmers in the neighborhood.

This claimant arrived at the amount of damage sustained on account of the loss of the business on his truck farm by itemizing the character of truck which he had for the market at the time he sustained the wound because of which he was confined to his bed for eight weeks unable to look after his crop, unable to market his truck, and sustaining as a result thereof the loss of its full value.

Mr. STAFFORD. I would surmise that there would be some other person in the household who could have looked after the marketing of his garden truck. This is a very old claim, resurrected from the Spanish-American War.

Mr. TARVER. It is true it is an old claim, but if it is a just claim the fact it is an old one ought not to prevent its payment.

Mr. STAFFORD. There are many just claims not being recognized by the Government because they are too hoary for consideration.

Mr. TARVER. A few days ago the House passed a bill introduced by the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. MILLER] which allowed compensation to a man for an injury sus~ tained in 1897. The man was a member of a deputy marshal's posse.

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes; and if the gentleman will permit right there, I know the gentleman is very strong on calling the attention of the House to certain instances of bills being passed where perhaps a Member through a desire to be lenient has not objected, or because a case was meritorious as in the instance cited by the gentleman from Georgia, where a man had his arm shot off. But in this case the claimant is seeking reimbursement for not m~rketing truck garden crops, and is asking $1,500, which, I think, is rather far-fetched at this late date.

Now, this is an old claim. I am not very much inclined to these old claims which are resurrected 32 years after the happening of the occurrence.

Mr. TARVER. The evidence further shows, as I pointed out a moment ago, that this man was injured without fault on his part and was confined to his bed for eight weeks with a doctor in attendance. The evidenee shows he suf-

14196 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JuNE 28 fered a great deal of pain and, according to the medical evi- · dence in the file, is still suffering pain on account of this injury.

Mr. BLACK. The claimant has not asked for interest, has he?

Mr. TARVER. No. Mr. STAFFORD. That does not make any difference, be

cause Congress does not recognize interest on claims of this character.

I want to be just in the consideration of this matter, but I will say to my friend, the gentleman from Georgia, that I do not like a claim of $1,500 in such an old claim.

Mr. TARVER. Let me say to the gentleman that the full amount of the claim is just and should be paid, but if the gentleman's feeling with regard to the value of the truck lost by the claimant is sufficiently strong to cause him to insist upon that as an objection to the passage of the bill I will be willing to accept a reasonable reduction in the amount, but I do not think it ought to be cut out entirely.

Mr. STAFFORD. I think $1,000 is a very fair amount. I think it would be generous treatment.

Mr. TARVER. Under the circumstances I shall accept such an amend.rilent if the gentleman will offer it.

There being no objection the Clerk read the bill as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he

1s hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to John B. Russell $2,500 as compenstation for injuries sustained on July 8, 1898, from gunshot wound occasioned by the discharge of a pistol held in the hand of Walter Crowe, private, Company D, Thirty-first Michigan Infantry, in the Chickamauga and Chattanooga National Military Park.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Line 6, strike out " $2,500 "

and insert in lieu thereof "$1,000."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer a further amend

ment. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFoRD: Line 6, strike out the

words "as compensation for" and insert in lieu thereof: "In full settlement of all claims against the Government of the United States."



MRS. ASA CASWELL HAWKINS

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 8353, for the relief of Mrs. Asa Caswell Hawkins.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I note this bill provides that the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs be authorized to pay to the widow of a man who lost his life in the prohibition service the sum of $5,000. I do not know what jurisdiction is conferred upon the Admiillstrator of Veterans' Affairs to pay to the widow of a man engaged in the prohibition service any sum of money.

Mr. BLACK. That will have to be amended. Mr. MOUSER. The bill is not in shape to be considered

at this time. Mr. BLACK. We can offer an amendment. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right

to object, I understand this officer was a deputy sheriff. Mr. BLACK. No; he was a contract prohibition omcer. Mr. IdOUSER. He had been in the service for 10 years

and there should not be any distinction between a citizen and an officer. They should both get $5,000 under circumstances as disclosed in this case.

Mr. STAFFORD. The chairman of the committee says he was not a deputy sheriff. I read from page 1 of the report:

Hawkins was deputy sheriff here for a number of years, and was always at the service of any officer who might need him, whether Federal, State, or county.

I take it that this man Hawkins, who was killed, was a deputy sheriff at the time this service was performed.

Mr. KERR. He was deputized to perform this service by the Federal officer. Let me state the facts. This man had a contract with the United States Government.

Mr. MOUSER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KERR. Yes. Mr. MOUSER. He was in the service of the Federal Gov

ernment. There is no question about that. Mr. KERR. None whatever. Mr. STAFFORD. I wish to be satisfied of that, because

it appears he was in the service of the State, and if so, we are under no obligation to pay him for injuries received during the performance of this service.

Mr. KERR. He had a written contract with the Government.

Mr. MOUSER. So he was a special agent. Mr. KERR. Besides that, he was deputized by the en

forcement officer. If the gentleman will refer to the report, be will find this language:

It is stated in the affidavit of Prohibition Agent s. K. Hughes that at the time of his death Hawkins was engaged in the discharge of his duties 1n making said raid, under deputization of his superiors.

Mr. BLACK. Evidently from this report his service as deputy sheriff had expired some years before. The statement which the gentleman from Wisconsin has read a.s to his being a deputy sheriff appeared in a newspaper article, but the evidence shows that he was a contract prohibition agent. .

Mr. STAFFORD. May I inquire of the author of the bill who it is proposed shall pay this money?

Mr. KERR. That ought to be amended. Mr. BLACK. That should be in the usual form and pro

vide that the money shall be paid by the Secretary of the Treasury.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Administrator of Veterans' Aft'airs

be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pa.y, out of any money 1n the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Mrs. Asa Caswell Hawkins, widow of Asa C. Hawkins, of the county of Lenoir and the State of North Carolina, the sum of $5,000, in full compensation for the death of said Asa C. Hawkins, who was killed while employed by and assisting Federal prohibition agents 1n the enforcement of the national prohibition act.

With the following committee amendment: Beginning 1n line 1, page 2, after the word "act," insert the

following: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated 1n this act

1n excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act 1n excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered 1n connection with said claim, any contract to the con~ trary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon con~ vtction thereof shall be fined 1n any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The committee amendment was agreed to. Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New

York offers an amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. BLAcl{: Strike aut in line 3, page 1,

the words "Administrator of Veterans' Atfatrs" and insert in lieu thereof the words "Secretary of the Treasury."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third

time, was read the third time and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

JOHN A. PEARCE

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 1030, for the relief of Johri A. Pearce.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I am absolutely against paying a certain sum per month


over a period of months. Under the circumstances I have no objection to paying a reasonable amount. This comes to us as a Senate bill, and I have no way of knowing what would be a fair amount.

Mr. BLACK. I think the recently duly nominated Member from Minnesota can explain this bill. The reason he was nominated was because he is such an excellent subcommittee.

Mr. STAFFORD. We all hope that information is broadcast not only in the gentleman's present district but throughout the State in which he is going to run at large, because be is one of the most efficient and effective worklrig Members of the House of Representatives.

Mr. PITTENGER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. MOUSER. Yes. Mr. PITTENGER. As I understand, the reason for this

action on the part of the Senate was to give this man over a period of months what he would otherwise be entitled to in a lump-sum payment.

Mr. MOUSER. We can not act as guardians far these people.'

Mr. PITTENGER. It would be better to pay it in that way. The bill is a meritorious bill and has the favorable report of the department.

Mr. MOUSER. If the gentleman will agree to change the amount to $1,500, I shall not object.

Mr. PITTENGER. I shall have to agree to anything that is submitted that is within reason, because anything is better than nothing.

Mr. MOUSER. Will the gentleman agree to such an amendment?

Mr. PITTENGER. I shall reluctantly agree to it. There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as


he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. the sum of $500, and $50 per month thereafter not to exceed 40 months, to John A. Pearce, in full settlement of all claims against the Government for injuries sustained by him on July 19, 1918, when he was shot by a sentry at the ~berdeen Proving Ground, in the State of Maryland.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment, in line 5, after the comma, strike out the words "the sum of $500, and $50 per month thereafter, not to exceed 40 months," and in lieu thereof insert the sum of "$1,500."

Mr. PITTENGER. Can not the gentleman raise that amount? This man is totally disabled, and $1,500 would be a pitiable sum to pay him. I do not know anything about the case, except the facts as presented. When I say I do not know anything about the case, I mean I do not know this party and I have no personal interest in the matter, and the amount certainly ought to be raised.

Mr. MOUSER. In view of what the gentleman from Minnesota has said, I will ask to insert $2,000 in the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MoUSER: Beglnn1ng in line 5, strike

out "the sum of $500, and $50 per month thereafter not to exceed 40 months," and insert .. •2.000."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I offer the usual attorney's

fee amendment. Mr. PITTENGER. Mr. Speaker, I agree to that. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MousER: At the end of line 10, strike

out the period, insert a colon and the following: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said clalm, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in· any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The amendment was agreed to.


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. LOUIS SOL URI

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 2242, granting six months' pay to Louis Soluri.

Mr. ARENTZ. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object ·in order to ask a question of the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. PITTENGER]. I have read the report, but I find nothing therein which gives any inkling as to how this man met his death. The report just states that his skull was fractured. How did he fracture his skull?

Mr. PITTENGER. It was in line of duty. Mr. ARENTZ. The report states that, but how was it in

line of duty; in other words, what are the facts? Mr. PITTENGER. I can not recall the facts just at this

moment. Mr. ARENTZ. Does not the gentleman believe the RECORD

ought to contain something about how the man met his death? This report states that it was not on account of his own misconduct.

Mr. PITTENGER. I have submitted quite a few reports and that fact has escaped me for the moment. I will say to the gentleman that I went over the facts carefully and this bill is the usual one granting six months' pay.

Mr. ARENTZ. But the gentleman has no recollection now of how the man met his death?

Mr. PITTENGER. No; I can not recall at the moment. Mr. STAFFORD. if the gentleman will permit, the report

of the Secretary of the Navy shows it was not the result of his own misconduct.

Mr. PITTENGER. That is correct. Mr. STAFFORD. There is no question about that, and

the second fact is that he suffered a fracture of the skull and the third fact is that it was in line of duty. This is shown in the letter of the Secretary.

Mr. ARENTZ. As long as the gentleman from Minnesota has studied the matter, I think that is sufficient; but the report should show how the accident occurred and what was the nature of the accident. I think the gentleman will agree that that is correct.

Mr. PITI'ENGER. The gentleman is quite correct, and in the reports I prepare I try to give all the facts. I overlooked doing that in this particular case.

Mr. ARENTZ. In view of the statement the gentleman has made about having studied the matter, and in view of the statement of the gentleman from Wisconsin, who is always so careful about such cases, I withdraw my objection.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, the Secretary of the Navy states that this father should not receive compensation of six months' pay unless he establishes to the satisfaction of the Secretary that he was actually dependent upon his son at the time of the injury. I assume the gentleman will have no objection to the following proviso:

Provided, That said Louis Solur1 can show to the satisfaction of the Secretary of the Navy that he was actually dependent upon his son at the time of his son's death.

Mr. PITTENGER. I may say for the information of my friend from Wisconsin that money-order stubs and letters from the son are in the file, showing dependency, and that is why that was not put in the bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. Th~ Secretary of the Navy has made this report, and of course we want to leave it to the Secretary of the Navy to determine the matter under the general law.

Mr. PITTENGER. I have no objection to that amendment. The facts are as I have stated them.


Be U tm4Cted., etc., That the Secretary of the Navy be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of the appropriation "Pay of the Navy, 1932," to Louis Soluri, father of the late Felix Soluri, seaman first class, United States Navy, an amount equal to six months' pay at the rate said Felix Soluri was receiving at the aate of his death.

14198 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment in line 4, strike out" and directed."

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: In line 4, strike out the

words "and directed."

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. And at the end of the section strike out

the period, insert a comma and the following: u Provided, That said Louis Soluri can show to the satisfaction of the Secretary of the Navy that he "ll'as actually dependent upon his son at the time of his death." ·

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: In line 8, after the word

"death," strike out the period, insert a colon and the following: " Provided, That the said Louis Soluri can show to the satisfac

tion of the Secretary of the Navy that he was actually dependent upon his son at the time of his son's death."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read

the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on . the table.

JOSEPH E. BOURRlE CO.

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, S. 2570, authorizing adjustment of the claim of Joseph E. Bourrie Co.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Comptr~ller General of the United States is hereby authorized and directed to adjust and settle the claim of Joseph E. Bourrie Co. for refund of $1,055.70, included in the amount of a certified check submitted by it as a guarantee with bids on two items of construction work at Camp Grayling, Mich., the total amount of which was collected and paid into the Treasury, although $1,055.70 included in such check was for a guarantee on a bid which was rejected. and to allow not to exceed $1,055.70 in full and final settlement o! any and all claims arising out of the transaction. There is hereby appropriated out of ::my moneys in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated the sum of $1,055.70, or as much thereof as may be necessary, for payment of said claim.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Page 2, after line 4, insert the following: "Provided. That no

part of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read

the third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. A similar House bill was laid on the table.

RIO GRANDE SOUTHERN RAILROAD CO.

The Clerk "read the next bill on the Private Calendar, S. 3058, authorizing adjustment of the claim of the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Co.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Comptroller General of the United States be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to adjust and settle the claim of the Rio Grande Southern Railroad Co. for reimbursement of its expenditures for labor and expenses in repairing the damages to the Western Union telegraph line on its right of way at mile posts 95 and 96 plus 16, near Stapleton, Colo., which was damaged by the blasting during the Government's construction of the Dolores-Rico Forest highway project in Colorado, and to allow in full and final settlement of said claim not to exceed the sum of $34.40. There is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $34.40, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to pay satd claim.


A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

JOHN STRATIS

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, S. 3447, for the relief of John Stratis.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay to John Stratis, ou~ or any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $1,000, representing the face value of two Liberty bonds in the amount of $500 each. deposited by him as security for a public charge and departure bond in the sum of $1,000, executed by him on account of Vasilios Kaplandis, an allen. conditioned upon the alien traveling in transit through the United States within 15 days, and forfeited through breach of such condition. subsequent hearings by the Department of Labor havtng developed that the alien had a former residence in this country and was entitled to admlss.ion to the United States without regard to the quota law.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr . . Speaker, I offer the following amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Page 1, line 9, after the word "alien," strike out the comma,

insert a period, and strike out the remainder of the bill. •

The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be read a third

time, was read a third time, and passed. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

POTOMAC . ELECTRIC POWER CO.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to return to Calendar No. 446, S. 260, authorizing adjustment of the claim of the Potomac Electric Power Co., of Washington, D. C. That came up on the last day that we considered the Private Calendar, and the gentleman from Colorado objected. I was not in the Chamber.

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I am very sorry, but I shall have to object.

W. B. FOUNTAIN

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 2928, for the relief of W. B. Fountain.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Reserving the right to object, I

understand the sponsor of the bill wishes to make a statement showing why the dishonorable discharge to this man should be set aside.

Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, if I thought this man was guilty I would not have this bill here. I have investigated, and I believe that there has been a severe miscarriage of justice in this case.

This man had three enlistments, all honorable discharges. In his last enlistment he received a good-conduct medal. He was accused of stealing some rope. The letters here · show where this rope was accounted for, and the only evidence he was convicted on was the evidence of a man named Hand. I had a special investigation made of Mr. Hand by the county attorney of the county where he lived, and the investigation showed that he was run out of the county. He had a grudge against Fountain. It was on the testimony of this man alone, unsupported, that this conviction was had. The rope was accounted for. He bought it from a junk dealer in my city named Cashen, that I know myself. I believe a rank injustice has been done in this case, and that the Congress can correct it. I hope the gentleman will not object.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, upon that statement I withdraw my objection.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection, and the Clerk read the bill, as

follows: Be it enacted etc., That in the administration of any laws con

ferring rights, privileges, and benefits upon honorably discharged enlisted personnel of the United States Navy W. B. Fountain. aviation chief rigger, United States _ Navy, late of the Naval Operating Base, Hampton Roads, Va., until May, 1925, shall hereafter be held and considered to have been honorably discharged from the naval service of the United States on the 4th day of May, 1925: Provided, That no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act.

1932 ~ONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14199

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 8, strike out the word • honorably • and insert after

the word .. discharged," in line 9, the words •• under honorable conditions."

The committee amendment was agreed to; and the bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a. motion to reconsider laid on the table.

JAMES JOHNSON

The next business was the bill <H. R. 4396) for the relief of James Johnson.


Be it enacted, etc., That in the administration of the pension laws James Johnson, who served as a private in Troop F, Tenth Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Cavalry, from September 9, 1862, to September 17, 1863, and in Company A. Fifty-fourth Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Mounted Infantry, from September 19, 1864, to December 19, 1864, shall hereafter be held to have been honorably discharged from the military forces of the United States on December 19, 1864: Provided, That no pay, bounty, pension, or other emolument shall accrue prior to the enactment o! this act.

With the following committee amendment: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: "That in the administration of any laws conferring rights, privi

leges, and benefits upon honorably discharged soldiers James Johnson, late of Troop F, Tenth Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Cavalry, from September 9, 1862, to September 17, 1863, and Company A. Fifty-fourth Regiment Kentucky Volunteer Mounted Infantry, from September 19, 1864. to December 19, 1864, shall hereafter be held to have been honorably discharged from the mllitary service of the United States as a private of the latter organization on the 19th day of December, 1864: Provided, Tha.t no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act."

The committee amendment was agreed to; and the bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to rconsider laid on the table.

WILLIAM A. TOZER

The next business was the bill (H. R. 7071) to remove the charge of desertion from the military record of William A. Tozer.


Be it enacted, etc., That tlie Secretary of War be, and he is hereby, authorized and directed to remove the charge of desertion now standing on the rolls and records of the War Department against the name of William A. Tozer, late of Company H, Eightythird Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, Civil War, and grant him an honorable discharge therefrom.

With the following committee amendment: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: " That in the administration of any laws conferring rights,

privileges, and benefits upon honorably discharged soldiers William A. Tozer, late of Company H, Eighty-third Regiment Pennsylvania Volunteer Infantry, Civil War, from September 2, 1862, to February 20, 1863, shall hereafter be held to llirve been honorably discharged from the military service of the United States as a private of that organization on the 20th day of February, 1863 : Provided, That no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act."

The committee amendment was agreed to; and the bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

GILBERT CLOCK CO.

The next business was the bill <H. R. 1437) to reimburse the William L. Gilbert Clock Co. for revenue erroneously paid.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to sub

stitute S. 2236, a similar bill, which has passed the Senate. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, a similar

bill, S. 2236, will be substituted, which the Clerk will report. There was no objection, and the Clerk read the Senate bill,

as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and

be is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in

the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the William L. Gilbert Clock Co., of Winsted, Conn., the sum af $416.92 to reimburse the company for money expended by 1t in an overpayment of customs duties to the collector of customs at New York. N. Y., on parts used in making clocks which were imported and entered at the port of New York, N. Y., under entry No. 888945 of March, 1928, and entry No. 901780 of Aprtl, 1928.

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

JOHN WORTHINGTON

The next business was the bill, H. R. 4276, for the relief of John Worthington.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. MONTAGUE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman re

serve his objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Yes. Mr. MONTAGUE. What is the reason on which the gen

tleman bases his objection to the bill? Mr. EATON of Colorado. This is one of a class of bills, of

which there have been a number, objected to because the accident complained of arose prior to the enactment of the employees' compensation act. In this case the accident was in 19.03, 29 years ago. As far as I know, no bill going back as far as that has passed through the Seventy-second Congress.

Mr. MONTAGUE. The record shows that every Secretary of War has approved of this measure and the United States compensation commissioners have approved of it. It has met with unanimous approval wherever there has been any official occasion to consider its merits and equity. The committee has cut down the amount from $5,000, which the compensation commission thought was right, to $2,500. The man lost his eye in the discharge of his duties as a punchpress operator in the United States armory at Springfield. It is a patent, open case, the facts are not dead, the evidence is not dead, the reports are alive, and the justice is manifest. I submit to the gentleman that we should not treat the employees of our Government in a manner like this, and I appeal to the gentleman from his high altitude of Colorado to look down on this humble man and withdraw his objection.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. It distresses me greatly to refuse such an appeal, but under the circumstances of the case my objection must stand.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. I object.

JOHN H. DAY

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 8398, for the relief of John H. Day.


Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to John H. Day, Decatur, Ala., the sum of $721. Such sum represents compensation for excess mileage of approximately 12,500 mnes which the said John H. Day was required to travel while carrying the mails on star route No. 24352, Decatur, Ala., by Albany, to Moulton, Ala., during the years 1925, 1926, and 1927, on account of the grading and paving of the regular route between Decatur and Moulton.

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 6. strike out " $721 " and insert in lleu thereof

.. $650.''

The committee amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and read


FAIRMONT CREAMERY CO.

The Clerk called the next bill, S. 945, for the relief of the Fairmont Creamery Co., of Omaha, Nebr.

Mr. PATI'ERSON. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. BALDRIGE. Will the gentleman withhold his objec

tion? Mr. PATTERSON. I will reserve it for my colleague to

make a statement.

14200 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 Mr. -BALDRIGE. This "claimant was over-assessed over

$99,000. This is admitted in a letter, a copy of which is in the report. Of this amount $41,000 was not allowed because it was barred by the statute of limitations. Claimant's position is that the Government was unable to determine the tax in time to be within the statutory period. This tax relief came under a special relief, sections 327 and 328, that makes it necessary to compare complainant's profit tax with similar concerns in a similar business, and it could not obtain this information in time to file a refund claim.

Permit me to say that there is in the coffers of the United States Treasury to-day this money that does not belong to it. This company paid the money and they are entitled to have it paid back. There was a mistake. There was no negligence on their part. It certainly seems fair and just that they should be allowed to get the money back.

Mr. PATTERSON. This is the :first time I knew there was any money at all in the coffers of the United States Treasury.

Mr. BALDRIGE. This claim has been through the Senate. We battled this through the Claims Committee. The committee thought it was a good bill. This is the last hurdle.

Mr. PA 'ITERSON. I can reply to my good friend, the distinguished chairman of this committee, on this bill. I will admit there may be some of these claims which have some equity, but there are thousands of individuals who have overpaid three or four dollars on this income-tax business, and to open up one of these claims I do not believe it is fair. There are probably thousands of claims where individuals have paid three or four dollars over the amount due. The only way to handle these things is to do it by a general law, and I am going to oppose any special law to do this.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PATI'ERSON. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman will recall when a simi

lar bill providing for refunds of tax payments came up for consideration on the first call of the Private Calendar, the Speaker of the House took occasion to state from his desk

/ that the Committee on Ways and Means, years ago, when these bills under special order of the House were referred to the Committee on Ways and Means for consideration, adopted a policy not to report any of the bills, because it would involve the expenditure of hundreds of millions of dollars by the National Government.

Mr. PATTERSON. Three billion dollars, to be exact. Mr. STAFFORD. I objected to this same bill in the last

Congress because of that very principle, and we can not, especially at the present time, open the empty Treasury to have the taxpayers of the country burdened by the payment of these claims.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I do not think that the gentlemen in all good morality could insist that the Government should be operated on money they owe other people. I do not see any morality in that position. If the Government wants to adopt that attitude that it should be the supreme embezzler and keep all the money it can lay its hands on, we do not need worry about the Budget at all.

Mr. STAFFORD. Under the enlarged view of the generous gentleman from New York, chairman of the committee, he would justify the opening of the old French spoliation claims and allow the claim agents to put their hands in the United States Treasury. These are no times for the gentleman's liberalitY. at the expense of the taxpayers.

Mr. PA'ITERSON. I am not so sure that I agree with the gentleman from Wisconsin entirely. I am not sure that I would not support a general law at the proper time, but for the present I am against these special laws, and I object.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Would not the gentleman be willing to let them have half of it now and the other half at the next session of Congress?

Mr. PATTERSON. No. I am against them having any of it now. I object, Mr. Speaker.

STEPHEN SOWINSKI

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 5154, for the relief of Stephen Sowinski.

Mr. STAFFORD. Reserving the right to object, I would like to inquire as to the reason why the committee struck out the proviso which always accompanies these bills, that no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act?

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. I have no interest of any kind in this measure other than it was delegated to me to make the report.

In this matter, Sowinski received an honorable discharge from the Army, but it was upon a surgeon's certificate of disability, to the effect that he was suffering from epilepsy, grand mal, contracted prior to his enlistment and not in line of duty. The evidence indubitably disclosed the fact that the finding was incorrect; that the epilepsy was contracted in line of duty. I might suggest that in the clinical record it was also found that his father had died of epilepsy, and by the proof in the case it was found that his father was not dead at all, but was living in a village in Poland. The previous health condition of this man was established by the affi.davits not only of medical officers of the Army but of his associates in the Army and of associates prior to his enlistment. So the fact appeared very plain to the committee that he did receive the disability and that it originated in the line of service.

I take it that the only reason the language which usually goes in these measures was stricken out was because the case was so plain that if any rights accrued to this man, it was thought by the committee they should accrue as of that time. I suggest that the gentleman should keep in mind the fact that this is not a case of dishonorable discharge against which relief is being sought, but it is a case where a man was discharged honorably, and where the entire record shows that his service was faithful and good, and that he has been denied the benefits which he should have, and which might possibly accrue in the future because of an incorrect finding as to the disability that necessitated his honorable discharge.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. CHIPERFIELD. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. I have no objection whatsoever to the

amendment of the committee stating that the disability of epilepsy was incurred in line of duty. I have read the report, and I question somewhat whether it did occur in line of duty, but I am positively opposed to allowing any bill to be passed recognizing the principle for the first time that any person will have a pension claim prior to the passage of the enabling act.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. I am not going to disagree with the gentleman from Wisconsin, but I may say I think a very different rule should ~pply in the case where the discharge is honorable than in a case where, from the records, the discharge was dishonorable. But, it is a matter that is in the hands of the House, and whatever the judgment of the House is with reference to the matter, of course, it ought to be accepted.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman can see it is a fundamental postulate that this Congress never votes back pension and should not vote back pension.

Mr. CHIPERFIELD. I am not disagreeing with the gentleman in that respect.

Mr. STAFFORD. With that understanding, I have no objection to the present consideration of the bill


Be it enacted, etc., That in the administration o:! any laws conferring rights, privileges, and benefits upon honorably discharged sol~iers, Stephen Sowinski, late of Company-, Battery D, Second Uruted States Field Artillery, shall hereafter be held and considered to have been honorably di-scharged from the milit ary service of the United States as a member of that organization on the 4th day of August, 1909: Provided, That no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14201 With the following committee amendment: Line 5, page 1, strike out the word "Company," the blank, and

. the comma following it.

The committee amendment was agreed to. The Clerk reported the next committee amendment, as

follows: Line 9, page 1, after the word "August," strike out the figures

'' 1909 " and the colon following it and the proviso ending in line 1, page 2.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, as a substitute for the committee amendment I offer the following: Insert after the figures " 1909,,. in line 9, page 1, the following: "For disability of epilepsy grand mal incurred in the service in line of duty" and leave the rest of it in there.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, is not the purpose accomplished by adding to the committee amendment that these words follow the word "duty,. in the next amend-ment? ·

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Page 1, line 9, after the

figures " 1909," insert .. for d1sab111ty of epilepsy grand mal incurred in the service in line of duty: Provided, That no bounty, back pay, pension, or allowance shall be held to have accrued prior to the passage of this act."

The substitute amendment was agreed to. The committee amendment, as amended by the substi

tute, was agreed to. The bill, as amended, was ordered to be engrossed and


ANNA CAPORASO The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 3720, for the relief

of Anna Caporaso. Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object,

as I understand it, this bill was introduced by the gentleman from New York [Mr. BoYLAN], who has been ill. There is practically no report accompanying the bill, and I wonder if the chairman of the committee can throw some light upon the evidence in addition to that which is included in the report?

The report indicates that this woman deliberately stepped in front of the truck. In view of the illness of the gentleman from New York [Mr. BoYLAN], if the chairman of the committee can satisfy me that the claim is just I shall not object.

Mr. BLACK. There is a great deal of material here which the gentleman may look at if he wishes. There were two oonflicting reports from the inspectors, one inspector saying she was responsible, and the other saying she was not.

There is the affidavit of an outside witness among the papers in the case, the affidavit of a fellow named Jennings.

Mr. MOUSER. Is there any corroboration of her statement that she did not do as claimed, step deliberately in front of this passing vehicle?

Mr. BLACK. From what I know of conditions in the west side of New York I can see just what happened here. This is right near the general post office, and these mail truck drivers of New York think this part of New York City constitutes a race track for them to drive madly around in.

Mr. MOUSER. It is not a question of what happens generally; it is a question of what happened in this case. Is there any statement in the record in disagreement with the statement of the post-office inspector that she stepped in front of the truck deliberately?

Mr. BLACK. Mr. Jennings's affidavit is to the effect that he saw Mrs. Caporaso cross Ninth Avenue in a westerly direction on the north side of West Twenty-sixth Street; that while she was 2 or 3 feet away from the west curb of Ninth Avenue he saw a mail truck going south, close to the west curb; that when it was 10 or 12 feet from the corner it was going at a fast speed, and as Mrs. caporaso was stepping onto the curb the truck hit her.

-Mr. MOUSER. That is all I wanted to know. In other words, that is in contradiction to the inspector's report that she deliberately ran in front of the truck .

Mr. BLACK. That is right. Mr. MOUSER. She was stepping up on the curb when

this truck hit her while it was going at a fast speed. The amount involved is very reasonable, because she was

very seriously injured. Mr. Speaker, I have no objection to the bill. There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as


he is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $1,000 to Anna Caporaso for injuries sustained as a result of being struck by a Government-owned truck of the Post Offi.ce Department, New York City, N.Y., on October 29, 1928.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer the customary attorney's fee amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: Page 1, line 9, after the

figures " 1928," insert the following: "Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorneys or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It sha.ll be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed gullty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and


FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A further message from the Senate by Mr. Craven, its principal clerk, announced that the Senate insists upon its amendments to the bill CH. R. 10022) entitled "An act making appropriations for the Executive Office and sundry independent executive bureaus, boards, commissions, and offices, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes," disagreed to by the House; agrees to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. SMooT, Mr. JoNEs, Mr. HALE, Mr. GLAss, and Mr. BROUSSARD to be the conferees on the part of the Senate.

CATHERINE BELL

The Clerk called the next bill on the Private Calendar, H. R. 3961, for the relief of Catherine Bell.

Mr. MOUSER. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. GLOVER. Will the gentleman reserve his objection? Mr. MOUSER. I will, but here is my . objection: This

woman settled with the railroad company and signed a release.

Mr. GLOVER. If the gentleman will allow me to make a statement, I think I can convince him. This was a claim that was purely a claim against the Government. A suit was first filed at Stuttgart, Ark., and the attorney, when he got it, recognized that it was solely a claim against the United States Government. and took a nonsuit. A suit was afterwards brought by another attorney, this woman not knowing her rights. As I say, a suit was brought, and in order to get rid of it, but not admitting liability, the railroad company out of court made an adjustment. However, the evidence in this case clearly shows that the Government employees were negligent in throwing off these mail sacks.

Mr. MOUSER. Does the gentleman say there was no ob-ligation on the part of the railroad company?

Mr. GLOVER. I do not think so. Mr. MOUSER. And that the $500 was purely a gratuity? Mr. GLOVER. Suppose it was? I think I have tried as

many of these personal-injury suits as any man in this

14202 CONGRESSIONAL RECQRD-_HOUSE JUNE 28 House. Suppose there was joint liability as between the railroad company and the Government?

Mr. MOUSER. You could not sue the Government. Mr. GLOVER. No; you could not sue the Government. Mr. MOUSER. The amount is reasonable and I will with-

draw my objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection.

· The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he

is hereby, authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Catherine Bell, 1n full settlement of all claims against the Government of the United States, the sum of $5,000 for personal injuries received by her on the 8th day of June, 1928, at Havana, Ark .. a. station on the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.'s road. by being struck by a sack of United States mall negligently thrown off a fast mall train by Government employees handling said mail, and in violation of the custom and rules for the delivering of mail from running trains. ·

With the following committee amendment: Page 1, line 7, strike out "$5,000" and insert "$1,000.'"

The committee amendment was agreed to. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I offer the customary

attorney's fee amendment. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Wis

consin offers an amendment, which the Clerk will report. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. STAFFORD: On page 2, line 4, after

the word "trains," insert a colon and the following: ((Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000."

The amendment was agreed to. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third

time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

VERTNER TATE

The Clerk called the next bill, H. R. 6634, for the relief of Vertner Tate.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I would like to have the distinguished gentleman from Virginia tell us why this man, after being rei.Dstated and having the disgrace against his name wiped out, should come and ask $2,000 from the United States.

Mr. MONTAGUE. He was inadvertently reinstated and held his position and drew his salary one month or two months.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Was not the thing he was looking for the justification of his record as an honest man?

Mr. MONTAGUE. He was looking for that, having been discharged without justification after being 16 years in the service, with a reputation unsullied, one of the kindest, one of the most honest, one of the most faithful men that was ever in the service of the United States. The city of Richmond was shocked to learn one day that he had been indicted for embezzling $30 of postal funds. He was put upon trial by the United States Government. He was acquittedacquitted triumphantly-the judge remarking that a more unjustifiable case had never been in his court. It had developed that another employee in the post office had " framed " this crime to get rid of him by reason of his personal enmity. When I came to Congress I undertook to have him restored to office. ·I did not succeed under the Wilson administration; but when Mr. Harding came in, his Postmaster General restored this good man. He entered upon his duties, but performed them only, I think. a month or a month and a half, when the Comptroller General ruled that he was beyond age and within the prohibitions of the civil service law, and again he was separated from the serv-

ice. He had nothing to live upon; · His salary had always been a very meager one.

Mr. EATON of Colorado. Let me interrupt the gentleman and ask this: Was this person who falsely charged this man an employee of the Government?

Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes. Mr. EATON of Colorado. One of the post-office em-

ployees? Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes. Mr. EATON of Colorado. I withdraw my objection. Mr. STAFFORD. ·Mr. Speaker, further reserving the right

to object, what perturbs me is the precedent we would be establishing if we recognized the rule that where persons are temporarily suspended from work in the Postal Service and then it is found the suspension was not merited, they would have the right to present a claim against the Government for their salaries. I would say, speaking offhand, that there are 10,000 cases where persons could come to Congress and claim they had been unrighteously separated from the Government and that they should be paid for the time they were separated· from the service.

Mr. BLACK. · This was a different situation. Here was a case where they absolutely libeled this man and ruined his good name in addition to separating him from the service.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have had cases come to my attention since I returned to Congress where a man imbibed too freely and was discharged. .

Mr. BLACK. That is not defaming. That was glorifying, while this is defaming, a different proposition.

Mr. STAFFORD. I may say, coming from Milwaukee, it was a glorifying case, because he is perhaps the most popular letter carrier ·in the city; but, really, I am very serious. I can not see how I can subscribe to the principle involved here.

Mr. MONTAGUE. Will the gentleman permit me to make a further statement?

Mr. STAFFORD. Surely. Mr. MONTAGUE. The gentleman interrupted my state

ment, not without my consent, of course. I wish to say to the gentleman from Wisconsin that for 17

years I have been following this case. This is a unique case. The injury done this man was in no wise of his own making. The Government prosecuted him and the Government was the cause of his irreparable injury.

Mr. STAFFORD. Even granting the Government was the direct cause of the injury, yet the Government is operating a great business corporation, and in passing upon individual cases we can not consider them as if it were a private corporation. We have to consider the effects that may be presented to the Congress if such cases are considered and passed.

Mr. MONTAGUE. I do not know that I can remove that opinion of the gentleman, but I utterly dissent from it. I deny that the . Go'Vernment is a corporation. The Government is an institution to safeguard and administer the safety, the liberty, the aspirations, the duties, the responsibilities, and opportunities of its citizens. It is not a moneymaking institution. It is not governed by the ordinary rules of corporations; its objects and purposes are different, as are the methods and means to effectuate such objects and purposes. I believe that if the gentleman would investigate this case he could not dissent from the views which I entertain upon this subject, and I will give the gentleman something more than my own views.

Here was an innocent man. He had been a faithful employee of the Government. He was indicted by the Government of the United States, through the machinations of an enemy, acquitted triumphantly. But still the clouds hung over him,- his reputation was more or less destroyed; but after the matter had been submitted to two administrations he was finally restored to duty, his friends in the meantime supporting and avouching his high character which a just public soon proclaimed.

Let me submit this to the gentleman: Attorney General Stone in a letter to Senator CAPP~ of the Claims Committee, some time about February, 1925, used this language,

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14203 and Attorney General Stone, as tbe gentleman knowSy Is now upon the Supreme Bench:

It appears from data in the files of this department that on or about the 23d of May, 1911, Mr. Taylor was removed from his position as a clerk in the post otfice at Richmond, Va., on charge of embezzling public funds. It subsequently developed that Mr. Taylor was in no wise responsible for the embezzlement.

His attempts to be reinstated in the post otfice were unsuccessful until 1921, when he was reinstated by Executive order, dated October 22, 1921. At the tlme of the order of reinstatement, however, Mr. Taylor had passed the age of 65, and it was held he was ineligible under the law for reinstatement in the service. From all the data in this department tt appears that a great injustice has been done Mr. Taylor, and it also appears that the only relief that can be afforded him is such relief as Congress is willing to give. I can not advise the committee in regard to the amount, if any, which should be paid to Mr. Taylor. This advice should come from either the General Accounting Office or the Post Office Department. I do think, however, that Mr. Taylor should be given some relief, for the reason that his separation from the service was occasioned by no act of his, and his trial for embezzlement by the Government has cast a refiection upon his integrity, although the trial resulted in his acquittal.

I also desire to quote from a letter of Acting Attorney General JAMES M. BECK, now an honored Member of this House:

It would seem-

Said he-a plain act of justice to do something for this man.

Mr. BEcK's letter, I may state, I knew nothing of until long after it was sent here, was addressed to Speaker Gillett, under date of February 24, 1925:

It would seem to be a plain act of justice

Says Mr. BECK-to do something for this man which would not only be in the nature of a vindication, but, incidentally, would recoup him for the loss he has sustained through the mistake of the United States Government, and I am writing to urge earnestly that some special action be taken in the matter that will enable the blll to be brought up in the House during the present session. It would seem to me this bill can be fairly differentiated from ordinary private relief bUls. It is not only a question of paying what the Government owes in money but rectifying a very grave injustice done to a worthy man who, I understand, may not 11 ve until another term of Congress--

Which is true-he is dead now-you will know best how this bill may be brought up, and this department earnestly addresses the matter to your attention in the hope that in this way the Government may rectify what was a grave injustice.

I am, Mr. Speaker, yours respectfully, JAMES M. BECK, Acting Attorney General.

If the gentleman will indulge me further, a similar bill passed the Senate two or three years ago and when the measure failed in the House, I gave up hope. The newspapers of the country took the case up without the slightest impulse from me, and the most distinguished papers in the country urged that this man's misfortunes should be rectified, and the gentleman from Arkansas, a member of the Claims Committee, came upon the file in the case and gave the matter diligent, faithful, and judicial consideration, and I think it was largely through his interest that the committee reported this bill out, and I beg the gentleman to withdraw his objection.

Mr. BACHMANN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. MONTAGUE. Yes. Mr. BACHMANN. I want to ask the gentleman from Wis

consin if he does not think from the explanation which the gentleman from Virginia has made, the documents he has here, and the evidence he has presented, we can get around the gentleman's objection about establishing a principle in this particular case? Does not this case rest upon a sound principle and is it not a meritorious case and should it not pass here?

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman ought to know, in his brief service in the House which is running now to years, of many instances where persons have been wrongfully severed from the Postal Service and after review have been reinstated, but we do not pay them back salary. We would have hundreds of such cases. This may be a meritorious

elaim, but I do not recall one case where any person has ever sought payment for salary where they had been unjustifiably severed from the service.

Mr. BACHMANN. I understand the amount involved-Mr. STAFFORD. It is not a question of amount. If it

were $250 or $50, I would object. I object, Mr. Speaker.

ANNIE MORAN

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar. H. R. 7734, for the relief of Annie Moran.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. MOUSER. Reserving the right to object, in this case

there is. no question about the negligence of the driver of the postal truck causing the death of this boy. However, the sum of $5,000 is asked, which is the same amount as if he had been the head of the family. He was 24 years of age, and the mother had a right to look to him for future support. She asked for $550 for funeral expenses. At the proper time I want to amend the bill by dividing this amount, making it $2,500, instead of $5,000, and adding the funeral expenses to that.

Mr. BLOOM. That will be satisfactory. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is author

ized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Annie Moran, New York City, the sum of $12,500. Such sum shall be in full satisfaction of all claims against the United States for damage sustained by the said Annie Moran as the result of the death of her son, Edward Moran, who was struck and fatally injured by a United States mail truck in New York City, May 12, 1930.

Committee amendment: Line 6, strike out tl:le figures " $12,500 " and insert in lieu

thereof the figures " $5,000."

Mr. MOUSER. I offer the following amendment to the committee amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Strike out "$5,000" and insert "$3,050."

The amendment to the committee amendment was agreed to.

The committee amendment as amended was agreed to. Mr. MOUSER. Now, Mr. Speaker, I offer the following

attorney's fee amendment. The Clerk read as follows: Provided, That no part of the amount appropriated in this act

in excess of 10 per cent thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, on account of services rendered in connection with said claim. It shall be unlawful for any agent or agents, attorney or attorneys, to exact, collect, withhold, or receive any sum of the amount appropriated in this act in excess of 10 per cent thereof on account of services rendered in connection with said claim, any contract to the contrary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not exceeding $1,000.

The amendment was agreed to. The bill as amended was ordered to be engrossed and


JOSEPH J. BAYLIN

The Clerk read the next bill on the Private Calendar, S. 1021, for the relief of Joseph J. Baylin . .

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. MOUSER. Reserving the right to object, I would like

some explanation of this bill. I can not understand why this money should be refunded.

Mr. PALMISANO. A number of similar bills have been passed by the House, and, as I understand, some have been passed this afternoon. The bondsman in this case made all efforts to apprehend the culprit and have him brought to justice.

Mr. MOUSER. But the bondsman did not produce him. The authorities picked him up without anything being done by the bondsman. It seems to me idle to require a man to put up a bond in a case and then if the accused flees and later on he is caught by the Government officials without any assistance of the bondsman, the bondsman should come

14204 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 in and ask the Treasury of the United States to refund the amount of the bond. That simply encourages citizens to go on bonds of crooks promiscuously.

. Mr. PALMISANO. I would agree with the gentleman if the facts were as the gentleman says.

Mr. MOUSER. I do not see anything in the report which shows where the bondsman had anything to do with the apprehension and return to custody of the accused. I may be wrong.

Mr. PALMISANO. I agree with the gentleman, if it had been a case where nothing had been done by the bondsman himself in apprehending the accused. In that case the money ought not to be refunded; but in this case everything possible was done by the bondsman, and the accused was afterward produced in court and pleaded guilty. U the gentleman will notice, in the report Mr. Woodcock, who was then United States district attorney for the district of Maryland, did not object to the refund of this amount. This passed the Senate in the last Congress, but for some reason failed to pass here.

Mr. MOUSER. Did the gentleman say that Mr. Woodcock recommended that this be passed?

Mr. PALMISANO. No; I say that he did not object to it. Mr. MOUSER. This is what I want to get at. The re

port of the Claims Committee indicates that the accused was apprehended through the diligence of the bondsman, but I can not find in the report, at least my memory does not serve.me to that extent now, where he did anything, and I am wondering where the Claims Committee got the impression from the evidence that which warranted it in making a deduction which authorized it to include the last statement in the report.

Mr. PALMISANO. This is a Senate bill. Evidently they got the report from the Senate. Of course, I am not familiar with that except that the statement claims that he did produce this man in court and there is no denial of these facts by the former district attorney, who is now the prohibition director.

Mr. MOUSER. I would like to hear from the chairman of the Committee on Claims. U this is like other forfeitures which have not been objected to, I shall not object, but

·I do think that it is time that we quit holding out encouragement to people to promiscuously go on bonds when they do not know the accused or know anything about the innocence or guilt of the accused, and then come back here believing that as a matter of mere procedure we are going to refund the amount paid in forfeiture out of the Treasury of the United States, regardless of any effort expended on their part to produce the accused in court.

Mr. PALMISANO. It was evidently investigated by the Senate and this man was produced in court.

Mr. MOUSER. How was he produced, and where is the evidence?

Mr. PALMISANO. I am sorry the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. ScHAFER] is riot here.

Mr. MOUSER. I ask unanimous consent that this go over without prejudice.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio?

There was no objection. OSWALD BAUCH

The next business was the bill (H. R. 6501> for the relief of Oswald Bauch.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to ob

ject. There is a very brief report, and what is stated there shows that this claimant apparently is receiving compensation at the rate of $70 a month. If he is receiving compensation for this injury, why should he receive in addition thereto $10,000?

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the bill go over without prejudice.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection.

R. B. BAUGH The next business was the bill (H. R. 10294) to authorize

the Secretary of War to pay toR. B. Baugh, M. D., certain money due him for services rendered as a member of the local board of Smith County, Miss., operating during the World ·war.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. BLACK. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object.

I rise to protect the conscientious objectors of this House from other Members of the House who go outside of their own districts and introduce bills in the districts of other Congressmen. I find that Smith County, Miss., is in the district of my good friend, one of our leadiri.g conscientious objectors, the gentleman fr<>m Mississippi [Mr. CoLLINS], and that the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. CoLLIER], without any regard at all for the proprieties, has gone into the district of my friend CoLLINS, this most conscientious man, and has introduced this bill, a low claims bill. I merely want to call this to the attention of the House.

Mr. BACHMANN. But the gentleman's committee, of which he is chairman, unanimously reported the bill favorably.

Mr. BLACK. Of course, upon the assumption that the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. CoLLINS], in whom I have great faith, is for the bill.

Mr. BACHMANN. And the fact is, there is nothing wrong with it now, is there?

Mr. BLACK. No; but I merely wanted to call the situa-tion to the attention of the House.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc .. That the Secretary of War be, and he fa

hereby, authorized and directed to pay to R. B. Baugh, M. D., out of any funds in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the amount of $300 for services rendered by him as a member of the local board of Smith County, Miss., between the dates ot June, 1917, and March, 1918, inclusive.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, . was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider laid on the table.

CHARLES PARSHALL The next business was the bill (S. 278) for the relief of

Charles Parshall, Fort Peck Indian allottee, of the Fort Peck Reservation, Mont.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the right to object in

order to get an explanation of the bill. Mr. ARENTZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

the bill b.e passed over without prejudice. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection.

ALBERT G. DAWSON The next business was the bill {H. R .. 7191) for the relief of

Albert G. Dawson. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I object.

STEPHEN A. M 1NEIL The next business was the bill <H. R. 620) for the relief of

Stephen A. McNeil. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? Mr. EATON of Colorado. I object.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted as

follows: To Mr. MITCHELL, for an indefinite time, on account of

important business. To Mr. LANHAM, for one week, on account of important

business. NAVY APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I call up the conference report on the bill (H. R. 11452) making appropriations for the Navy Department and the naval service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, and I ask

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14205 unanimous consent that the statement may be read in lieu of the report.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the

gentleman from Kansas? There was no objection. The Clerk read the statement. The conference report and statement are as follows:

CONFERENCE REPORT

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 11452) making appropriations for the Navy Department and the naval service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate recede . from its amendments numbered 8, 9, 21, 22, 23, 28, 32, 48, 49, 51, 52, 58, 59, and 60.

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments of the Senate numbered 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 57, and agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 2: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 2, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment insert the following: " in other than civil government and literature, and cost of special instruction "; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 18: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 18, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Restore the matter stricken out by said amendment, amended to read as follows: "(not to exceed an average of 5,910 chief petty officers and an average of 850 chief petty officers under acting appointment) "; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 20: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 20, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment insert the following: "in excess of four"; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 33: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 33, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment insert the following: "and the compensation of any greater number than 90 "; and the Senate agree to the same.

The committee of conference have not agreed on amendments numbered 1, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 24, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, and 43.

W. A. AYRES, w. B. OLIVER,

BURTON L. FRENCH <Except as to amendment No. 50),

JOHN TABER <Except as to amendment No. 50),

Managers on the part of the House. FREDERICK HALE, HENRY W. KEYES, HIRAM BINGHAM, E. S. BROUSSARD,

PARK TRAMMELL, Managers on the part of the Senate.

STATEMENT

The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to H. R. 11452, a bill making appropriations for the Navy Department and the naval service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon and recommended in the accompanying conference report as to each of such amendments, namely:

On Nos. 2 and 3, relating to the appropriation "Pay, miscellaneous ": Excepts " history " and " languages " from the proposal of the House designating subjects to be omitted from postgraduate instruction, and strikes out the proposal of the House requiring expenditures for the collection and classification of information from abroad and at home to be accounted for specifically, as proposed by the Senate.

On Nos. 4, 5, 6, and 7, relating to naval training stations: Appropriates $160,200 for the station at San Diego, Calif., as proposed by the Senate, instead of $166,300, as proposed by the House; appropriates $202,000 for the station at Newport, R. I., as proposed by the Senate, instead of $182,000, as proposed by the House; appropriates $245,000 for the station at Great Lakes, m., as proposed by the Senate, instead of $252,900, as proposed by the House; and appropriates $225,000 for the station at Hampton Roads, Va., as proposed by the Senate, instead of $231,000, as proposed by the House.

On Nos. 8 and 9: Appropriates $3,077,686 for the Naval Reserve, as proposed by the House, instead of $3,727,686, as proposed by the Senate.

On No. 11: Amends the House proposal to deny funds for training or practice cruises of members of the Naval Reserve Officers' Training Corps so as to permit such cruises at the personal expense of such persons, as proposed by the Senate.

On No. 12: Imposes a limitation of $15,000 upon the appropriation for pay of the class cf employees at the Naval Home, Philadelphia, Pa., whose compensation is adjustable to correspond so far as may be practicable to the rates established by the classification act, as amended, for the departmental service in the District of Columbia, as proposed by the Senate.

On Nos. 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, and 27, relating to the appropriation" Pay, subsistence, and transportation of naval personnel": Restores the limitation proposed by the House upon the number of chief petty officers and chief petty officers under acting appointment, amended to provide for an average number of each, instead of a specific number, as proposed by the House; provides for the employment of four retired officers on active duty, instead of six, as proposed by the Senate, and none, as proposed by the House; restores the proposal of the House looking to the ultimate abolition of the assigned class of the Fleet Naval Reserve; imposes limitations upon expenditures for the transportation of dependents of officers and enlisted men and for travel by officers, midshipmen, and female nurses, as proposed by the House; corrects the text, as proposed by the Senate; strikes out, as proposed by the Senate, the restriction proposed by the House upon the employment of civilian and naval personnel required for the care of patients of the Veterans' Administration, and strikes out, as proposed by the Senate, the House provision respecting the compensation of retired officers filling civil offices or positions.

On No. 28, relating to the appropriation " Maintenance, Bureau of Supplies and Accounts": Restores the proposal of the House to limit expenditures on account of the transportation of privately owned automobiles to the return to the United States of such vehicles as may be in transit to or from points outside of the continental limits of the United States or have been transported to such outside points at public expense on or by the date of the approval of the naval appropriation bill, striking out the substitute proposed by the Senate simply to impose an expenditure limitation of $5,000.

On No. 30: Reappropriates $150,000 of the unexpended balance of the appropriation " Fuel and transportation, Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, 1932," for the same objects for which originally made, as proposed by the Senate.

On No. 31: Corrects the text of the appropriation " Medical Department," as proposed by the Senate.

On Nos. 32 and 33, relating to the appropriation "Maintenance, Bureau of Yards and Docks": Strikes out the authorization proposed by the Senate to furnish paving material to the city of Bremerton, Wash., for paving that portion of a street abutted by the Puget Sound Navy Yard,

14206 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 and excludes from the limitation proposed by the House upon expenditures for the maintenance, operation, and repair of motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles the compensation of enlisted chauffeurs in excess of 90, as proposed by the Senate, amended so as more clearly to express the intent of such exclusion.

On No. 34: Appropriates $2,490,UUU Ior puDllt worKs, BUreau of Yards and Docks, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $2,790,000, as proposed by the House.

On No. 39: Authorizes contractual obligations for the procurement of new airplanes and their equipment, spare parts, and accessories to the extent of $5,715,000, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $5,000,000, as proposed by the House.

On Nos. 40, 41, and 42, relating to the Naval Academy: Appropriates $284,130 for the pay of civilian instructors, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $269,000, as proposed by the House; imposes a limitation of $236,000 upon the appropriation for pay of employees whose compensation is adjustable to correspond so far as may be practicable to the rates established by the classification act, as amended, for the departmental service in the District of Columbia, as proposed by the Senate, and strikes out a conjunction, incident to another amendment, as proposed by the Senate.

On Nos. 44 to 52, both inclusive, relating to the Marine Corps: Reappropriates $129,101 for pay of officers on the active list, as proposed by the Senate; increases the limitation on flying pay from $122,018, as proposed by the House, to $138,148, as proposed by the Senate; strikes out the provision proposed by the House prohibiting the commissioning of additional officers in the Marine Corps prior to June 1, 1933, as proposed by the Senate, reappropriates $100,000 for pay of enlisted men, active list, as proposed by the Senate; restores the proposal of the House looking to the ultimate abolition of the assigned class of the Fleet Marine Corps Reserve; limits expenditures for travel by officers, as proposed by the House; prohibits expenditures on account of sending additional marines to Nicaragua to supervise an election there, as proposed by the Senate; limits expenditures for transportation of dependents of officers and enlisted men, as proposed by the House, and strikes out the proposal of the Senate to make the sums provided for the Marine Corps Reserve available exclusively for such activity.

On No. 53: Strikes out, as proposed by the Senate, the proposal of the House to reduce the limit of cost of modernizing the U. S. S. New Mexico, Mississippi, and Idaho from a total of $30,000,000 to a total of $27,000,000.

On Nos. 54, 55, 56, and 57, relating to the appropriation "Increase of the NavY": Appropriates $15,063,000 for construction and machinery, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $23,063,000, as proposed by the House; appropriates $3,-000,000 for armor, armament, and ammunition, as proposed by the Senate, instead of $4,167,333, as proposed by the House; excludes the cost of material on hand from the total cost of certain submarines and destroyers, as proposed by the Senate, and increases the total cost of destroyers Nos. 350, 351, and 352, exclusive of material on hand, from $4,-569,000 each, as proposed by the House, to $4,844,000 each, as proposed by the Senate.

On No. 58: Strikes out the proposal of the Senate providing that hereafter the existing scale of wages applicable to civil employees shall be the minimum rates payable, prohibiting the average pay for any trade or occupation from being less than when such schedule became effective, and forbidding a reduction of pay by resort to assigning lowerpaid employees to work of a character usually performed by higher-paid employees.

In No. 59: Strikes out the proposal of the Senate to make appropriations interchangeable.

On No. 60: Strikes out the proposal of the Senate requiring all unobligated balances of annual appropriations heretofore made to be covered into the Treasury on July 1, 1932.

The committee of conference report in disagreement the following amendments of the Senate:

On No. 1, relating to the attendance upon meetings of technical organizations by civilian employees.

On No. 10, -relating to reserve officers employed on extended active duty.

On No. 13, relating to the purchase of patents pertaining to radio control.

On No. 14, relating to the number of officers of the Navy on the active list.

On Nos. 15, 16, 17, 19, and 24, relating to the appropriation for increased pay for making aerial flights. _ On No. 29, relating to the disposition of cash receipts by NavY and Marine Corps disbursing officers.

On Nos. 35 and 36, relating to a new naval hospital at Philadelphia, Pa.

On Nos. 37 and 38, relating to the appropriation "Aviation, Navy," and being incident to the appropriation for increased pay for making aerial flights.

On No. 43: Making the appropriation" Current and miscellaneous expenses, Naval Academy," available for the engraving of trophies and badges.

W. A. AYRES, W. B. OLIVER, BURTON L. FRENCH, JOHN .TABER,

Managers on the part of the House.

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question. The previous question was ordered. The conference report was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the first amend

ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 1: Page 2, line 2, after the word "employees,"

insert "including not to exceed $1,500 for the expenses of attend~ ance, at home and abroad, upon meetings of technical, profes" sional, scientific, and other similar organi2a.t1ons when, in the judgment of the Secretary of the Navy, such attendance would be of benefit in the conduct of the work of the Navy Department."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur in the Senate amendment.

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend-

ment in disagreement. -The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 10: On page 12, in line 20, after the words

"Naval Reserve," strike out the colon and all of the proviso end" ing in line 2 on page 13.

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur with an amendment which I have sent to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves that the House recede and concur tn Senate

amendment No. 10 by restoring the matter stricken out by said amendment, amended to read as follows:

"Provided, That no appropriation contained tn this act shall be available to pay more than one officer of the Naval Reserve and one officer of the Marine Corps Reserve above the grade of lieutenant or captain, respectively, the pay and allowances of their grade for the performance of active duty other than the perform" ance of drills or other equivalent instruction or duty, or appro· priate duties, and/or the performance of 15 days• active training duty, and other officers above such grades employed on such class of active duty shall not be entitled to or be paid a greater rate of pay and allowances than authorized by law for a lieutenant of the Navy or a captain of the Marine Corps entitled to not exceeding 10 years' longevity pay."

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend·

ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 13: Page 18, line 22, after the word "control,"

insert the following: "and the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to enter into contract for purchase of the patents covered by this license agreement, subject to appropriations therefor."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman explain the neces· sity of authmizing the Secretary of the Navy to purchase patents, as is provi~ed in this amendment?

Mr. AYRES. This applies to what are known as the Hammond patents on radio control. Several years ago Con-

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 1420'l gress authorized and made an appropriation to purchase these patents. The appropriation was not used and finally was covered back into the Treasury. It has been contended that the repeal of the appropriation, by implication, repealed the authorization. The Navy Department is now using the patents under a license agreement, and the purpose of the amendment is to give the department the right to purchase, subject to appropriation. A contract has been entered into on the part of the Navy and the patentee, whereby we pay $90,000 for leasing these patents over an 18-month period, with the provision that in case they should be purchased whatever sum has been paid for leasing will be applied on the purchase price.

Mr. STAFFORD. Has any set price been agreed upon as to what the patentee will sell his rights to the Government for?

Mr. AYRES. Yes; $720,000. The SPEAKER. The question is on agreeing to the motion

of the gentleman from Kansas. The motion was agreed to. . The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend

ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 14: Page 23, beginnlng in line 6, after the word

" orders," strike out all down to and including the word " o:tll.cers " in line 16.

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur with an amendment which I have sent to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves that the House recede and concur in amend

ment No. 14 by restoring the matter stricken out by said amendment, amended to read as follows: "{not to exceed 908 o:tll.cers of the Medical Corps, 186 officers of the Dental Corps, 556 o:tll.cers of the Supply Corps, 83 officers of the Chaplain Corps, 233 officers of the Construction Corps, 109 officers of the Civil Engineer Corps, and 1,461 warrant and commissioned warrant officers: Provided, That if the number of warrant and commissioned warrant officers and officers 1n any staff corps holding commission on July 1, 1932, 1s in excess of the number herein stipulated, such excess officers may be retained in the Navy until the number 1s reduced to the limitations imposed by this act.)"

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman explain the latter part of the proposed amendment, which seems to negative, to a large extent, the purpose that the House had in mind in placing a limit of numbers in these respective grades?

Mr. AYRES. There happen to be a few officers in the service in excess of the numbers specified in the original provision. The amendment is designed to take care of that situation.

Mr. STAFFORD. Then, as I understand, it only takes care of those few who are in excess of the numbers designated?

Mr. AYRES. That is it exactly. Mr. STAFFORD. It was the purpose of the House amend

ment to exclude them. I suppose some favorites levied hard to have them excepted from the purview of the amendment.

The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Kansas.

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend

ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 15: Page 23, line 16, strike out "$30,653,486"

and Insert 1n lieu thereof " $31,513,421."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, I offer a preferential motion to concur in the Senate amendment.

The SPEAKER. The motion to recede and concur is a preferential motion. The gentleman from Kansas has offered a preferential motion. The question is on the motion to recede and concur.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask for a division of the motion. '

The SPEAKER. The crtteStion is on the motion to recede. The motion to recede was agreed to.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question now is on the motion to concur.

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur with an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves to concur in Senate amendment No. 15 with

an amendment.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, I move to concur. The SPEAKER. The motion to amend takes precedence

over the motion to concur at this stage of the proceedings. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYiu:s moves to concur in Senate amendment No. 15 with

an amendment, as follows: In lieu of the sum inserted by said amendment insert " $31,479,106."

The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion of the gentleman from Kansas. ·

The motion to concur with an amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend

ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 16: Page 23, line 17, strike out "$1,014,250"

and insert in lieu thereof "$1,191,850."


The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves to recede and concur in Senate amendment No.

16 with the following amendment: In lieu of the sum proposed by sald amendment insert the following: H $1,157,535 (none of which shall be available for increased pay for making aerial filghts by nonfiying officers or observers except eight officers above the grade of lleutenant commander, to be selected by the Secretary o! the Navy)."

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, on that I reserve the point of order.

I want to ask the gentleman from Kansas the purpose of his amendment.

I! I remember correctly, when the bill was before us the entire question of aerial flights was agreed to in the House. The amount was reduced and the bill went over to the Senate. Now we come back with an entirely new proposition, and it surely is not a compromise, and it surely is subject to a point of order, because the Senate bill provides a new amount. The House bill had an amount in there. There is nothing about any limitation on the number of :flights.

Mr. AYRES. I am perfectly willing to give the gentleman the information.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker--Mr. LAGUARDIA. I would like to have the information

pending the time the gentleman from Wisconsin can bring up his reinforcements.

Mr. STAFFORD. I have been rather effective with my reinforcements so far, I may say to the gentleman from New. York.

Mr. AYRES. The House provided $1,014,250 for increased pay for officers of the Navy for making aerial flights. This sum was $271,890 less than the Budget estimate for such purpose. As agreed to by the conferees, the figure has been raised to $1,157,535, which is $143,285 more than proposed by the House and $128,605 less than the Budget estimate. This Senate increase, as finally agreed to, it is proposed to meet by reducing the appropriation for naval aviation by a like amount.

As passed by the Senate the reduction below the Budget for flying pay was reduced to $94,290. This amount the Navy Department intended to meet administratively in the following manner: Reduce nonaviator aerological officers on :tlight status from 12 to O; reduce medical officers on flying status from 26 to 15; reduce miscellaneous flight orders from 14 to 6; diwontinue student training in lighter-than-air; curtail heavier-than-air student training; detach 10 lighterthan-air aviators from flight status--account Los Angeles going out of commission.

The House conferees insisted upon a larger reduction and the amendment I have proposed provides for a further reduction of $34,315, to be met by refusing flying pay to more

14208 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 than eight nonflying officers, who must be above the grade of lieutenant commander. It may be necessary to curtail in other directions to meet the entire amount of the reduction to which we have agreed. I might add, Mr. Speaker, that the conferees were fortunate in having the counsel of a recognized authority upon aviation matters. I refer to the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM], who was one of the Senate conferees.

Mr. LAGUARDIA .. How many flight surgeons are there? Mr. AYRES. I should say about 18. Mr. LAGUARDIA. They do a very important piece of re-

search work. · Mr. CHINDBLOM. Mr. Speaker, in order to obviate the

necessity for a point of order I move that the House recede and concur, wltich is a preferential motion.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. What becomes of the point of order? Mr. CHINDBLOM. That will be pending if my motion is

defeated. Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, the question of the point

of order is not free from doubt, I will confess. We have here an appropriation which was limited as it passed the House in its use to certain stated puiposes, and there is now before the Hou.Se for consideration appropriation for increased pay for making aerial flights.

The Senate increased the amount that may be available for that purpose by some one hundred and seventy odd thousand dollars. The question now before the House is whether the committee can offer any germane amendment as if it were an original proposition. I am assuming the House agrees to recede from their disagreement and if it is an original proposition then I maintain the committee has the right under the Holman rule to limit, if it is germane, the purpose for which this sum may be utilized. So the committee offers an amendment within the appropriation as it passed the House and as agreed to by the Senate, namely, instead of $1,014,250, the House appropriation, and the Senate appropriation, $1,191,850, it makes the amount $1,157,-535, with a limitation. That is just the same as determining how the excess appropriation that is proposed may be utilized. The committee says, "none of which shall be available for increased pay for making aerial flights by nonfiying officers or observers except eight officers above the grade of lieutenant commander, to be selected by the Secretary of the Navy." I think if it were an original proposition, as it must be considered, this amendment would be in order in the House under the Holman rule, seeking to limit the authorization as to how this money should be expended.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. The gentleman is losing his punch in this argument.

Mr. STAFFORD. I will determine whether I have lost my punch after the Speaker rules.

The SPEAKER. The point of order has not been made yet. ·

Mr. CHINDBLOM. Mr. Speaker, I have offered a preferential motion to recede and concur.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from lllinois offers a preferential motion to recede and concur in the Senate amendment.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask for a division of the question.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Wisconsin demands a division. The question is on receding.

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The question is on the motion to concur. Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede

and concur with an amendment. Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, I have made a point of

order on the amendment. The SPEAKER. The gentleman has not stated his point

of order. Mr. LAGUARDIA. The gentleman from Wisconsin has

been arguing it for the last 5 or 10 minutes. Mr. STAFFORD. I was arguing under the impression

that the gentleman had made his point of order. Mr. LAGUARDIA. I have made the point of order that

the amendment is beyond the jurisdiction of the conferees.

The SPEAKER. Yes; but the gentleman from New York did not make the point of order after the preferential motion was made.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. I certainly did, as quickly as I could speak without being rude to the Speaker.

The SPEAKER. The Chair agrees with the gentleman that he made it as quickly as he could, but the first point of order would not apply to the motion.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. But immediately after the division of the question I renewed the point of order.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state his point of qrder.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. I make the point of order that the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas is beyond the power and scope of the conferees; that it brings in entirely new matter; that the difference between the Senate bill and the House bill is simply one of amount, and we can not at this stage of the proceedings legislate on the bill.

The SPEAKER. On the 'grounds the gentleman makes his point of order the Chair will overrule it. The question is on the motion to concur with. an amendment.

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER. Let the Chair say in connection with

that point of order that if the gentleman from New York had made the point of order that the proposed amendment was not germane to the Senate amendment, the Chair thinks it would have been sufficient, but the gentleman from New York said it was beyond the jurisdiction of the conferees, and the motion to concur with an amendment is not subject to that point of order.

The Clerk will report the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows: On page 23 of the bill, in line 20, strike out "$40,457,181" and

insert " $41,317,116."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur with an amendment. . The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the amendment.

The .Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves that the House recede and concur in Senate

amendment No. 17 with an amendment: In lieu of the sum proposed by said amendment insert: "$41,.282,801."

The motion was agreed to. Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, a parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. GOSS. What was the amendment offered by the

committee? I understood the House would recede and concur with an amendment.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk reported the amendment, and the Chair said that without objection the motion to recede and concur with ~n amendment would be agreed to, and there was no objection.

Mr. GOSS. What about the amendment? The SPEAKER. It is concurred in. Mr. GOSS. May I inquire what the amendment was? The SPEAKER. The Clerk reported the amendment

changing the amount only, and the Chair announced that, without objection, the motion to recede and concur with an amendment was agreed to, and there was no objection.

The Clerk will report the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 19: On page 25 of the bill, in line 20, strike out

"$130,751,221" and insert 1n lieu thereof "$131,611,156."


The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves to recede and concur in Senate amendment

No. 19 with an amendment as follows: In 11eu of the sum inserted by the Senate amendment insert " $131,576,841."

The motion to recede and concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk Will report the next amendment in disagreement.

'1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14209 The Clerk read as follows: · Amendment No. 24: On page 28 of the blll, in line 12. strike out

" $149,052,211 " and insert in lieu thereof " $149,912,146."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker,'! move that the House recede and concur in the Senate amendment with an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Mr. AYRES moves to recede and concur in Senate ll.IIlendment

No. 24 with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the sum inserted by the Senate amendment insert "$149,877,831."

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman briefly state what was accomplished by the conference in the way of reduction, so far as the total of the bill is concerned, as agreed to in conference. I think the RECORD ought to show just what economies have been effected by the efforts of the House and Senate conferees.

Mr. AYRES. The bill as it passed the House, I will say to the gentleman from Wisconsin, carried $326,353,459. The bill as passed by the Senate carried $318,233,591, or a reduction below the House bill of $8,119,868. As agreed to by the conferees the bill carries $317,583,591, or a reduction below the House bill of $8,769,868.

In its final stage, therefore, assuming that the action of the conferees will be confirmed. the bill carries $40,678,532 less than the sum of the current appropriations and $24,-093,859 less than the sum of the Budget estimates.

The Senate reductions run to three items, namely: Public works----------------------------------------- $300,000 Increase of the Navy, construction and machinery ______ 8, 000, 000 Increase of the Navy, armor, armament, and ammuni-

tion------------------------------------------------ 1,167,333

Total----------------------------~-~----------- 9,467,333 These were partly offset by an increase of a like number

(3) of items, namely: Naval Reserve-for 15-day training____________________ $650, 000 Pay of the Navy-for pay of ensigns recently commis·

·stoned _______ ..:._____________________________________ 682,335 Naval Academy-for pay of five civ111an instructors____ 15, 130

Total------------------------------------------ 1,347,465

Making the net reduction $8,119,868, as previously stated. In addition to these changes as to direct appropriations,

the Senate added reappropriations totaling $379,101 and provided $1,000,000 for commencing the construction of the naval hospital at Philadelphia. Pa., to be charged to the naval hospital fund. The effect of these additions upon the Treasury will be the same as if direct appropriations had

- The motion to recede and concur in the Senate amendment, with an amendment, was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amendment in disagreement.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 29: Page 31, line 12, after the figures, insert a

colon and the following proviso: "And provided further, That, without deposit to the credit of

the Treasurer of the United States and withdrawal on money requisitions, receipts of public moneys !rom sales or other sources by officers of the Navy and Marine Corps on disbursing duty and charged in their official accounts may be used by them as required for current expenditures, all necessary bookkeeping adjustments of appropriations, funds. and accounts to be made in the settlement of their disbursing accounts."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and roncur in the Senate amendment.

The motion was agteed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend-

ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 35: On page 40, after line 8. insert: "The avallablllty of the $200,000 authorized by the act approved

February 12, 1931, public numbered 620, of the Seventy-first Congress, to be expended from the naval hospital fund for the acquisition of land for a site for the hospital buildings at Philadelphia, Pa., authorized by said act, is hereby extended to include investigations by contract or otherwise of subsurface conditions at said site."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur.

The motion was agreed to. The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the next amendment

in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 36, page 40, line 16, insert the following: " Naval Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa.: To continue construction of

the public works authorized by the act entitled 'An act to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to proceed with the construction of certain public works at Philadelphia, Pa., and for other purposes,' approved February 12, 1931 ( 46 Stat. 1091), subject to the limit of cost fixed by such act, the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to expend $1,000,000 from the naval hospital fund for the buildings, equipment, accessories, and appurtenances authorized by such act, in addition to the expenditures authorized from such fund by such act."


The Clerk read the amendment, as follows:

been provided. So the Senate reduction actually may be Amendment No. 36: In lieu of the matter inserted by said 'd t b $ 7 7 amendment insert the following:

sal o e 6, 40, 67. "Naval Hospital, Philadelphia, Pa.: To continue construction The House conferees insisted upon the disagreement of of the public works authorized by the act entitled 'An act to

the House to the amendment of the Senate adding $650,000 authoriz-e the Secretary of the Navy to proceed with the confor 15-day training for members of the Naval Reserve and struction of certain public works at Philadelphia, Pa., and for the Senate has receded from this amendment. In no other other purposes,' approved February 12• 1931 <46 Stat. 1091), the Secretary of the Navy is authorized to expend $1,000,000 from respect does the action of the conferees affect the amounts the naval hospital fund for the buildings, equipment, accessories, of money carried by the bill as passed by the Senate. utllities, and appurtenances authorized by such act, in addit:lon

M ST 11. 1:FFORD s th H nf 'th th to the expenditures authorized from such fund by such act: r. ~ · o e ouse co erees, Wl e co- Provided, That the limit of cost of such buildings, equipment,

operation of the Senate conferees, have reduced still further accessories, utilities, and appurtenances is hereby reduced from the total appropriations- $3,000,000 to $2,250,000, and additional appropriations for such

Mr. AYRES. To $8,769,868 below the House bill work may be made from the naval hospital fund to the extent Mr. STAFFORD. And a reduction. in conference of one- that the Secretary of the Navy may approve."

half million dollars. Mr. DARROW. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. AYRES. Six hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Mr. AYRES. I yield. Mr. WOOD of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask Mr. DARROW. As I understand, in making this amend-

for a little information, and perhaps I should have asked ment there is no intention on the part of the conferees to it sooner. In the appropriation for fiight .pay is provision fail to carry out the present plans for the building of this made for the pay of the pioneers in naval aviation? hospital?

Mr. AYRES. I do not think there is any question about Mr. AYRES. I will say that there is no intention except that at all, but, of course, that will be largely an admin- to carry out the original plan. · istrative matter. Mr. DARROW. As the gentleman knows, we have already

Mr. VvOOD of Indiana. r" think those who were the appropriated $100,000, and in this cutting down of the appioneers in this bnsiness and have had to do with design- propriation it is the plan to build the hospital according ing and construction ought to be taken care of in preference to the plans as they have been prepared. to some of the other gentlemen. Mr. AYRES. The gentleman is correct.

Mr. AYRES. I will say to the gentleman from Indiana The motion was agreed to. that there is nothing in the bill that prevents that being The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report the next amend-done. - I ment in disagreement.

LXXV-895

14210 _CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE ·JuNE 28

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 37: Page 41, line 11, strike out ,. $13,578,805"

~nei insert " $13,401,205."

Mr. AYRES. I move that the House recede and concur wtth an amendment.

The Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Amendment No. 37: In lieu of the sum inserted by said amend·

ment, insert " $13,435,520."


ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 38: Page 42, line 8, strike out "$25,388,705 ..

and insert " $25,211,105."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move to recede and concur with an amendment.

The Clerk read the amendment, as follows: Amendment No. 38: In lieu of the sum inserted by said amend·

ment , insert "$25,245,420."


ment in disagreement. The Clerk read as follows: Amendment No. 43: Page 44, line 6, after the word "purposes,"

tnsert "and engraving of trophies and badges."

Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House recede and concur.

The motion was agreed to. On motion of Mr. AYREs, a motion to reconsider the sev·

eral votes was laid on the table. Mr. AYRES. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

extend my remarks on the conference report. The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. PITI'ENGER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con

sent to extend my remarks on the conference report, to show that I am opposed to it.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. PITI'ENGER. Mr. Speaker, I am opposed to adopt

ing the conference report on H. R. 11452, the naval appropriation bill. The conferees have agreed to economize at the expense of the Naval Reserve, and, in my opinion, the Naval Reserve is just as important as any other branch of the Navy. The House bill as passed by the Senate was amended so as to increase the appropriation for the Naval Reserve. The increase was $650,000. That Senate amendment ought to be adopted by the House. I know that what I say is going to be futile. I know that the steam roller is working and that the conference report will be passed without opportunity to offer amendments or make any changes in the program of the conferees.

But I want to protest this procedure. It is false economy. It is a clear attempt, as I indicated some time ago in a speech on the floor of the House, on the part of some Navy Department officials to economize at the expense of the Naval Reserve, so that other branches of the Navy may have more funds. Such an attitude is unfair. This Senate amendment is still below the Budget estimate. As a matter of fact, let us keep the record straight. The House committee was going to follow the Budget estimate. After the hearings on the bill were closed Navy Department officials, without giving opportunity to oppose their plans, came before the Naval Affairs Committee and asked that the amounts for the Naval Reserve be reduced. This was an unusual thing to do. It was a wrong policy for the Navy to pursue. We have at Duluth, Minn., a Naval Reserve vessel, the Paducah. We do not want it junked, nor do we want the efficiency of the Naval Reserve there lessened in any way.

I am opposed to adoption of the report of the conferees, and the following memorandum sustains the correctness of my position: :MEMORANDUM REGARDING APPROPRIATION I'OR ANNUAL TRAINING DUTY

FOR THE UNITED STATES NAVAL RESERVE

The Naval Reserve budget for the fiscal year 1933, as submitted to Congress. contemplated an appropriation of $3,840,000, a de-

crease of $780,835 from 1932. This reduction was cheerfully accepted by the reserve in view of existing conditions. The Naval Reserve appropriation, as passed by the House, provided only $3,077,686, or a total decrease from the previous year of $1,543,149, or 34 per cent. This is $762,314 under the Budget and eliminates annual training cruises for the Navy's civ111an component.

A similar condition existed in regard to the Army's civilian components, which was corrected by the House. The United States has by far the smallest naval reserve of any of the treaty powers {approximately 40,000 officers and men).

Present foreign relations and domestic conditions demand an adequate national defense. To meet this condition the War Department and the Army have advocated and procured training duty from the House for approximately 250,000 of its civ111an components.

The Naval Reserve is asking that Congress replace the Naval Re· serve active training which will require only $617,710 increase over the House appropriation, and is still less than the Budget figures by $144,604.

It may be stated here that many o1ficers and men of the Naval Reserve are out of work and have looked forward to and counted on this training-duty appropriation as a means of procuring the bare necessities of life for themselves and their families.

Sailors can not be made from books, but only upon ships which are available, as follows: East Coast and Gulf, 5 destroyers (Till· man, Goff, Bainbridge, James, and Taylor), a.nd 7 Eagle boats; Great Lakes, 5 gunboats; West coast, practically entire United States Fleet.

At the present time, the Navy budget has been cut 9 per cent; the Naval Reserve budget 34 per cent; and of the cut absorbed by Navy personnel, the Naval Reserve has absorbed 78 per cent of the total. The Naval Reserve has cheerfully taken a cut under 1932 appropriation of approximately $1,000,000 without complaint, but the elimination of training duty strikes at national safety.

This situation ought to be corrected by the restoration to the Naval Reserve appropriation of this vital item of $617,710.

FARM LEGISLATION

Mr. FULMER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. FULMER. Mr. Speaker, I have remained on my

post of duty, although the campaign in my State has been on since June 14, and I have two opponents opposing me. I felt it would be to the best interest of my constituents to stay on the job because of so many important matters pend· ing in Congress at this time-conference reports on appropriation bills, economy legislation, and various bills of my own. During this period I have been able to get a favorable report from the Agricultural Committee on my bill proposing to extend additional facilities to the actual producers of cotton under the United States cotton grading act passed during the Sixty-seventh Congress, whereby farmers would be able to get the full benefit of the actual grade and staple of cotton, which they are not now getting in many instances. I have also had the privilege of receiving a favora~le report from the Agricultural Committee on my bill authorizing the turning over to the National Red Cross of 40,000,000 bushels of wheat out of the very large surplus of wheat and 500,000 bales of cotton out of the 1,3-00,000 bales being held by the Federal Farm Board. The purpose of this legislation is to help feed and clothe the millions of hungry and naked unemployed people in America to-day.

Not only will this bring about a consumption of a great part of this Federal Farm Board surplus, but, it will be a godsend to millions of people who are unable to buy food, bedding, and clothing. It will also enable cotton mills that are now closing down to continue 1'Uililing as well as give employment to hundreds of their employees who would otherwise be laid off and turned into the ranks of the unemployed. The Federal Farm Board and a great many other people, including quite a few Congressmen, prefer that this surplus wheat and cotton be sold to foreign countries on a credit basis rather than distribute same in this country as above outlined. They know and you know that these countries have already practically repudiated their obligations to the United States contracted during the war, and, therefore, it would be just a gift to foreigners. The Federal Government has already done this in several instances at the expense of the American people. So far as I am concerned in this great hour of need · the American people should come first in every instance.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14211 I have especially stayed on the job for the purpose of

trying to help pilot through the Senate the appropriation bill for the Post Office and Treasury Departments, which is a hard job, especially in a time when so many of the Senators and Congressman are playing politics. Some time earlier in the session I introduced a bill authorizing the Postmaster General to purchase supplies for the Post Office Department from merchandise produced in the United States, although a little higher in price than the same or similar type of merchandise imported into the United States.

I received a favorable report on this bill by the Post Office Committee and was able to amend the Post Office and Treasury Departments appropriation bill so as to carry the provision of this bill, which, as stated, has been pending in the Senate for some time. The reason I have been so deeply interested in this matter is because the Postmaster General is now holding up an order for twine to be used in the post offices of the United States that will be given to cotton mills for cotton twine instead of jute which bas always been used under the present law because in every instance jute twine has been cheaper than cotton. It was my hope that I would be able to pass my net weight cotton bagging bill also before this session of Congress closed. I received a unanimous favorable report from the Agricultural Committee and the bill is now pending on the House Calendar. On Monday Mr. GARNER, Speaker of the House, agreed to recognize me to make a unanimous-consent request to consider the bill for the purpose of its passage. However, as usual, we have Representatives from the cotton States who are more interested in jute mills that are located in their States than they are in the cotton farmers, and I was unable to have this bill considered as above stated for the reason that several Congressmen told the Speaker they would object if the bill were called for consideration. These gentlemen are from the States of North Carolina and Georgia.

The gentleman from Georgia previously objected to this bill when same was up for consideration on the Consent Calendar. I expect to pass this bill during the next session of Congress either by a special rule or when the Agricultural Committee has a day for considering its bills. These bills I have passed and expect to pass would put the cotton South in a position to dispose of and consume between 750,000 and 1,000,000 bales of cotton. I also have a bill pending before the Ways and Means Committee proposing to place a tax on the importation of jute and jute products flooding this country, that if prohibited, we could use an additional two to three million bales of cotton. I have been especially concerned about farm-relief legislation, and one of the main reasons I have remained on my post of duty was because I hoped to be able to get the members of the Agricultural Committee to agree to work out and report a real farm relief bill that would at lea~t give to farmers the cost of production on their major farm products.

For the past 10 or 12 years farmers have been promised legislation that would place them on a basis of equality with industry and other lines of bl.ldiness; however, up to this time these promises ba ve not been fulfilled. I want to state now as I have stated in practically every speech I have made upon the floor of the House, as well as in my various remarks in the committee, that until something is done to give farmers a fair price for that which they produce normal prosperity will be long drawn out.

Some years ago we passed the equalization-fee legislation, and it was promptly vetoed by Mr. Coolidge and later by President Hoover. The Republican Party then gave us the Federal marketing act under the supervision of the Federal Farm Board. I still maintain that the marketing act is a very good piece of legislation, but under the interpretation placed upon this legislation, and the rules and regulations promulgated by this board, under which they have· administered the act, it has proven to be an absolute failure so far as rendering farmers any appreciable service. I especially want to get before the House the history of farm-relief legislation during this session of the Ct1il.gress. Some time

during the month of April the chairman of the Agricultural Committee, my colleague [Mr. JoNEs], requested the representatives of the various farm organizations of the country who were appearing before the committee in behalf of numerous bills to get together on a bill that would be satisfactory to these leaders and that the committee would give serious consideration to same. Some time in May they came before our committee with a bill which I introduced and which is known as H. R. 11866, or the "Three Title Bill." This bill under titles 1, 2, and 3 contains the following plans:

Title I, equalization-fee plan; Title II, the debenture plan; and Title m, the allotment or cost of production plan. In a regular meeting of the committee I made a motion that this particular bill be taken up as a basis for consideration to be read and amended with the hope that we would be able to work out and report to the House a real bill for the relief of farmers that would be workable under one or all three of these plans, in connection with the various major farm products. The committee read Titles I and II, adopting numerous amendments perfecting these titles. When we came to Title m, I made a motion that the chairman appoint a subcommittee of five members to take up the allotment plan as carried under Title m, along with the McAdoo and Wilson allotment plan, for the purpose of working out an allotment plan that would be sound and workable to be substituted for the allotment plan carried under Title m in the bill The subcommittee, of which I was chairman, along with the legislative drafting service, worked several days on this proposition, finally submitting our plans to the whole committee for consideration.

The subcommittee allotment plan was further considered and perfected, with additional amendments by the whole committee, but when the time came for the final consideration of the 3-title bill for the purpose of adopting all amendments agreed upon, including the perfected allotment plan for Title m, several members of the committee, who seemingly were more interested in playing politics than working out real helpful legislation, made a motion that the bill be reported as originally introduced, without the crossing of a "t" or the dotting of an "i," stating that this was the bill farm leaders wanted and that we should give them what they wanted. They knew that the bill was unworkable as well as ridiculous, especially as to Title m of the bill. At this point I immediately refused to further sponsor the bill. The bill was then reintroduced by my colleague, Mr. NoRTON, of Nebraska, and we went before the Rules Committee, requesting that we be given a nile to consider the Norton bill, H. R. 12617, making the debenture, H. R. 12574, as introduced by Mr. JoNES, chairman of the committee, and the perfected subcommittee allotment plan bill, H. R. 12644, as introduced by me in order to substitute for the Norton bill, or to be offered as a substitute to Titles II and m, respectively, of the Norton bill. We had about three days' hearings before the Rules Committee, but for some reason unknown to me and the farmers of this country, who are daily going into bankruptcy, the rule up to this date has been refused.

At this stage of the game an emergency bill was introduced by my colleague, Mr. KLEBERG, of Texas, which contains practically everything contained in my bill, H. R. 12644. On last Friday the committee met, as I understood, for the purpose of voting out this bill as an emergency piect of legislation which would not or should not interfere with the final passage of the 3-title bill, debenture bill, or my allotment bill. However, I found when the bill was up for consideration that several Members were perfectly willing to so load the bill with amendments, many of them, perhaps, unworkable, that it would be impossible to get consideration in either House during this session of the Congress.

Therefore I want to state, and I believe that every member of the Agricultural Committee will agree with me, that I have done everything that could humanly be done in and out of the committee to have farm legislation considered at this session.

It is my belief that the equalization fee as well as th~ debenture plan will work in the interest of farmers.

14212 CONGRESSIONAL- RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 The allotment plan, which is a practically new plan, is, so

far as I am concerned, the best farmer's bill that has been before the Congress since I have been a Member.

I am willing to go to the country on this type of legislation and I sincerely hope that if this session closes without farm legislation that we will be able to pass H. R. 12644, known as the domestic allotment plan, in the next session of Congress.

NATURALIZATION OF WOMEN BORN IN HAWAll

The SPEAKER laid before the House the following order, which the Clerk read:

. lN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STAT!'.S, June 28, 1932.

Ordered, That the House of Representatives be requested to return to the Senate the blll (H. R. 10829) entitled "An act relating to the naturalization of certain women born in Hawaii."

The SPEAKER. Without objection. the request is agreed to.

There was no objection. STATE BRIDGE OF WEST VIRGINIA

Mr. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table the bill S. 4898, amending an act entitled "An act authorizing the State of West Virginia by and through the State Bridge Commission of West Virginia, or the successors of said coiD.Illission. to acquire, purchase, construct, improve, maintain, and operate bridges across the streams and rivers within said State and/or across boundary-line streams or rivers of said State" approved March 3, 1931.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. BACHMANN. Yes. Mr. STAFFORD. I understand a similar House bill has

already been reported from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

Mr. BACHMANN. It has. Mr. STAFFORD. And it is on the Consent calendar? Mr. BACHMANN. Yes. The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. The Clerk read the bill as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That sectton 5 of an act entitled "An act

authorizing the State ef West Virginia by and through the West Virginia Bridge Commission, OT the successors of said commission, to acquire, purchase, construct, improve, maintain, and operate bridges across the streams and rivers within said State and/or across boundary-line streams or rivers of said State," approved March 3, 1931, be, and the same 1s hereby, amended to read as follows:

" SEc. 5. The State of West Virginia, by and through the West Virginia Bridge Commission, or its successors, may unite or group all or such of said intrastate bridges into one or more separate projects for financing purposes as in its Judgment shall be deemed practicable, and may also unite or group for financing purposes in any one issue of bonds such interstate bridges as the West Virginta Bridge Commisslon shall determine to be competitive, but no particular project or group shall be so united that any such project or group will include both interstate and intrastate bridges: Provided, however, That the bridges herein authorized to be acquired across the Ohio River from the city of Wheeling, w. Va., to an island in the Ohio River, constituting territory of the State of West Virginia, may be included in the same group or groups as the respective connecting bridges from such island to a point in Ohio shall be included, and when sufficient revenues shall have been determ.1ned to be available from the collection of tolls on the bridges terminating in the State of Ohio to pay interest and maintenance charges and to provide a sinking fund ample to retire the bonds at maturity as issued for the acquirement of all said bridges, the commission is authorized to make free of tolls the bridges between the city of Wheeling proper and Wheeling Island.

"If tolls are charged for the use of a bridge or bridges in a project, the rates of toll to be charged for the use of such bridge or bridges embraced in the particular project shall be so adjusted as to provide a fund not to exceed an amo.unt su1ficient to pay the reasonable cost of maintaining, repairing, and operating the bridge or all of the bridges included in the particular project and their approaches under economical management, and not to exceed an amount su1ficient in addition to the foregoing, to provide a s1nking fund sufficient to amortize the aggregate cost of the bridge or all of the bridges embraced in the particular project, and their approaches, including reasonable interest and financing costs, as soon as possible under reasonable charges, bnt within a period not exceeding 25 years from the date of approval of this act. The tolls derived from the bridge or bridges

embraced 1n any particular project may be continued and paid into the appropriate sinking fund until all such costs of the bridges embraced 1n the particular project shAll have been amortized. In any event tolls may be charged on the basis aforesaid for transit over the bridge or bridges in each project for which revenue bonds of said State are Issued, and such tolls may be continued and adjusted at such rates as may be necessary to pay such bonds with interest thereon and any lawful premium for the retirement thereof before maturity, subject only to the power of the Secretary of War or other authorized Federal authority to regulate such rates."

The bill was ordered to be read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

A similar House bill was laid on the table. DISPENSING WITH CALENDAR WEDNESDAY BUSINESS

Mr. BYRNS. Mr. Speaker, there are at least two conference reports to be taken up to-morrow. I ask unanimous consent that the business in order to-morrow on Calendar Wednesday be dispensed with.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection.

RADIO Mr. LAGUARDIA. Mr. Speaker, in that connection last

Tuesday, June 21, 1932, the gentleman from lllinois [Mr. CmNDBLOM] inserted a proposed amendment that he had prepared to the copyright bill. I have read that amendment, and I have gleaned a few ideas from it. I am introducing two bills carrying out the idea of the gentleman from lllinois to ·its. logical conclusion. I ask unanimous consent to insert the two bills in connection with this statement at this point.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? Mr. CHINDBLOM. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to

object, is the gentleman's purpose to introduce the two bills in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of to-day?

Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. Mr. CHINDBLOM. In the regular reading matter of the

RECORD? Mr. LAGUARDIA. Yes. Mr. CHINDBLOM.. I shall not object, although the bills

will be printed in the usual form and be available to all Members.

Mr. LAGUARDIA. I know, but after reading the gentleman's inspired amendment, I want to follow the gentleman's proposition to its logical conclusion.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. The bills referred to are as follows:

A blll to regulate and establl.sh reasonable ltcense fees for patented radio equipment

Be it enacted, etc .. That 1f in any suit for infringement for the unauthorized sale or use of any patented article used 1n the transmission OT receipt of radio programs or messages it shall appear that the suit 1s brought by or in behalf of any association, society, corporation, combination, pool, or group of corporations with interlocking directorates. which deal with or in the Issue or grant of licenses for the use or sale of such patented items and which exercises in the United States a substantial control of the use or sale of such patented articles or any c~ thereof, recovery shall be limited to an amount which will justly compensate the plaintiff !or the use made of such patented articles and shall 1n no event exceed the amount of a reasonable fee or price for a license which, under similar circumstances, would have authorized the infringing act or acts complained of. In determlning the amount of such reasonable fee or price the prices currently paid for such licenses to use OT sell such patented articles under similar circumstances shall be considered. Upon payment of a reasonable price or fee, as found by the court, the infringer shall, in the discretion of the court, be entitled to continue the infringing acts complained of, upon such terms and for such reasonable license period as the court shall deem j:ust. No injunction shall issue in respect to any articles other than those proved to have the subject of infringement.

A bill to regulate and establish reasonable fees for radio advertisements

Be it enacted, etc., That 1f any owner or operator of two or more radiobroadcasting stations, operating under license from the Federal Radio Commission, shall refuse to allow any legitimate advertiser or sponsor of radio programs the use of such stations fOT the broadcasting of his advertisements or sponsored programs at a reasonable price for the privilege therefor, such advertiser may appeal to the Federal Radio Commission to fix such reasonable price or fee, and upon tender o! same he shall be entitled to the use ot

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14213 said broadcasting station or stations for the broadcasting of his advertisements or programs. The reasonable price or fee so fixed shall be limited to an amount which will justly compensate the owner or operator of the station for the use made thereof, and shall i:::l no event exceed the amount of a reasonable fee or price which, under similar circumstances, would have been charged by the owner or operator of the radiobroadcastlng station for the use thereof. In determining the amount of such just compensation or of such reasonable fee, the prices currently paid for similar broadcasting privileges under similar circumstances shall be considered. Upon payment of a reasonable fee, as found by the Federal Radio Commission, the advertiser or sponsor of programs may, in the discretion of the commission, be entitled to continue the use of such station at the same rate of payment and for such reasonable period as the commission may deem just.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED

Mr. PARSONS, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee had examined and found truly enrolled bills, a joint resolution, and a concurrent resolution of the House of the following titles, which were thereupon signed by the Speaker:

H. R. 406. An act to validate a certain conveyance heretofore made by Central Pacific Railway Co., a corporation, and its lessee, Southern Pacific Co., a corporation, to Pacific States Box & Basket Co., a corporation, involving certain portions of right of way in the vicinity of the town of Florin, county of Sacramento, State of California, acquired by the Central Pacific Railway Co. under the act of Congress approved July 1, 1862 <12 Stat. L. 489), as amended by the act of Congress approved July 2, 1864 (13 Stat. L. 356);

H. R. 922. An act for the relief of John Heffron; H. R. 927. An act for the relief of the estate of Franklin

D. Clark; H. R. 996. An act for the relief of Mildred B. Crawford; H. R. 1226. An act for the relief of Edna M. Gilson. H. R. 1383. An act for the relief of certain United States

naval officers. H. R.1700. An act for the relief of Walter S. West. H. R.1804. An act for the relief ·of Frank Woodey; H. R.1903. An act for the relief of Harrison Simpson; H. R.1962. An act for the relief of Noble Jay Hall; H. R. 2418. An act concerning the claim of Jacob Landry. H. R. 2514. An act for the relief of the estate of Samuel

Schwartz; H. R. 2695. An act for the relief of David Albert Robeson; H. R. 2707. An act for the relief of William Alexander

Keys; H. R. 3624. An act for the relief of Minnie Hopkins; H. R. 3644. An act for the relief of Lewis A. McDermott; H. R. 3725. An act for the relief of the First National

Bank of Brenham, Tex.; H. R. 3726. An act for the relief of the Farmers State Bank

of Georgetown, Tex.; H. R. 4059. An act for the relief of Rosamond B. McManus; H. R. 4071. An act for the relief of W. A. Blankenship; H. R. 4264. An act for the relief of Lieut. Col. H. H. Kipp,

United States Marine Corps, retired; H. R. 4743. An act to amend an act entitled "An act to

provide for the promotion of vocational rehabilitation of persons disabled in industry or otherwise and their return to civil employment," approved June 2, 1920, as amended;

H. R. 5059. An act for the relief of Mrs. Johnnie Schley Gatewood;

H. R. 5971. An act for the relief of Grover Cleveland Ballard;

H. R. 6003. An act for the relief of A. L. Marshall; H. R. 6334. An act for the relief of Lieut. M. A. Sprengel; H. R. 6336. An act for the relief of George W. Steele. jr.; H. R. 6444. An act authorizing the Secretary of the NavY,

in his discretion, to deliver to the custody of the Alabama Society of Fine Arts the silver service presented to the United States for the U. S. S. Montgomery;

H. R. 6599. An act to amend the act entitled "An act to authorize the construction and procurement of aircraft and aircraft equipment in the Navy and Marine Corps, and to adjust and define the status of the operating personnel in

connection therewith," approved June 24, 1926, with reference to the number of enlisted pilots in the Navy;

H. R. 6735. An act to authorize the Secretary of the Navy to fix the clothing allowance for enlisted men of the Nayy;

H. R. 6860. An act for the relief of Florence Northcott Hannas;

H. R. 7411. An act for the relief of Alex Bremer; H. R. 7793. An act to secure the departure of certain aliens

from the United States; H. R. 8306. An act for the relief of D. M. Leypoldt Co.; H. R. 9004. An act for the relief of Agnes C. Reder; H. R. 9058. An act to authorize the Secretary of War to

accept on behalf of the United States a tract or parcel of land for park purposes, to the Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park;

H. R. 9369. An act to set aside certain lands around the abandoned Bowdoin well, Montana, for recreational purposes under a lease to Phillips County Post No. 57, of the American Legion, Department of Montana;

H. R. 11361. An act making appropriations for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities chargeable in whole or in part against the revenues of such District for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes;

H. R. 12078. An act to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the east branch of the Niagara River at or near the city of Niagara Falls, N.Y.;

H. J. Res. 408. Joint resolution providing for the filling of vacancies in the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution of the class other than Members of Congress; and

H. Con. Res. 26. House concurrent resolution to establish a commission to be known as the United States Roanoke Colony Commission to report a plan and program for the celebration in 1934 of the three hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the birth of English-speaking civilization in America on Roanoke Island, N.C. · The SPEAKER announced his signature to enrolled bills of

the Senate of the following titles: S. 3784. An act to add certain lands to the Idaho National

Forest, Idaho; S. 4525. An act providing for the transfer of the duties au

thorized and authority conferred by law upon the Board of Road Commissioners in the Territory of Alaska to the Department of the Interior, and for other purposes;

S. 4573. An act authorizing the sale of the southerly end of the breakwater at Indiana Harbor, Ind.; and

S. 4808. An act relating to the acquisition of restricted Indian lands by States, counties, or municipalities.

BILLS PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT

Mr. PARSONS, from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee did on June 27, 1932, present to the President, for his approval, bills of the House of the following titles:

H. R. 3987. An act for the relief of R. K. Stiles & Co.; H. R. 4594. An act to fix the rate of postage on publica

tions mailed at the post office of entry for delivery at another post office within the postal district in which the headquarters or general business offices of the publisher are located;

H. R. 5649. An act to extend the life of "An act to permit a compact or agreement between the States of Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and Montana respecting the disposition and apportionment of the waters of the Columbia River and its tributaries, and for other purposes ,,.;

H. R. 7238. An act to amend section 5 of the suits in admiralty act, approved March 9. 1920;

H. R. 8031. An act to provide for expenses of the Crow and Fort Peck Indian tribal councils and authorized delegates of such tribes;

H. R. 8548. An act authorizing the adjustment of the boundaries of the Siuslaw National Forest, in the State of Oregon, and for other purposes;

H. R. 8777. An act for the relief of J. N. Gord~n;

14214 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 H. R. 9306. An act to amend section 99 of the Judicial

Code <U.S. C., title 28, sec. 180), as amended; H. R. 10161. An act amending the act of May 25, 1918,

with reference to employing farmers in the Indian Service, and for other purposes;

H. R. 10244. An act fixing the fees and limits of indemnity for domestic registered mail based upon actual value and length of haul, and for other purposes;

H. R.10247. An act prescribing fees and corresponding indemnities for domestic insured and collect-on-delivery mail of the third and fourth classes, and for other purposes;

H. R. 10587. An act to provide for alternate jurors in certain criminal cases;

H. R.10590. An act to prohibit the misuse of official insignia;

H. R. 10599. An act to fix the date when sentence of imprisonment shall begin to run, providing when the allowance to a prisoner of time for good conduct shall begin to run, and further to extend the provisions of the parole laws;

H. R. 10683. An act to provide for the conveyance by the United States of a certain tract of land to the borough of Stonington, in the county of New London, in the State of Connecticut;

H. R.11153. An act to extend the times for commencing and completing the construction of a bridge across the Sabine River where Louisiana Highway No. 7 meets Texas Highway No. 87;

H. R. 11639. An act to authorize extensions of time on oil and gas prospecting permits, and for other purposes; and

H. R. 11944. An act to facilitate execution of and economy in field season contracts of the Forest Service.


TARIFF DUTIES ON VEGETABLE AND AND.1AL OILS AND FATS

Mr. SELVIG. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a bill amending the tariff act of 1930 relative to the duties on vegetable and animal oils and fats. I have done so at this time in order that the membership of this body and the country may study its provisions in the hope that action may be secured at an early date.

The provisions of this bill are included at the close of my statement. There may be necessary changes and modifications which can best be formulated when the subject is given more detailed study and consideration. The bill and the discussion of its provisions are not the final words on this important matter. I have attempted to bring the facts together because I believe the American farmer under our system of protection is entitled to equal consideration with every other group or industry that has been given tariff protection.

I was encouraged in reading the plank in the Republican Party's platform adopted at Chicago this month which states:

The American farmer is entitled not only to tariff schedules on his products but to protection from substitutes therefor.

This is a clear mandate from the chosen delegates of the Republican Party in national convention assembled. To assist in translating that declaration into the actuality of the law of the land is my purpose in submitting the facts I desire to present.

The proposed bill seeks to remedy a tariff injustice which Congress failed to do when the tariff act of 1930 was enacted

into law. I discussed the subject of the tariff in its relation to agriculture at that time and included the vegetable oils and animal fats, but there were too many other important schedules that required attention. In the 1930 act most of agriculture's demands were fully and adequately met. They stand on the statute books to-day; and if the present world tragedy had not intervened, our fondest hopes would have been realized.

Now that the problem of giving protection to substitute products has been sanctioned by the Republican Party, our attention can be turned to this very important phase.

One of the omissions in the 1929 revision of the tariff. was the failure of Congress to give agriculture any substantial protection against the enormous importations of foreign vegetable, animal, and fish oils and fats which are flooding our markets, displacing domestic butter and other oils and fats. In fact, in one important particular, protection to agriculture was still further reduced by extending the list of products entitled to free entry to include a number of oils and fats previously dutiable, but now to be free of duty when rendered inedible by denaturing.

The proposed bill includes all of the proposed duties on vegetable, animal and fish oils and fats which Congress failed to grant. It seeks to provide adequate rates of duty on all of these products, many of which are now on the free list. Many others are now dutiable at very low rates of duty. The complete list appears in the bill. INJURY TO AMERICAN AGRICuLTURE FROM THE IMPORTS OF FOREIGN

Oll..S AND FATS

During the year 1930, the same year that the tariff act of 1930 became effective, a total of 1,813,707,000 pounds of animal and vegetable oils, including raw materials in terms of oil, were imported for consumption in the United States. Of this nearly 2,000,000,000 pounds of imported oils and fats, 511,005,000 pounds were dutiable and 1,302,702,000 pounds were free of duty. Thus the duty-free imports were about two and orie-half times the volume of the dutiable imports. This does not indicate that agriculture is anything like adequately protected against foreign oils and fats.

This situation has been growing rapidly worse for two decades. Domestic oils and fats are being displaced more and more by imported oils and fats which can be purchased at cheaper prices for comparable grades. In 1923 our imports practically equaled our exports of oils and fats, including oil from imported stock. Seven years later, in 1930, our imports exceeded our exports by 932,905,000 pounds, or nearly 1,ooo·.ooo,ooo pounds.

The enormous increase in the importation of foreign oils and fats into the United States means that domestic oils produced from the products of American farms have been displaced to an increasing extent by the use of these cheaper materials from foreign countries. The total consumption of foreign soap and food oils in the United States increased 407.4 per cent in 1929 as compared with 1914, whereas the use of domestic soap and food oils made from domestic materials increased but 39 per cent during the same period. The use of foreign food oils increased 2,168.8 per cent compared with only 31.1 per cent for domestic food oils during this same period, and the use of foreign soap oils increased 388.9 per cent compared with 40.6 per cent for domestic oils during this period.

This is summarized in the following table (Table I) taken from the 1932 report of the tariff commission.

TABLE 1.-Comumption and exports of principal dome8tic and foreign animal and tJegetable cil~, not including lndter, edible olioe oil, paint oil8, and other specialized oil8, 1914 and t9e9

Domestic oils made from domestic materials All foreign and domestic oils 5 foreign Total foreign

oils covered by soap and food Lard (except Othert Total resolution oils t Excluding lard Including lard neutral)

Consumption in food: Pounds Pot£nds Pounds Pounds Pounds Pounds Pounds 1914..-- ---------------------------------------------- 1. 152, 197, {)()() 1. 533, 860, {)()() 2, 686,057,000 5, 280.000 12,645,000 1, 546, 505, {)()() 2, 698, 702, 000 1929_----- ------------------------------------------- 1, 725, 164, 000 1, 795, 535, 000 3, 520, 699, 000 284, 980, ()()() 286, 886, 000 2, 082, 421, 000 3, 807,585,000

Increase or decrease_------------------------------------ 572, 967, 000 261, 675, 000 834, 642, {)()() 279, 700, 000 27 4, 241, 000 535,916, {)()() 1, 108, 883, {)()() Per cent ________ ------- ____ ---------·_----- __________ 49.7 17.1 3Ll 5,'JSJ7. 3 2, 168. 8 34.7 41.1

!Including cottonseed, corn, peanut, soybean, oleo oil, neutral lard. edible and inedible tallow, greases, fish and whale oils. 'Including, in addition to thej oils mentioned in the resolution. inedible olive oil and foots, soybean, peanut oils, other animal oils, including fish.

r

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14215 TABLE I.-C011Jumpticm and txport8 of principal domestlc and foreign animal and ve1etable cit&, not including bulter, edible olive oil, paint oil&, and other specialized rila,

1914 and 19.!!'-Continued

Domestic oils made from domestic materials All foreign and domestic oils

Consumption in soap:

Lard (except neutral)

Pounds

Other Total

Pound& P(lunds

5 foreign Total foreign l----------oils covered by soap and food

resolution oils Excluding lard Including lard

Pound1 Pounds Pounds Pounds 1914_------ ------------------------------------------ 10,484,000 581, 547, 000 592, 031, 000 123, 358, 000 160, 334, 000 741, 881, 000 a 752,365, !XY.l 1929 __ ------ ----------------------------------------- ---------------- 832, 402, 000 832, 402, 000 673, 871, 000 783, 900, 000 1, 616, 302, 000 3 l, 616, 302, 000

Increase or decrease_------------------------------------ ---------------- 250, 855, 000 240, 371, 000 550,513,000 623, 566, 000 87 4, 421, 000 863,937,000 Per cent_ _______________________________ ---- _________ ---------------- 43.1 40.6 446.3 388.!) 117.9 114.3 Total consumption: •

1914_-- ---------------------- ___ ._ -------------------- 1, 162, 681, 000 2, 118, 171, 000 3, 280, 852, 000 168, 987, 000 234, 816, 000 2, 352, 987, 000 3, 515, 668, 00~ 1929·----- - ------------------------------------------ 1, 725, 164, 000 2, 833, 871, 000 4, 559, 035, 000 1, 067, 779, 000 1, 191, 484, 000 4, 025, 355, 000 5, 750, 519, OOG

Increase or decrease.------------------------------------ 56~. 433, 000 7] 5, 790, 000 1, 278, 183, 000 898, 792, 000 958, 663, 000 1, 672, 368, 000 2, 234,851,000 Per cent_ ___ ---------------------------------------- 48.4 33.8 39.0 531.9 407.4 71.1 63.6

E:qJorts: 1914_-------------- -------------------- -------------- 438,016,000 350, 971, 000 788,987,000 997,000 1, 071, ()()() 352,042,000 790, 058, OOJ 1112\1.------------------------------------------------ 829, 328, 000 174,419, 000 1, 003, 747, 000 29,532,000 29,532,000 203, 951, ()()() 1, 033. 279, 000

Increase or decrease_------------------------------------ 391,312, ()()() -176, 552, 000 214,760,000 28,535,000 28,406,000 -148,091,000 243, 221, 000 Per cent. ___ ---------------------------------------- 89.3 -50.3 27.2 2, 862. 1 2, 522. 7 -42.1 30.8

• The difference between these totals and those shown in Table IV-3, p. 1.'i, -66,303,000 pounds in 1914 and 75,488,000 pounds in 1929, is accounted for by soap stock, red oil, vegetable tallow, and miscellaneous oils, which nre not included in this table.

• Exceeds food and soap consumption by quantities used in other industries.

Source: Report of Tarill Commission on "Certain vegetable oils," 1932.

EFFECT ON DAIRY INDUSTRY

The soap interests have been the principal opponents of tariffs on oils and fats. Their chief argument has been that certain of these imported oils and fats possess peculiar properties for soap making not possessed by any domestic oils or fats. This argument will be discussed later at length. Obviously this argument can not be applied to the manufacture of margarine or other butter substitutes. Every pound of margarine or other butter substitute manufactured and sold displaces a pound of butter which otherwise could be consumed.

The production of margarine in the United States has more than doubled since 1914, increasing from 144,000,000 pounds in 1914 to 312,000,000 pounds in 1930, as shown by the following table. TABLll !I.-Production of margarine in the United States by classes

[Report of TarUI Commission on certain vegetable oils, 1932]

Calendar year

1914. ---------------1916.- - -------------1918.---------------1919_- --------------1920_- --------------1921.---------------1922.---------------1924_- --------------1926_- --------------1928----------------1929----------------1930.---------------

Vegetable-oil margarine Animal-oil margarine

To~lquan- 1-------~-----1---------~----

tity Quantity Per cant

of total Quantity

Pounds Pound8 Pounds

Per cent of to~l

144,000,000 -------------- ---------- -------------- ----------203, 000, 000 2, 000, 000 1. 0 201, 000, 000 99. 0 356,000, 000 89,000,000 25.0 267,000,000 75. 0 371,000,000 143,000,000 38.4 228,000,000 61.6 370,000, 000 196,000,000 52.8 174,000,000 47. 2 212,000, 000 102, 0()1), 000 47. 8 110,000,000 52. 2 18!i, 000, 000 76, 000. 000 40. 8 109, 000, 000 59. 2 229, 000, 000 1()1, 000, 000 44. 2 128, 000, 000 55. 8 239, 000,000 121, 000,000 50.8 118, 000,000 49. 2 30R, 000, 000 196, 000, 000 63. 7 112, 000, 000 36. 3 342, 000, 000 222, 000, 000 64. 8 1 20, 000, 000 35. 2 312, 000, 000 i 216, 000. 000 69. 3 96,000, 000 30. 7

The consumption of margarine in the United States varies from year to year, largely depending upon the amount of spread in price between butter and margarine. In 1914 when there was a spread of 9.4 cents a pound, the ratio of the consumption of margarine to the consumption of butter was 8.5 per cent. During the war period and subsequently the spread between butter prices and margarine prices increased to 16.8 cents in 1917, 21.3 cents in 1918, 23.6 cents in 1919, and 24.3 cents in 1920. During the same years the ratio of margarine consumption to butter consumption jumped to 15 per cent in 1917, 21.5 per cent in 1918, 22.6 per cent in 1919, and 24 per cent in 1920. In 1921 the price spread was reduced to 18.4 cents per pound, and simultaneously the ratio of consumption dropped to 16.5 per cent. After 1924 the price spread again began to increase, increasing from 17.5 cents in 1924, to 20.1 cents in 1925, 20.1 cents in 1926, 23.2 cents in 1927, 23.9 cents in 1928, and 23.2 cents in 1929. During the same period the ratio of consumption of margarine to butter consumption increased from 12.2 per

cent in 1924, to 11.2 per cent in 1925, 11.8 per cent in 1926, 12.4 per cent in 1927, 14.4 per cent in 1928, and 16.2 per cent in 1929. In 1930 the price spread dropped to 13.5 cents per pound, and the ratio of consumption dropped to 14.2 per cent. A much larger drop in the ratio of consumption would probably be shown in 193l if figures were available. These data are taken from the 1932 Report of the Tariff Commission. I insert this table at this point. TABLE Ill.-Comparison of price differences and relative consump

tion of butter and margarine

[From Tables 143 and 144, 1932 report of TarUI Commission on certain vegetable oils]

Year

Excess of butter price over

margarine price

Cent-t per pound 1914_ ----------------------------------------------- 9. 4 1917------------------------------------------------ 16. 8 1918_- ---------------------------------------------- 21. 3 1919________________________________________________ 23. 6 1920 ________________________ ------------------------ 24. 3

192L --------------------------------------------- _ _ 18. 4 1922________________________________________________ 18.9

1923 .. ---------------------------------------------- 23. 0 1924 ____________________ ---------------------------- 17. 5 1925 __ ---------------------------------------------- 20. 1 1926 __ - --------------------------------------------- 20. 1 1927------------------------------------------------ 23. 2 1928_- ---------------------------------------------- 23. 9 1929 _____________ ----------------------------------- 23. 2 ] 930 __ ---------------------------------------------- 13. 5

Ratio of consumption of margarine to consumption

of butter

Per cent 8. 5

15.0 21.5 22.6 24.0 16.5 10.5 11.3 12.2 11.2 11.8 12.4 14.4 16.2 14.2

Coconut oil in 1931 constituted two-thirds of the entire domestic consumption of oils and fats in the manufacture of margarine, a total of 155,954,000 pounds of coconut oil being utilized for this purpose during that year. All of this enormous quantity of coconut oil was imported into the United States either as coconut oil or in the form of copra, from which it was later extracted, and displaced an equivalent amount of domestic oils and fats.

In this connection it is interesting to compare the oleomargarine formula containing animal fats with that containing vegetable oils, as shown in Tables IV and V.

TABLE IV.-Oleomargarine formula containing animal fats 450 pounds oleo oil, at 7.5 cents _________________________ $33.75 350 pounds neutral lard, at 5.35 cents____________________ 18. 73 100 pounds cottonseed oil, at 4 cents_____________________ 4. 00 100 pounds palm. oil, at 3.25 cents_______________________ 3. 25 300 pounds milk, at 2 cents______________________________ 6. 00 35 pounds salt, at 1 cent-------------------------------- .35

66.08

When churned this will produce about 1,150 pounds of finished product. Therefore, the cost of materials necessary for the production of 1 pound of oleomargari:t?-e is 5% cents.

14216 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 TABLE V.-Oleomargarine formula containing vegetable oils

800 pounds coconut oil, at 3.5 cents _____________________ $28. 00 100 pounds peanut oil, at 8.75 cents--------------------- 8. 75 100 pounds palm oil, at 3.25 cents________________________ 8. 25 300 pounds milk, at 2 cents____________________________ 6. 00 35 pounds salt, at 1 cent-------------------------------- • 85

46.35

When churned this will produce about 1,150 pounds of finished product. Therefore, the cost of raw material going into 1 pound of oleomargarine is 4.03 cents.

The domestic dairy industry, which has been on a deficit basis for so many years, is on the verge of becoming a surplus-producing industry. The price levels of other farm commodities of which we produce large exportable surpluses have become so disastrously low that many of these producers are turning to dairying. Coincident with this expansion · in the number of dairy producers is a decline in the purchasing power of city workers who purchase dairy products, with the result that the dairy industry is facing a critical period in its history. In view of this situation, the continuation of the enormous importation of foreign oils and fats to displace domestic butter becomes increasingly menacing.

EFFECT ON LIVESTOCK INDUSTRY

Domestic cattle producers and hog producers are affected adversely by the large volume of imports of vegetable and animal oils and fats, particularly for the manufacture of margarine, lard substitutes, and soap. The production of lard substitutes has increased about 50 per cent since 1912, increasing from 876,927,000 pounds in 1912 to 1,211,268,000 pounds in 1930, as shown by the following table: TABLE VI.-Production and consumption of lard compounds in the

United States 1

[From 1932 report of the Tariff Commission on certain vegetable oils]

[Thousands of pounds]

Calendar YE:'ar

1912 ___ _____ --------------------------------------------1914 ___________________________________________________ _ 19!9 ___________________________________________________ _

1920 __ --------------------------------------------------192L _ --- __ --------- _ ------------------- _ -------------- _ 1922_----- ----------------------------------------------1923 ___ ________________________________________________ _

I9Z4 ____ ------ - __ --- _ --- _ -------------------------------1 925_- -.------------------- ------------------------------1926_ ---------------------------------------------------1927-- --------------------------------------------------1928 ___________________________________________________ _

19:29------------ ----------------------------------------1930 __ - ----------------------------------------------- --1931 <.first half) ________________ -------------------------

Produrtion · Consumption

876, 9'n --------------1, 136, 522 --------------1,350, 000 --------------

747, 255 --------------811,095 --------------784, 180 752, 413 750, 522 747, 899 830,435 814,303

1, 152, 620 1, 135, 215 1, 140, 708 1, 130, 377 1, 178, 995 1, 166, 413 1, 143, 349 1, 135, 659 1, 220, 102 1, 214, 935 1, 211, 268 --------- - ----

569,602 --------------

'Fi~ures from 1912 to 191R, Dep~rtmont of Agriculture, Supplement to Bulletin No. 769; 1920 and 1921, ostirMted on basis of data obtained by Tariff Commission by qnostionnaire; for 192.2 to 19H, Bureau of the Census, Animal and Vegetable Fats nnu Oils.

The consumption of nearly one and one-fourth billion pounds of lard substitutes in the United States displaces that much lard which otherwise might be utilized. The American hog producers, therefore, are deprived of a market for one and one-fourth billion pounds of lard. Not all of this consumption of lard substitutes can be attributed to the imports of foreign oils and fats, as cottonseed oil is the principal ingredient used in the manufacture of lard compounds at the present time. If adequate protection were given against foreign oils and fats, cottonseed oil and other vegetable oils now used in margarine and lard substitutes might be utilized for other industries to a much larger extent instead of using such large quantities in the production of butter substitutes and lard substitutes to compete with butter and lard.

The duties in the proposed bill will not prevent the manufacture of margarine and lard substitutes, as they are not high enough to increase the cost of margarine and lard substitutes sufficiently to eliminate the differential in price between these products and butter and lard. Domestic cottonseed oil, peanut oil, corn oil, tallow, and soybean oil will stm be available for the manufacture of margarine and lard

substitutes, but the effect would be to raise the general price level of both domestic and imported oils and fats with the result that the American producers of these products would receive a fairer price for these products.

If we are going to continue the production of margarine and lard substitutes in the United States, there is no reason why we should not produce our entire supply from domestic oils and fats. We have an exportable surplus of 800,000,000 pounds of lard, an exportable surplus of 2,665,000 pounds of tallow, 47,325,000 pounds of oleo oil, and 14,292,000 pounds of oleo stearin, which could be utilized for the manufacture of margarine or soap if it were not for the availability of the enormous quantity of cheaper materials imported into the United States.

The use of domestic animal oils has been materially reduced through their replacement by the utilization of imported oils and fats.

The cattle producers in the United States have been adversely affected by the increasing utilization of imported oils and fats and the resulting displacement for these uses of domestic oils and fats, including tallow, oleo oil and oleo stearin.

In 1912 domestic inedible tallow constituted 32.1 per cent of the total domestic consumption of oils and fats in soap making, whereas in 1930 it constituted 27.8 per cent of the total consumption. During the same period the use of imported whale oil increased from 1.3 per cent of the total consumption to 3.3 per cent. The use of imported coconut oil increased from 10.6 per cent to 19.4 per cent of the total consumption; the use of imported palm oil from 1 per cent to 12.3 per cent of the total consumption. These figures are shown in the following tables from the 1932 Report of the Tariff Commission on Certain Vegetable Oils. TABLE VII.-Consumption in soap making of major classes of

domestic and foreign oils 1

[Report of the U. S. Tariff Commission on certain vegetable oils, 1932]

Made from domostic materials Made from fo~eign materials

Calendar Animal Animal year Vegetable oils and Whale Misoel- Vegetable oils and Whale

oils fats, ex- and fish laneous oils fats, ex- and fish cept oils cept oils

marine marine

In 1,000 pounds

1912_- ----- 256,261 316,835 1,103 'rl, 414 114,301 15,510 9,927 1914_ ------ 263,763 351,690 11,853 31,033 131,956 24,355 4,023 1916_ ------ 34.5, 615 436,922 4, 726 40,464 200,'n5 22,657 8,126 1917------- 292,429 410,036 7, 576 56,613 342, 124 87, 170 5, 732 1919 _______ 198,407 338,696 8, 712 41, 111 269,787 45,967 4, 843 192L ------ 159,445 498,653 35,179 24,048 246,761 24, Oll 2,434 1922_ ------ 114, 507 580,550 41,863 19, 169 292,818 21,832 48,642 1923_ ------ 100,775 554,326 36,127 22,334 414,047 30,823 37,142 1924_ ------ 112,214 714,564 33,764 20, ()()() 386,412 20,440 34,017 1925_ ------ 140,824 630,4'rl 46,074 20,000 508,194 16,828 52,866 1926_ ------ 153,727 652,663 42,886 20,000 512,002 35,647 68,787 1927_ ______ 194,011 726,741 40,507 20, ()()() 534,851 15,000 95,042 1928_ ------ 168,866 684,897 52,814 20,000 586,180 32,500 89,406 1929_ - ----- 162,716 670,271 49,527 20,000 679,696 25, ()()() 84,580 1930_ ------ 146,775 678,554 41,160 15,000 585,542 20, ()()() 72,669

In percentages of total consumption of oil in soap making

1912_ ------ 34.6 42.7 0.2 3. 7 15.4 2.1 1.3 1914 ________ 32.2 43.0 1. 4 3.8 16.1 3.0 .5 1916 ________ 326 41.3 .5 3.8 18.9 2.1 .8 1917-------- 24.3 34.1 .6 4.7 28.6 7. 3 • 5 1919 _______ ._ 21.9 37.3 1.0 4.5 29.7 6.1 . 5 1921__ ______ • 16.1 50.3 3.6 24 24.9 2.4 .3 1922 ________ 10.2 51.9 3. 7 1. 7 26.2 2.0 4.3 1923 ________ 8.4 46.4 3.0 1.9 34.6 2.6 3.1 1924 ________ 8-5 64.1 26 1.6 29.2 1. 5 2.6 1925 ________ 10.0 44.6 3. 2 1.4 35.9 1. 2 3. 7 1926 ________ 10.4 43.9 2.9 1.3 34. 5 2.4 4.6 1927-------- 11.9 44.7 25 1. 2 32.9 .9 5.9 1928 ________ 10.3 41.9 3. 2 1.2 35.9 2.0 5. 5 1929 ________ 9.6 39.6 2. 9 1. 2 40.2 1. 5 5. 0 1930 ________ 9.4 43.5 2. 6 1.0 37.5 1.3 4. 7

1 Government figures 1912-1919; 1921-1923 estimated from data furnished by the trade to the Tari.fi Commission; 1924-1930 estimated from trade sources based on Government data.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14217 TADLE VIII.-Consumption in soap making of vegetable oils, im

ported or from imported materials 1

Calendar Coconut Palm- Olive oil, Olive oil, Soybean Miscel-Palm oil kernel Ian eo us year oil oil foots inedible oil oils

In 1,000 pounds

Peanu: oil

1912 _______ 78,816 7, 546 20,579 5,457 690 1,182 31 1914 _______ 77,959 10,000 31,376 7,298 748 4,499 70 1916 __ ___ __ 111,0M 14,938 5,804 9,411 1,184 57,373 4,811 1917_ ______ 16 '602 Z7,345 4, 762 10,500 1, 731 12!, 058 5,126 1919.------ 182,613 17,268 4, 551 3, 964 935 58,401 2,055 192L ------ 194,417 24,386 593 15,842 767 10,756 ----------1922.- ----- 237,702 30,389 685 20,688 1, 047 2, 307 ----------

Vegetable tallow

1923.------ 267, !l82 102,323 3, 237 Zl, 324 1, 317 3,266 8, 548 192L ______ 260,000 82,250 4, 440 24,785 7, 239 2,500 5,198 1925 ____ ___ 286,000 119,400 45,037 38,197 10,886 2,250 6, 424 1926.------ 270,206 100,960 83,653 42,981 9, 225 2, 500 2,477 19Zl _______ 334,765 112,460 31,248 11,:m 6,818 2, 500 5,688 1928 _______ 335.417 142,363 50,578 39,621 8,439 2,51)() 7,262 1929.- ---- 2 344,205 192,331 72,920 43,417 10,212 6,400 10.211 1930 _______ 303, Z71 191,956 29,431 43,013 6,829 5,000 6,042

In percentages of total consumption of oils and fats in soap manufacture

Peanut oil 1912 _______ 10.6 1.0 2.8 0. 7 0.1 0. 2 ----------1914 _______ 9.5 1. 2 3.8 .9 .1 .6 ----------1916 _______ 10.5 1.4 .6 .9 .1 5.4 1917------- 14.0 2.3 .4 .9 .1 10.3 0.4 1919.--- --- 20.1 1.9 .5 .4 .1 6.4 .2 1921. ______ 19.6 2.5 .1 1. 6 .1 1.1 ----------1!)22 _______ 21.2 2. 7 .1 1. 9 .1 .2 ----------

Vegetable tallow

1923.------ 22.4 8.6 0.3 2.3 0.1 0.3 0. 7 1924. ----- - 19.7 6.2 .3 1.9 .6 .2 .4 1925.------ 20.2 8.4 3. 2 2.7 .8 .2 .4 1926 _______ 18.2 6.8 5.6 2.9 .6 .2 .2 19Zl_ ------ 20.6 6. 9 1.9 2. 5 .4 .2 .4 1928_ ------ 20.5 8.7 3.1 2.4 .5 .2 .5 1929 s ______ 2{).3 11.4 4.3 2,6 .6 .4 .6 1930_ ------ 19.4 12.3 1.9 2.8 .4 .3 .4

1 Government figures 1912-1919; 1921-1923 estimated from data furnished by the trado to the Tariff Commission; 1924-1930 estimates based on Government data.

z Census of factory consumption of animal and vegetable oils in 1929 shows 393,-914,000 pounds of coconut oil used in the soap industry; 178,851,000 pounds of palm oil; 44,5321000 pounds of palm-kernel oil; 38,448,000 pounds of olive.-oil foods; 2,375,000 pounds ot inedible olive oil.

a Based on census of factory consumption referred to in the preceding note, the percentages for this year would be as follows: Coconut oil 24.3, palm oil 11, palmkernel oil2.8, olive.-oil foots 2.3, inedible olive oil 0.1. This report did not distinguish foreign and domestic soybean oil and miscellaneous oils.

Report of Tariff Commission on Certain Vegetable Oils, 1932.

TABLE IX.-Consumption in soap making of specified domestic · vegetable oils 1

[In 1,000 pounds]

Cottonseed oil Cottonseed.-oil foots

Miscel-Calendar Per cent Per cent Peanut Ian eo us

year total oil total oil Corn oil oil soap Quantity consump- Quantity consump- stock

tion in tion in soaps soaps

---------1912.------ 132,312 17.8 89,127 12.0 9,822 ---------- 25,000 1914 _______ 119,254 14.6 108, 141 13.2 11,368 -------·-- 25,000 1916 _______ 194,916 18.4 112,178 10.6 12,821 700 25,000 1917_ ______ 126,390 10.5 115,042 9.6 15,997 10,000 25,000 1919.------ 56,130 6.2 108,389 11.9 2,235 1, 000 30,653 1921_ ______ 47, !!35 4.8 76,018 7. 7 2,405 10,983 22,104 1922 __ _____ 19,759 1.8 61.966 5.5 4, 941 6, 711 21,130 1923 ____ ___ 10,824 .9 52,676 4.4 5, 617 6,900 24,753 1924_ ------ 10,000 .8 77,214 5.8 5,000 5,000 15,000 1925.------ 8,000 .6 109,824 7.8 6,000 ---------- 18,000 1926. ------ 5,000 .3 118,727 8.0 5,000 3,000 22,000 1927 _______ 7,500 .5 147,511 9.0 5,000 2,000 32,000 1928_- ----- 20,000 1.2 105,206 6.4 5,000 3,000 35,660 1929.------ 12,000 .7 108,904 6.4 5,000 1, 700 35,112 1930.-- ---- 7, 500 .5 103,360 6.6 4,000 1, 500 30,415

I Government figures 1912-1919; 1921-1923 estimated from data furnished by the trade to the Tariff Commission; 1924-1930 estimates based on Government data.

Report of the T ariff Commission on certain vegetable oils, 1932.

Likewise there has been a sharp displacement of animal oils by imported oils and fats in the manufacture of margarine. In 1914 domestic oleo oil constituted 49.7 per cent

of the total domestic consumption of oils in margarine, but in 1931 it constituted only 12 per cent. Neutral lard constituted 15 per cent in 1914 but only 3.3 per cent in 1931, whereas imported coconut oil constituted three-tenths of 1 per cent of the total consumption in 1914 compared with 66.8 per cent in 1931.

In other words, the animal oils, neutral lard, and oleo oil which constituted 64.7 per cent, or more than two-thirds of the total consumption of oils in margarine in 1914, were so largely displaced by 1931 that they constituted only 15.3 per cent, or about one-seventh of the total consumption for margarine, whereas imported coconut oil increased in importance from virtually nothing in 1914 until it constituted two-thirds of the domestic consumption of oil in 1931.

There is no question but there is real displacement evidenced by these figures. The soap interests have sought to make a great deal of capital out of the point that certain imported oils, particularly coconut oil and palm kernel oil, have peculiar properties not possessed by domestic oils. While this may be granted for certain specialized types of soap, it does not apply in the manufacture of margarine. In fact, animal oil margarine generally sells at a premium over vegetable oil margarine as shown by the following table. TABLE x.-comparison of annual average prices 1 of vegetable-oil

and animal-oil margarine, Chicago [From 1932 report of the Tar11f Commission on certain vegetable

oils]

Nut mar-Calendar year garine

l

Cenl.! per pound

1920.--------------------------- 28.7 1921_ --------------------------- 22.1 1922.--------------------------- 19.4 1923.--------------------------- 20.2 1924.--------------------------- 21.2 1925.--------------------------- 21.2 1926.--------------------------- 21.5 1927 J-- -------------------------

18.2 1928.--------------------------- 17.2 1929---------------------------- 17.5 1930.--------------------------- 17.0 1931 6- -------------------------- 14.1

1 The National Provisioner.

Animal .-oil margarine

First Second grade a grade •

-------Cenl.!per Cent!pu

pound pound 33.8 32.4 22.9 21.9 19.7 18.7 22.3 21.3 23.4 22.4 25.8 22.6 24..4 21.2 23.8 21.1 24.0 21.1 25.0 20.6 23.5 19.1 17.2 14.4

2 Calculated from data in section on margarine.

Proportion of production composed

of~

Nut (veg- Animal-etable.-oil) oil mar-margarine garine -----~ Per cent Per cent

52.8 47.2 47.8 52.2 40.8 59.2 42.9 57.1 44.2 55.8 4.8.9 15.1 50.8 49.-2 56.4 43.6 63.8 36.2 64.8 35.2 69.2 30.8

---------- ----------

:Quoted as butterine, 1920-1924; highest grade animal.-oil oleomargarine, 1925-1931. • Quoted as natural-color butterine, 1920-1924; white animal-fat oleomargarine,

11l25-1931. 6 Average for first 6 months.

The cheaper price of the imported coconut oil and the margarine made principally from this oil in comparison with margarine made from domestic animal oils has likewise resulted in a large displacement of domestic animal-oil margarine by vegetable-oil margarine. In 1916 animal-oil margarine constituted 99 per cent of the total margarine production in the United States, but in 1930 it constituted only 30.7 per cent, whereas vegetable-oil margarine increased in importance from virtually nothing in 1916 to 69.3 per cent in 1930.

While not all of the vegetable-oil margarine is made from imported oils and fats, the enormous increase in imports of coconut oil for this purpose was a predominant factor in the displacement of animal-oil margarine. This is apparent when it is realized that coconut oil now represents approximately two-thirds of the total consumption of all oils in all margarines produced in the United States, and when it is realized further that the prices of coconut oil have uniformly been cheaper than cottonseed oil, oleo oil, or neutral lard during the past decade. The displacement of animal-oil margarine by vegetable-oil margarine is shown in Table IT.

If this displacement had resulted in proportionate benefits to the domestic cotton fanners and the domestic cottonseed-oil industry, it would have been much less objectionable

14218 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE JUNE 28 from a national point of view, but this displacement has resulted primarily to the benefit of the producers of imported coconut oil. While the production of vegetable-oil margarine has greatly increased at the expense of animaloil margarine, the consumption of domestic cottonseed oil for this purpose has decreased in relative importance, while imported coconut oil has tremendously increased. In 1914 cottonseed oil constituted 20 per cent of the total consumption of oil in margarine, while in 1931 it constituted only 9.4 per cent, while coconut oil increased from three-tenths of 1 per cent of the total consumption of oil in margarine to 66.8 per cent in 1931.

INJURY TO COTTON FARMERS

The domestic cottonseed-oil industry has suffered severely from the growing volume of imports of foreign oils and fats into the United States, and this in turn has reflected adversely upon the cotton farmers by injuring the market for cottonseed. Cottonseed oil has lost its position of dominance in the domestic market for oils and fats which it once enjoyed. In 1914 cottonseed oil constituted 63 per cent of the total domestic consumption of all oils and fats, except lard, butter, and edible olive oil. In addition cottonseed foots constituted 4.6 per cent of the total domestic consumption. By 1929, however, cottonseed oil had declined from a position of major importance to one of minor importance, constituting only 36.6 per cent, or a little over one-third of the total domestic consumption of all oils and fats for food and soap uses, and cottonseed foots had declined to 2.7 per cent of the total consumption. In striking contrast, the use of imported coconut oil and palm-kernel oil increased from 4.9 per cent of the total domestic consumption for food and soap uses in 1914 to 18.6 per cent of the total domestic consumption in 1929. Imported palm oil increased from 2.1 per cent in 1914 to 5.7 per cent in 1929; imported whale oil from two-tenths of 1 per cent to 1¥2 per cent.

The four most important uses for cottonseed oil are for the manufacture of margarine, for the manufacture of lard compounds, for the manufacture of soap, and for the manufacture of mayonnaise, salad oils, cooking oil, and so forth.

The use of imported oils and fats for these purposes ·has increased at the expense of domestic cottonseed oil and other domestic oils. In the manufacture of margarine the relative importance of .cottonseed oil has declined from 20 per cent of the total oil consumption in margarine in 1914 to 9.4 per cent in 1931, whereas the relative importance of coconut oil has increased from three-tenths of 1 per cent of the total consumption in margarine in 1914 to 66.8 per cent in 1931. In soap making the relative importance of cottonseed oil has decreased from 14.6 per cent of the total consumption of oils in 1914 to five-tenths of 1 per cent in 1930, whereas the relative importance of coconut oil and palmkernel oil increased from 13.4 per cent of the total consumption in 1914 to 21.3 per cent in 1930. In the case of salad oils, cooking oils, and oils for mayonnaise manufacture, there has been a considerable increase in the importance of sesame oil which has displaced to that extent the use of cottonseed oil and other domestic oils.

INJURY TO OTHER AMERICAN FARMERS

Com oil produced from corn, soybean oil produced from soybeans, peanut oil produced from peanuts, and olive oil produced from olives, have all encountered injurious competition from imported oils from foreign countries such as sesame oil, soybean oil, peanut oil, and olive oil, and to some extent rapeseed oil. Corn oil, soybean oil, and peanut oil when hardened are suitable for use in the manufacture of margarine and lard substitutes. These oils are also suitable without hardening for use in the manufacture of soap, salad oils, cooking oils, and for the manufacture of mayonnaise.

If adequate protection can be obtained on all of the imported oils and fats which are suitable for similar uses to which these domestic oils are fitted, the market for these domestic oils would be broadened, thereby providing increased outlets for our surplus corn and for soybeans, peanuts, and olives. ·

INJURY TO PRODUCERS OF ROSIN

The increased utilization of imported oils in the manufacture of white laundry soap has greatly displaced the use of domestic rosin which otherwise might have been utilized in the manufacture of yellow laundry soap. The switch in consumption from yellow laundry soap to white laundry soap was promoted to a large extent by elaborate advertising campaigns conducted by soap manufacturers utilizing foreign oils and fats for the manufacture of white soaps. Strenuous efforts have been made to impress the belief on consumers that white laundry soap is superior to yellow laundry soap. The Tariff Commission in its 1932 report, however, points out that so far as results are concerned the two soaps are substantially similar although differing materially in characteristics.

The soap interests opposing tariffs on foreign oils and fats have greatly stressed the statement that we do not possess any domestic soap materials possessing quick-lathering properties. This is not true so far as rosin is concerned, as it produces a quick-lathering laundry soap. If the same proportionate production of yellow laundry soap had been maintained as prevailed in 1914, there would have been an additional market in 1929 for 272,987,000 pounds of rosin for soap manufacture. Thus the domestic producers of rosin have been deprived of a large outlet for their product as a result of the high-pressure promotion of white laundry soap made largely from imported oils and fats.

INJURY TO DOMESTIC FISHERMEN

Thousands of American fishermen are adversely affected by the importation of whale oil, herring oil, pilchard oil, sardine oil, and other fish oils for soap making, margarine manufacture, and other uses for which domestic whale and fish oils are equally well suited.

The domestic consumption of imported whale oil in soap making has increased from 4,023,000 pounds in 1914 to 50,669,000 pounds in 1930, whereas the use of domestic whale oil has only increased during the same period from 632,000 pounds to 9,939,000 pounds. The use of imported herring and sardine oil increased from virtually nothing in 1914 to 22,000,000 pounds in 1930, whereas the use of domestic herring, sardine, and menhaden oils increased during the same period from 11,221,000 pounds to 31,221,000' pounds.

In terms of percentages of total domestic consumption in soap manufacture, imported whale oil increased from onehalf of 1 per cent in 1914 to 3.3 per cent in 1930, whereas domestic whale oil only increased from one-tenth of 1 per cent to three-fifths of 1 per cent during this period. The relative use of imported herring and sardine oils increased much more in proportion than the relative use of domestic herring, sardine, and menhaden oils during this same period, the use of these imported oils increasing from virtually nothing in 1914 to 1.4 per cent of the total consumption in soap manufacture in 1930, while the use of these domestic oils increased from 1.4 per cent to 2 per cent.

Modern whaling methods have been developed which have resulted in the wholesale exploitation of this industry, with the result that the world production of whale oil has increased tenfold since 1920, increasing from 160,000,000 pounds in the whaling season of 1919-20 to 1,500,000,000 pounds in the 1930-31 season. The industry now has large fleets of steamers equipped with vessels where the oil can be rendered immediately. Fishermen residing in all of the coastal States, both on the Atlantic coast and Pacific coast of the United States, are adversely affected by the importation, not only of fish and whale oils, but by the importation of coconut oil, palm oil, palm-kernel oil, and various other foreign oils and fats which are imported into the United States to displace domestic oils and fats which otherwise might be utilized.

There are fish-oil and whale-oil plants in all of the following States: Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas, Washington, Oregon, California, and the Territory of Alaska. The State of Maine is reported to have as many as 50 plants. The total investment in this

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14219 industry is approximately $150,000,000, and approximately owing table shows the number of farmers who are ad-35,000 men are employed in the 300 plants, in addition to versely affected either directly or indirectly by the importathe large number of fishermen who supply the fish for these tion of foreign oils and fats. plants. At the present time, large numbers of these employees are without work because of the inability of the domestic industry to compete with the foreign oils and fats

TABLE XI.-Number of farmers affected directly or indirectly

Not only is the domestic fishing industry injured by the imports of whale oil and fish oil, but the dairy industry, the livestock industry, the cottonseed producers, and other

Number of farms reporting production of product named census of 1930

Product

Number

domestic producers of oils and fats are injured by the im-portation of these foreign whale and fish oils which dis- Dairy products ________ _ 1, 556, 4S7

643,994 Lard___________________ 4, 850.807 place the use of domestic oils and fats.

INJURY TO FLAXSEED PRODUCERS 'l'allOW----------------- 583, 57i3

Domestic flaxseed producers encounter competition not 1 2: ~~i: ~J only from imported flaxseed, but also from imported perilla Cottonseed_____________ 1, 986, 726 oil and tung oil. The imports of perilla oil into the United Peanuts________________ 326• 253

t Soybeans_______________ 302, 842

S ates in 1930 totaled 8,837,000 pounds. Perilla oil and lin- Corn___________________ 4, 148,791

e Olives_________________ 4, 311

Products

Cream sold as butterfat. Butter sold. Swine on farms. Sheep and lambs on farms. Sheep and lambs slaugbterad. Beef cattle on farms. Cotton produced. Peanuts produced. Soybeans for all purposes. Corn harvested for grain. Flax threshed. Olives produced (in California). seed oil are not completely interchangeable, but they ar Flaxseed_______________

87• 002

interchangeable for various border-line uses where t~ere is Rosin __________________ ------------ Number not reported separately by Census Bureau.

not much preference between the two oils. 1 Census of 1920. 2 Census of 1925. Although the importation of perilla oil, including the raw

material in terms of oil, has declined sharply since the in-crease in the duty in the tariff act Of 1930, the pOSSibility li\U'ORTANCE IN PRICE IN REPLACEMENT

of increased competition for the domestic flaxseed industry The comparative prices with which various oils and fats from imported perilla oil and imported tung oil is enhanced can be obtained in the market is perhaps the greatest single by the fact that since 1929 perilla oil has been slightly factor in determining which particular oil or fat will be cheaper than linseed oil, the average price for the first six used within the limits of possible technical interchange months of 1931, as shown by the 1932 report of the Tariff ability. Some oils have particular properties which specially Commission, being 8.9 cents per pound for crude perilla oil fit them for particular uses, but there is a wide range of in barrels at New York, compared to 9 cents per pound for possible interchangeability for the manufacture of mar raw linseed oil in barrels at New York. ga!ine, lard substitutes, soaps, salad oils, mayonnaise, and

The average price in 1930 was 12.2 cents per pound for so forth. perilla oil, compared with 12.5 cents per pound for linseed The importance of price in determining the use of oils oil, whereas in 1929 the price of perilla oil was 15.2 cents per is indicated by a comparison of the prices of domestic and pound and the price of linseed oil 12.3 cents. The differen- imported oils, and the comparative volume of each utilized tial now in price is much greater. Quotations in the New In margarine, for example, when coconut oil was selling for York Journal of Commerce on June 3, 1932, quoted linseed 12.2 cents per pound in 1914 and cottonseed 6.6 cents per oil in car lots at New York at 6.1 cents to 6.2 cents per pound, coconut oil constituted only three-tenths of 1 per cent pound, compared to perilla oil, car lots delivered at New of the total consumption, whereas cottonseed oil constituted York, at 3% to 4 cents per pound. 20 per cent. During the war the price of cottonseed oil rose

The cheapness of imported China wood oil, or tung oil rapidly so that it exceeded the price of coconut oil. In 1918 which is also free of duty, is likely to encourage the sub~ cottonseed oil averaged 20.1 cents per pound, whereas cocostitution of this oil to a considerable extent for linseed oil nut oil averaged 18.1 cents per pound. This was reflected The price of China wood oil, or tung oil, as quoted in the u:nmediately in the comparative consumption, the consumpJune 3, 1932, issue of the New York Journal of Commerce tlon of coconut oil in margarine jumping to 22.6 per cent was 5% ·cents per pound in tanks at New York, compared t~ of the tqtal consumption of oil in margarine, and cotton-5.5 cents to 5.6 cents per pound for linseed oil in tank cars. seed oil dropping to 13.4 per cent of the total domestic

Furthermore, there is an " infant industry " which has re- consumption. cently started in Florida for the production of tung oil. By 1931 the price of cottonseed oil had dropped to 7.2 A commercial acreage of tung-nut trees has been planted cents per pound, but coconut oil had dropped to 4.5 cents for this purpose. Tung oil can be substituted to some extent per pound. Coincident with this change in price relation..: for linseed oil but has special properties which particularly ship, the use of coconut oil increased to 66.8 per cent of the fit it for certain special uses. The privilege of free entry total oil consumption in margarine in 1931, whereas the use accorded to foreign tung oil, particularly at the present of cottonseed oil declined to 9.4 per cent of the total contime, when prices are so low, will make it more difficult for sumption of oil in margarine. the United States to develop its own supply of tung oil. TABLE XII.-Co'T!"parison of prices and consumption of coconut

COMPARATIVE NUMBER OF CITIZENS AFFECTED Otl and COttonseed Oil in margarine

The number of citizens who would be benefited by the proposed bill providing additional protection against foreign oils and fats would far exceed in number the comparatively few citizens who now enjoy the profits resulting from free trade or inadequate duties on these imported products.

The soap industry, which is the principal beneficiary of free en~ry of foreign oils and fats, consisted of 282 plants employmg 14,363 wage earners, according to the 1929 census of manufactures. The oleomargarine industry (not includ-ing meat-packing establishments) consisted of 41 plants em-plo~ng 1,534 wage earners. The paint and varnish industry consiSted of 1,063 plants employing 29,211 wage earners. Many of these plants no doubt utilize domestic oils almost entirely. · . . In contrast with the comparatively small number engaged 1n these industries utilizing the bulk of the imports of foreign oils and fats, there are several million farmers who

Yeart

Prices in cents "Per pound'

CottonCoconut seed oil, oi~ crude prime, (in tanks) summer,

Pacific yellow coast (in tanks)

New York

Per cent or oil consumption in margarine 3 supplied by-

Coconut Cotton-oil seed oil

-------------1-------------1913 __ - ------------------------------------1914_-- -------- ----------------------------1915_ --------------------------------------1916_-- ------------------------------------1917---------------------------------------1918 ______________________________________ _

1919.---- ------------- ---------------------1920.----------------------------------- ---

12.0 12.2 12.3 15.1 17.1 18. 1 17.4 17.4

7. 3 ----------6.6 0. 3 20.0 6. 8 ---------- ----------

10.6 15.4 20.1 24.1 15.4

. 3 7.9

22.6 23.3 26.5

30.1 25.6 13.4 12.7 13.0

are affected either directly or indirectly by the enormous 1 Prices, calendar years; C?nsumpiion, fiscal years. importation of foreign oils and fats at low prices. The fol- 2

Bureau of Labor Stat1st1Cs, '-"'.holesale Prices. 'Calculated from data given in margarine on section.

14220 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 TABLE XII.~omparison of prices and consumption of coconut TABLE XIII.~omparison of prices and consumption of coconut oil,

oil and cottonseed oil in margarine-Continued oleo oil, and neutral lard in margarine-Continued

Year

1!J2L ------------ __ ------------------------1922.--------------------------------------1923.--------------------------------------1924.--------------------------------------1925.--------------------------------------1926.--------------------------------------192i- --------------------------------------1923.--------------------------------------1929. --------------------------------------1930.--------------------------------------1931.--------------------------------------

• Average for first li months.

Per cent of oil con-Prices in cents per sumption!nmar

pound garine supplied by-

CottonCoconut see~ oil, oil, crude pnme, (in ta!Jks) s;;•

Pacilic (in tanks) coast New

10.1 8.4 8.2 8.6 9.8 9.4 8.2 8.0 7.1 5. 9

1 4.5

York

7. 9 10.1 11.3 10.8 10.8 1L8 9. 7 9. 9 9. 7 8.1

'7. 2

Ccconut Cotton-oil seed oil

43.8 35.3 37.0 uo 43.2 46.4 49.2 56.3 59.9 62.7 66.8

7. 9 9.5

10.6 10.2 11.4 12.1 10.7 9. 9 9.8

10.2 9.4

Report of Tariff Commission on Certain Vegetable Oils, 1932.

A similar movement took place with respect to the relative prices and consumption of coconut oil, oleo oil and neutral lard in margarine. In 1914 when coconut oil was selling for 12.8 cents per pound compared with 10.9 cents per pound for oleo oil, and 11.4 cents per pound for neutral lard, the use of coconut oil amounted to three-tenths of 1 per cent of the total consumption of oils in margarine, whereas the use of oleo oil amounted to 49.7 per cent of the total consumption of oils in margarine, and neutral lard amounted to 15 per cent. During the war, likewise, the prices of oleo oil and neutral lard rose higher than the price of coconut oil so that in 1918 the price of coconut oil was 18.9 cents per pound compared with 25.7 cents per pound for oleo oil and 27.8 cents per pound for neutral lard. This was immediately reflected in a marked increase in the relative use of coconut oil and a marked decrease in the relative use of oleo oil and neutral lard, coconut oil in that year amounting to 22.6 per cent of the total consumption of oils in margarine, while oleo oil amounted to 35.3 per cent and neutral lard 13.5 per cent.

From that time on, coconut oil could be bought cheaper than oleo oil or neutral lard. As a result the displacement of domestic oils by imported coconut oil continued rapidly until in 1931 when coconut oil was selling for 5.2 ·cents per pound, compared with 6.8 cents per pound for oleo oil and 9.5 cents per pound for neutral lard, the use of coconut oil amounting to 66.8 per cent of the total consumption of oils in margarine compared with 12 per cent for oleo oil and 3.3 per cent for neutral lard.

These trends are shown in Tables XIll and XIV. TABLE XIII.~omparison of prices and consumption of coconut

oil, oleo oil, and neutral lard in margarine [From report of the Tariff Commission on certain vegetable oils, 19321

Yeart

1913_---- -------------1914_ ----- ------------1915.-----------------1916.-----------------1917------------------1918 ____ _____________ _

1919 __ -- --------------1920 ___ ---------------1921._- ---------------

Price (cents per pound) 2 Ratio to total consumption of

oils in margarine 1

Coconut oil (plus freight

rate from Pacific coast to

Chicago)•

12.6 12.8 12.8 15.6 17.6 18.9 18.5 18.8 IL3

Oleo oil Nf~~ral Coc:illnut Oleo oil Nf~~ral

11.5 10.9 12.2 14.0 21.7 25.7 30.6 21.4 1L3

'

Per cent Per cent Per cent 1L 8 ---------- ---------- ----------11. 4 0. 3 49. 7 15. 0 11.0 -------- -- - --------- ----------14. 0 • 3 41. 7 15. 6 23.5 7. 9 38. 7 14.0 27. 8 22. 6 35. 3 13. 6 31. 8 23. 3 32. 7 12. 3 23.3 26.5 29.4 9. 9 13. 3 43. 8 2L 1 9. 2

t Prices, calendar year; ratios, fiscal year. 2 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wholesale Prices (Chicago). • Computed from data given in section on soap making. 'Varied from 0.55 cent to 1.50 cents per pound during the period.

Price (cents per pound) Ratio to total consumption of oils in margarine

Year Coconut oil (plus freight

rate from Pacific coast to Chicago)

Oleo Oil Neutral Coconut Oleo oil Neutral lard oil lard

---------Per cent Per cent Per cent

10.7 12.6 35.3 25.2 12.4 12.8 13.3 37.0 26.3 12.4 16.1 15.0 41.0 25.8 11.8 13.8 18.6 43.2 24.0 10.4 12.0 16.8 46.4 22.3 8.8 13.4 14.3 49.2 22.4 8.4 14. 1 13.8 66.3 18.1 7.4 10.9 13.0 59.9 16.5 6.3 10.5 12.1 62.7 15.4 5.0 6.8 1 9.5 66.8 12.0 3.3

1922__________________ 9. 6 1923__________________ 9. 0 1924__________________ 9. 4 1925__________________ 10. 6 1926__________________ 10. 2 1927------------------ 9. 0 1928__________________ 8. 8 1929__________________ 7. 8 1930__________________ 6. 6 1931_________________ '5. 2

' Average for first 6 months.

Similarly, in the case of oils for soap making, the relative consumption of cottonseed oil has declined and the relative consumption of coconut oil has increased coincident with a reversal of the price relationship between these two materials. Prior to 1918 coconut oil was higher in price than cottonseed oil, and there was little or no increase in the relative consumption of coconut oil for soap making, and the relative consumption of cottonseed oil increased up until 1917. In 1918 the price of coconut oil was cheaper than the price of cottonseed oil and remained cheaper from then on, except for the year 1921. In 1919, when coconut oil was nearly 7 cents per pound cheaper than cottonseed oil, the consumption of coconut oil represented 20.6 per cent of the total consumption of oils in soap making compared with 13.4 per cent in 1914, whereas the use of cottonseed oil had declined until in 1919 it represented only 6.2 per cent of the total consumption in soap making compared to 14.6 per cent in 1914.

By 1930, when coconut oil was selling for 5.9 cents per pound, and cottonseed oil for 8.1 cents per pound, the use of coconut oil represented 21.3 per cent of the total consumption in soap making, whereas the use of cottonseed oil for this purpose had declined until it represented only one-half of 1 per cent of the total consumption.

The prices of inedible tallow have been more nearly competitive with coconut oil, and it has not lost its place of importance in the soap industry as cottonseed oil has but, in fact, has made some gains in relative importance since 1914. These trends are shown in Table XIV. TABLE XIV.~omparison of prices and consumption in soap mak

ing of coconut oil, cottonseed oil, rosin, and inedible tallow [Report of the Tari:tf Commission on certain vegetable oils, 1932)

Year

---

1913 ______ 1914 ______ 1915 ______ 1916 ______ 1917------1918 __ ____ 1919 ______ 1920 ___ ___ 192L _____

Prices (cents per pound) I Percentage of consump

tion of oils in soap making supplied by-2

CottonCoconut seed oil,

oil, prime crude summer

(in yellow tanks), (in Pacific tanks), coast New

York

---

12.0 7.3 12.2 6.6 12. 3 6.8 15.1 10.6 17.1 15.4 18.1 20.1 17.4 24.1 17.4 15.4 10.1 7.9

Tsllow, inedible packers prime,

Chicago

7.1 6.9 6.9 9.9

15.6 17.9 15.4 13.1 6.4

Inedi-Rosin, Coco- ble tal-

Consumpo tion of rosin in soap • K nut and Cotton- low and

gr:ade, palm- seed compet-Savan- kernel oil itive nah • oils mate-

1.7 1. 5 1.3 2.0 2.1 3.6 6.8 5. 3 1.5

rials'

1,000 pound1

---iax ---14:6- ----47:s· ---isfi;aio ---ii~o- ---is~4- ----45~2- ----------

a. 4 10. 6 44. 1 ----------

---~i6- ----6~2- ----60~3- ---ii9;529 19.7 4.8 59. 0 ----------

1 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wholesale Prices. t Computed from data given in section on soap making. a Gamble, Thomas. Yearbook, 1913-1918 (naval stores); Naval Stores Review,

1921-1930. • Includes greases, red oil. palm oil, whale, and fish oils. • Bureau of Census, 1914 and 1919; Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, 1924-1929.

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 14221 TABLE XIV.-Comparison of prices and conS".tmption in soap mak

ing of coconut oil, cottonseed oil, rosin, etc.-Continued

PerC('ntnge of consump-Prices (cents per pound) tion of oils in soap

making supplied by-

Cotton- Consump-Coconut seed oil, Inedi- tion of

Year oil. prime Tallow, Ro~in, Coco- ble tal- rosin in crude summer inedible K nut and Cotten- low and soap

(in yellow packers grade, palm- seed com pet-tanks) , (in prime, ~a van- kernel oil itive Pacific tanks) , Chicago nah oils mate-coast New rials

York --------- -----------------

1,000 pound!

1922 ______ 8. 4 10.1 7.1 1.7 21.3 1.8 64.6 ----------1923 __ ____ 8.2 11.3 8.2 1. 7 22.7 .9 63.6 """104;956 1924 ___ ___ 8. 6 10.8 8.5 1. 8 20.0 .8 66.9 1925 ______ 9. 8 10.8 9. 7 3.5 23. 4 .6 61.2 140,615 192!L • .•• 9.4 11. 8 8. 7 4. 5 23.8 .3 60.6 118,257 1927-- - --- 8. 2 9. 7 8.1 3.2 22.5 .5 60.9 100,227 1928 ______ 8.0 9. 9 8.8 2.8 23.6 1.2 61.3 92,777 1929 ___ --- 7.1 9. 7 8. 5 2. 7 24.6 • 7 60.4 114,300 1930 ______ 5.9 8. 1 6. 8 1. 9 21.3 .5 64.4 ----------1931 a _____ 4.5 7.2 4.3 --------- -------- -------- --------- ----------

!Average for first 6 months. TARIFF ON IMPORTS FROM PHILIPPINES

Unless the oils and fats imported into the United States from the Philippines are made subject to tariff duties, the expected benefits from the proposed bill, so far as assisting agriculture in meeting competition from foreign oils and fats, will be largely nullified. Coconut oil constitutes one of the most important imported oils and fats used for the manufacture of margarine and soap. The tariff act of 1930 provides a duty of 2 cents per pound upon coconut oil, but the duty is of little or no value to the farmers of the United States because of the fact that most of our coconut oil is ·imported from the Philippine Islands free of duty, either in the form of copra or in the form of oil. · Practically the entire output of copra and coconut oil from the Philippine Islands is exported to the United States. In 1930, for example, 518,161,000 pounds of coconut oil and copra in terms of coconut oil were exported to the United States out of a total exportation to all countries of 566,965,000 pounds.

In 1930, 317,919,000 pounds of coconut oil were imported into the United States free of duty_ from the Philippine Islands, while only 32,000 pounds were imported from other countries, dutiable at 2 cents per pound. Thus, over 99 per cent of all the imports of coconut oil into the United States came from the Philippine Islands. The following table (Table XV) shows the enormous increase in exports of coconut oil and copra, in terms of coconut oil, from the Philippine Islands to the United States since 1900. TABLE XV.-Copra and coconut oil: Exports from the Philippine

Islands to all countries and to the United States [From 1932 Report of the Tarifi Commission on Certain Vegetable

Oils] [Thousand pounds; 1. e., 000 omitted]

Coconut oil in Total copra and Copra terms of copra 1

coconut oil in terms of copra

Calendar year

To all To the To all To the To all To the countries United countries United countries United

States States States

---------1900 .•• --------------- 143,059 228 ---------- ---------- 143,059 228 1905.----------------- 122,903 226 36 ---------- 122,939 226 1910.----------------- 265,619 15,737 ---------- ---------- 265,619 15,737 1915 _________________ -

306,644 46,777 47, 116 46, 779 353,760 93,556 1916 __________________ 159,342 78, 198 56,310 53,567 215,652 131,765

1917------------------ 203,221 150,473 158,165 157,632 361,386 308, 105 1918 __ ---------------- 121,389 121,389 403,UO 397,300 524,799 518,689 1919 __ - --------------- 55,322 5, 101 489,710 298,765 545,032 303,866 1920 __ ---------------- 56,885 3,160 271,451 251,762 328,336 254,922 192L. ---------------- 331,429 116,686 315,965 281,714 647,394 398,400 1922 ___ - -------------- 381,510 196,999 375, 160 373,190 756,670 570,189 1923 __ ---------------- 456,642 284.963 312,084 296.565 768,726 581,528 1924 __________________

345,597 237,054 390,630 386,879 735,227 623,933 1925 __ ---------------- 323,434 256,082 364,381 337,248 687,815 593,330 1926. ----------------- 383,647 284,572 410,443 402,189 794,090 686,761 1927------------------ 439,419 347,946 506,717 495,470 946, 136 843,416 1928 ___ - -------------- 516,795 402,529 ' 497,760 492,828 1,014,5W 895,357 1929_ ----------------- 382,658 285,756 666,697 660,287 1,049,355 946,043 1930.----------------- 384,263 311,205 615,682 511,273 899,945 822,478

I Converted to copra on basis of 63 per cent oil yield. Sources: For 1900 to 1929, Statistical Bulletin of the Philippine Islands; !or 1930,

A.nnual Report of the Insular Collector of Customs,

CONCLUSION

The facts have been presented in order that Congress may know that a tariff injustice exists with respect to vegetable-oil and animal-fat substitutes.

The farm organizations have recognized the problem and are doing splendid work in bringing the facts before the people and Congress.

The proposed bill seeks to remedy this great injustice to agriculture. It remedies this injustice not by striking down the protection of any other group, but by giving to agriculture the benefit of the protective tariff which has already been given to industrial groups. Agriculture must be given tariff equality with other groups.

Text of bill amending the tariff act of 1930 to provide duties on oils and fats.

Be it enacted, etc., That paragraph 52, Title I, tariff act of 1930, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"PAR. 52. Oils, animal and fish: Cod, herring, pilchard, and menhaden, 2 cents per pound; whale, 2.7 cents per pound; seal, 2.4 cents per pound; sperm, 2.2 cents per pound; spermaceti wax, 6 cents per pound; wool grease containing more than 2 per cent of free fatty acids, 1 cent per pound; containing 2 per cent or less of free fatty acids and not suitable for medicinal use, 2 cents per pound; suitable for medicinal use, including adeps lame, hydrous or anhydrous, 3 cents per pound; all other animal and fish oils, fats, and greases, not specially provided for, 45 per cent ad valorem: Provided, That none of the foregoing shall be subject to a less rate of duty than 45 per cent ad valorem."

SEc. 2. Paragraph 53, Title I, tariff act of 1930, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"PAR. 53. Oils, vegetable: Castor, 5 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; hempseed, 4¥2 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; linseed or flaxseed, and combinations and mixtures in chief value of such oil, 4¥2 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; olive, weighing with the immediate container less than 40 pounds, 10 cents per pound on contents and container; olive, not specially provided for, 10.4 cents per pound; poppy seed, 8.8 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; rapeseed, 3 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; other expressed or extracted, not specially provided for, 45 per cent ad valorem."

SEc. 3. Paragraph 54, Title I, tariff act oi. 1930, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"PAR. 54. Coconut oil, including product of Philippine Islands, 3.6 cents per pound; cottonseed oil, 6 cents per pound; palm oil, 3.1 cents per pound; palm-kernel oil, 3.6 cents per pound; peanut oil, 5.4 cents per pound; perilla oil, 4.6 cents per pound; sesame oil, 5.4 cents per pound; soybean oil, 3% cents per pound; sweet almond oil, 3.4 cents per pound; tung oil, 5.9 cents per pound; all other vegetable or nut oils, not specially provided for, 45 per cent ad valorem : Provided, That none of the foregoing shall be subject to a less rate of duty than 45 per cent ad valorem.''

SEC. 4. Paragraph 56, Title I, tariff act of 1930, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"PAR. 56. Hydrogenated or hardened oils and fats, 1 cent per pound in addition to the duty provided herein on the oil from which chiefly made, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; other oils and fats, the composition and properties of which have been changed by vulcanizing, oxidizing, chlorinating, nitrating, or any other chemical process, and not specially provided for, 45 per cent ad valorem."

SEc. 5. Paragraph 57, Title I, tariff act of 1930, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"PAR. 57. Combinations and mixtures of animal, vegetable, or mineral oils, or of any of them (except combinations or mixtures containing essential or distilled oils), with or without other substances, and not specially provided for, 45 per cent ad valorem, but not less than the rate applicable to the component materia.J. subject to the highest rate of duty: Provided, That no article containing alcohol shall be classified for duty under this paragraph."

SEc. 6. The rates of duty on tallow, oleo oil, and oleo stearin, provided in paragraph 701, Title I, tariff act of 1930, are amended to read as follows:

"Tallow, 3.3 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; oleo oil, 3.7 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem; and oleo stearin, 4.5 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per. cent ad valorem."

SEc. 7. The rate of duty on lard, provided in paragraph 703, Title I, tariff act of 1930, is amended to read as follows:

" Lard, 4.6 cents per pound, but not less than 45 per cent ad valorem."

SEc. 8. Paragraph 762., Title I, tariff act of 1930, is hereby amended to read as follows:

"PAR. 762. Oil-bearing seeds and materials: Castor beans, 2.2 cents per pound; flaxseed, 65 cents per bushel of 56 pounds; poppy seed, 3.8 cents per pound; sunflower seed, 2 cents per pound; apricot and peach kernels, 3 cents per pound; soybeans, 2 cents per pound; cottonseed, 2 cents per pound; copra, including product of Philippine Islands, 2 cents per pound; hempseed, 1 cent per pound; palm nuts, 1.7 cents per pound; palm-nut kernels, 1.2 cents per pound: rapeseed, 1.8 cents per pound; perilla seed, 1.6

14222 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JUNE 28 cents per pound; sesame seed, 2.4 cents per pound; seeds and nuts, not specially provided for , 45 per cent ad valorem: Provided, That none of the foregoing except flaxseed shall be subject to a less r ate of duty than 45 per cent ad valorem."

SEc. 9. Subsection (b), paragraph 1730, Title II, tariff act of 1930. is hereby amended to read as follows:

" PAR. 1730. (b) Eulachon oil, cod and cod liver." SEc. 10. Paragraph 1732, Title II, tariff act of 1930, is hereby

amended to read as follows: " PAR. 1732. Oils, expressed or extracted: Croton." SEc. 11. Sec. 301, Title m , tariff act of 1930, is hereby amended

by inserting at the beginning of the first sentence the following words: " Except as otherwise provided herein."

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. BYRNS. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly <at 4 o'clock and 22 minutes p. mJ the House adjourned until to-morrow, Wednesday, June 29, 1932, at 12 o'clock noon.

REPORTS OF COMMITrEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Ru1e XIII, Mr. GREEN: Joint Committee on Disposition of Useless

Executive Papers. A report on the disposition of useless executive papers in the Navy Department <Rept. No. 1726). Ordered to be printed.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 3 of Ru1e XXII, public bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. CHAVEZ: A bill (H. R. 12834) to authorize a per capita payment of $100 to the Mescalero Apache Indians of New Mexico from their tribal funds; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

By Mr. SELVIG: A bill <H. R. 12835) amending the tariff act of 1930 to provide duties on oils and fats; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. LOZIER: A bill (H. R. 12836) to authorize the reimbursement of the Missouri State Highway Department, certain drainage and levee districts, and .certain individuals for funds contributed to the War Department for use in the construction of permanent improvements on the Missouri River; to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors.

By Mr. KLEBERG: A bill (H. R. 12837) to provide for increasing the permissible alcoholic content of beer to 3 per cent by volume, to make intoxication upon premises where beer is sold unlawful, to provide penalties for such intoxication, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. MOREHEAD: A bill (H. R. 12838) to provide for the grading and paving of part of Eighth Street, city of Plattsmouth, Nebr., and of a part of county highway No. 307 of Cass County, Nebr.; to the Committee on Roads.

By Mr. COLLINS: A bill (H. R. 12839) providing for the appointment of a commissioner to hear cases arising under contracts of war-risk insurance in the district courts for the northern and southern districts of Mississippi; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. McCLINTIC of Oklahoma: A bill (H. R. 12840) providing for the appointment of a commissioner to hear cases arising under contracts of war-risk insurance in the district courts for the eastern and western districts of Oklahoma; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a bill <H. R. 12841) to provide temporary aid to agriculture for the relief of the existing national economic emergency; to the Committee on Agriculture.

By Mr. WYANT: A bill <H. R. 12842) imposing upon consignors of liquid fuels the duty of making monthly reports in certain cases to the Bureau of Mines of the Department of Commerce, and imposing penalties; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. McCORMACK: A bill (H. R. 12843) to change the name of the retail liquor dealers' stamp tax in the · case of retail drug stores or pharmacies; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. LAGUARDIA: A bill (H. R. 12844) to regulate and establish reasonable license fees of patented radio equipment; to the Committee on Patents.

Also, a bill <H. R. 12845) to regulate and establish reasonable fees for radio advertisement; to the Committee on Merchant Marine, Radio, and Fisheries.

By Mr. KVALE: A bill <H. R. 12846) to repeal section 2 of Public Act No. 242, Sixty-fourth Congress, being an act making appropriations for the support of the Army, and approved August 29, 1916, and relating to the establishing of a council of national defense; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. STEVENSON: Resolution (H. Rea. 276) to print additional copies of the revenue act of 1932; to the Committee on Printing.

By Mr. MORTON D. HULL: Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 451) proposing an amendment to the eighteenth amendment of the Constitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. FOSS: A bill (H. R. 12847) for the relief of John Inkinen; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. KLEBERG: A bill <H. R. 12848) for the relief of W. F. Lueders; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. LANKFORD of Virginia: A bill (H. R. 12849) for the relief of the heirs at law of John W. Dixon; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. MONTET: A bill <H. R. 12850) for the relief of Rene D. Trahan; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. PARKER of Georgia: A bill (H. R. 12851) granting retirement annuity or pension to John B. Fitzgerald; to the Committee on Pensions. .

By Mr. RUDD: A bill <H. R. 12852) for the relief of Adolph Schnepf; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. SNELL: A bill <H. R. 12853) granting an increase of pension to Rose Ann Richards; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. STALKER: A bill (H. R. 12854) granting an increase of pension to Jane L. Morrill; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. SWING: A bill <H. R. 12855) granting a pension to Annie L. Gray; to the Committee on Pensions.

PETmONS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of Ru1e XXII, petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows:

8463. By Mr. CLANCY: Petition of Olaf J. Burgess and Charles Swartz and approximately 450 other citizens of Detroit, Mich.; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

8464. By Mr. JAMES: Resolution of the Houghton Association of Commerce, Houghton, Mich., requesting reduction of Federal expenses in all departments and opposing any added program of expenditures for public works when not absolutely necessary, and also favoring repeal of all emergency tax legislation as soon as conditions of the Treasury warrants; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8465. By Mr. KVALE: Petition of Morris National Farm Loan Association, Morris, Minn., urging a 3-year moratorium on mortgage indebtedness to apply only to bona fide farmers; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

8466. Also, petition of Express Lodge, No. 2061, Minneapolis, Minn., urging increase in second, third, and fourth class postage rates; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

8467. Also, petition of Lions Club, Dawson, Minn., urging enactment of Senate bill 1197; to the Committee on Banking and currency.

8468. By Mr. WYANT: Petition of Southwest Lodge, No. 63, Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, Youngwood, Pa., urging legislation to regulate the operation of busses, trucks,

1932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 14223 and waterway carriers in the interstate transportation of passengers and freight for hire; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

8469. Also, petition of Western Pennsylvania Retail Druggists Association, urging passage of the $5,000,000,000 prosperity loan; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8470. By Mr. YATES: Petition of 148 members of the Champaign County Farm Bureau, urging passage of the Rainey bill; to the Committee on Agriculture.

SENATE WEDNESDAY, JUNE 29, 1932

(Legislative day of Tuesday, June 28, 1932>

The Senate met at 10 o'clock a. m., on the expiration of the recess.

Mr. VANDENBERG. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll, and the following Sen

ators answered to their names: Ashurst Davis Kendrick Austin Dickinson Keyes Barbour Fletcher La Follette Bingham Frazier Lewis Black George McGill Blaine Goldsborough McNary Borah Hale Metcalt Bratton Hastings Moses Broussard Hat:fleld Norris Bulow Hawes Nye Capper Hayden Oddle Can.way Hebert Pittman Carey Howell Reed Coolldge Johnson Robinson. Ark. Copeland Jones Robinson, Ind. Couzens Kean Schall

Sheppard Shipstead. Shortridge Smoot Steiwer Thomas, Idaho Thomas, Okla. Townsend Trammell Vandenberg Walcott Watson White

The VICE PRESIDENT. Sixty-one Senators have answered to their names. A quorum is present. The unfinished business, House bill 7233, the Philippine independence bill, is before the Senate.

NAVAL APPROPRIATION8--CONFERENCE REPORT

Mr. HALE submitted the following report:

The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 11452) making appropriations for the NavY Department and the naval service for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate recede from its amendments numbered 8, 9, 21, 22, 23, 28, 32, 48, 49, 51, 52, 58, 59, and 60.

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendments of the Senate mnnbered 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 11, 12. 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 34, 39, 40, 41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 53, 54, 55, 56, and 57, and agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 2: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 2, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment insert the following: "in other than civil government and literature, and cost of special instruction"; and the Senate agree to the sam~

Amendment numbered 18: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 18, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: Restore the matter stricken out by said amendment, amended to read as follows: "<not to exceed an average of 5,910 chief petty officers and an average of 850 chief petty officers under acting appointment) "; and the Senate agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 20: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 20, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment insert the following: " in excess of four "; and the Senate agree to the sa.me.

Amendment numbered 33: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 33, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter inserted by said amendment insert the following: " and the compensation of any greater number than 90 "; and the Senate agree to the same.

The committee of conference have not agreed on amendments numbered 1, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 24, 29, 35, 36, 37, 38, and 43.

FREDERICK HALE, HENRY W. KEYEs, HIRAM BINGHAM, E. S. BROUSSARD, PARK TRAMMELL,

Managers on the part of the Senate. W. A. AYRES, W. B. OLIVER, BURTON L. FRENCH

<Except as to amendment No. 50), JOHN TABEa

<Except as to amendment No. 50), Managers on the part of the H ou.se.

Mr. HALE. I move the adoption of the conference report. The report was agreed to. The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate the action

of the House of Representatives on certain amendments of the Senate to the bill, which was read, as follows:

IN THE HOUSE 011' REPRESENTATIVES,

June 28, 1932. Resolved, That the House recede from its disagreement to the

amendments of the Senate Nos. 1, 13, 29, 35, and 43 to the bill (H. R. 11452) making appropriations for the Navy Department and the nave.! service !or the fiscal year ending June 30, 1933, and for other purposes, and concur therein.

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment o! the Senate No. 10, and concur therein with an amendment as follows:

Restore the matter stricken out by said amendment amended to read as follows: ": Provided, That no appropriation contained in this act shall be available to pay more than one omcer of the Naval Reserve and one omcer o! the Marine Corps Reserve above the grade of lieutenant or captain, respectively, the pay and allowances of their grade !or the performance of active duty other than the performance of drllls or other equivalent instruction or duty, or appropriate duties, and/or the performance of 15 days' active training duty, and other officers above such grades employed on such class of active duty shall not be entitled to or be paid a greater rate of pay and allowances than authorized by law for a lieutenant of the Navy or a captain o! the Marine Corps entitled to not exceeding 10 years• longevity pay."

That the House recede !rom its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate No. 14. and concur therein with an amendment as follows:

Restore the matter stricken out by said amendment amended to read as follows: •• (not to exceed 908 officers of the Medical Corps, 186 omcers of the Dental Corps. 556 officers of the Supply Corps, 83 omcers of the Chaplain Corps, 233 officers of the Construction Corps, 109 officers of the Civil Engineer Corps, and 1,461 warrant and commissioned warrant officers: Provided., That 1! the number of warrant and commissioned warrant officers and officers in any statr corps holding commission on July 1, 1932, 1s in excess of the number herein stipulated, such excess officers may be retained in the Navy until the number 1s reduced to the 11mitat1ons imposed by thls act)."

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate No. 15, and concur therein with an amendment as follows:

In lieu of the sum inserted by said amendment insert "$31,-479,106."

That the House recede !rom its disagreement to the amendment o! the Senate No. 16, and concur therein with an amendment as follows:

In lieu of the sum inserted by said amendment insert "$1.157.-535 (none of which shall be available for increased pay for making aerial fiights by nonfiying officers or observers except eight officers above the grade of lieutenant commander. to be selected by the Secretary of the Navy) :•

That the House recede !rom its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate No. 17, and concur therein with an amendment as follows: .

In lleu of the sum inserted by said amendment insert ,, $41,282,801."

That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate No. 19, and concur therein with an amendment as follows:

In lieu of the sum inserted by said amendment insert .. $131,576,841."

Date post:	30-Apr-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	khangminh22
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

1932 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Documents