congressional record-senate 923 - Congress.gov

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 923 ment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means. · 8271. ·Also, petition of Claire E. Hall and 49 other citizens and veterans of Los Angeles, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8272. Also, petition of Leslie L. Atkinson and 49 other citizens and veterans of Los Angeles, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8273. Also, petition of Laron ElkinS and 49 other citizens and veterans of Los Angeles, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8274. Also, petition of Mrs. R. C. Ketter and 49 other citizens and veterans of Los Angeles, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8275. Also, petition of Mrs. A. Van Echton and 51 other citizens and veterans of Burbank, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8276. Also, petition of Mrs. S. I. UrqUhart and 49 other citizens and veterans of Los Angeles, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means. · 8277. By Mr. VINCENT: Petitions of residents of the eighth district of Michigan, urging the adoption of House bill 9986, for Federal control of the motion-picture industry; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

8278. By Mr. WALKER: Petition signed by L. N. Griffee and nine other citizens of Richmond, Ky., in favor of House bill 12549, the Vestal copyright bill, without amendments; to the Committee on Patents.

8279. By Mr. ZIHLMAN: Petitions of reside·nts of Washington, D. C., in support of House bill 7884, a bill to prohibit experiments on living dogs in the District of Columbia; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

SENATE WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1930

The Chaplain, Rev. Z~Barney T. Phillips, D. D., offered the following prayer:

Eternal and ever blessed God, who hast made the world without and hast planted Thine ·own image within our hearts, inspire and guide with Thy spirit ·these Thy servants, the few among the many, endowed with high positions, with command and influence, with gifts and resources of power, to the end that they may be found faithful stewards of Thy bounty. Lead them ever by integrity and wisdom to such conceptions and decisions as shall meet the exactions of the days that press upon us and tend to the furtherance of the welfare of Thy people and the spread of Thine own kingdom. Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

THE JOURNAL

The Chief Clerk proceeded to read the Journal of the proceedings of the legislative day of Monday, December 15, when, on request of Mr. FEss and by unanimous consent, the further reading was dispensed with and the Journal was approved.

SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA Mr. SIMMONS. Mr. President, I present and send to the

desk the credentials of the Senator appointed by the Governor of the State of North Carolina to succeed my late colleague, Senator Overman. The Senator designate is present, and I ask that the oath may be administered to him. ·

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The credentials will be read.

The credentials were read, as follows: STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA,

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. To all to· whom these presents shall come, greeting:

Know ye that we, reposing special trust and confidence in his int egrity and knowledge, do by these presents appoint CAMERON MoRRISON United States Senator to succeed Lee S. Overman, deceased, for a term expiring next general election, November 3, 1932. and do hereby confer upon him all the rights, privileges, and powers useful and necessary to the just and proper discharge of the duties of his appointment.

In witness whereof his excellency, 0. Max Gardner, our governor and commander in chief, hat h signed with his hand these presents and caused our great seal to be affixed hereto.

Done at our city of Raleigh this 13th day of December, A. D. 1930, and in the one hundred fifty-fifth year of our American independence.

0 . MAx GARDNER, Governor. By the governor. (SEAL.) J. A. HARTNESS,

Secretary of State.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The credentials will be placed on file. The Senator designate will present himself at the desk and take the oath of office.

Mr. MORRISON, escorted by Mr. SIMMONS, advanced to the Vice President's desk; and the oath prescribed by law having been administered to him by the President pro tempore, he took his seat in the Senate.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE A message from the House of Representatives by Mr. Hal

tigan, one of its clerks, announced that Mr. JAMES of Michigan was appointed a manager on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 8159) to authorize appropriation for construction at the United States Military Academy, West Point, N. Y.; Fort Lewis, Wash.; Fort Benning, Ga., and for other purposes, in the place of Mr. SPEAKS, resigned.

The message also announced that the House had disagreed to the amendments of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 14246) making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30; 1932, and for other purposes, requested a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and that Mr. WooD, Mr. HARDY, Mr. WELSH of Pennsylvania, Mr. BYRNS, and Mr. ARNOLD were appointed managers on the part of the House at the conference.

ENROLLE.D BILL AND JOINT RESOLUTION SIGNED The message further announced that the Speaker had

affixed his signature to the following enrolled bill and joint resolution, and they were signed by the President pro tempore:

S. 4400. An act to legalize a pier constructed in Chesapeake Bay at Annapolis Roads, Md., and to legalize an intake pipe in Warren Cove, at Plymouth, Mass.; and

H. J. Res. 440. Joint resolution authorizing the payment of salaries of the officers and employees of Congress for December, 1930, on the 20th day of that month. APPROPRIATIONS FOR TREASURY AND POST OFFICE DEPARTMENTS

The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate the action of the House of Representatives disagreeing to the amendments of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 14246) making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1932, and for other purposes, and requesting a conference with the Senate on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon.

Mr. PHIPPS. I move that the Senate insist on its amendments, agree to the conference asked by the House, and that the Chair appoint the conferees on the part of the Senate.

The motion was agreed to; and the President pro tempore appointed Mr. PHIPPS, Mr. SMOOT, Mr. MosES, Mr. HARRIS, and Mr. GLASS conferees on the part of the Senate.

PETITIONS The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid before the Senate a

telegram signed by Mrs. Walter S. Robertson, corresponding secretary of the Shakespeare Followers, Dallas, Tex., in-

924 CONGRESSIONAL ·RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 dorsing present activities leading to world peace, which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Mr. JONES presented· petitions of sundry citizens of Tacoma and Olympia, Wash., praying for the passage of legislation exempting dogs from vivisection in the District of Columbia, which were referred to the Committee · on the District of Columbia.

GIFT OF MOULTRIE MEMORIAL

Mr. BLEASE. Mr. President, I have a short article from yesterday•s Columbia (8. C.) State, which I ask to have read.

There being no- objection, the legislative clerk read as follows: [From the Colmnbia State, Columbia, S. C., December 13, 1930]

MOULTRIE MEMORIAL HANGS IN CAPITOL

WASHINGTON, December 12.-Senator COLE. L. BLEASE to-day presented to the Senate M111tary Mairs Committee a handsomely framed collection of letters and other correspondence between Lord Montague and Gen. William Moultrie. The gift was from the Moultrie Memorial Association of South Carolina through J. C. Dillingham, president. ·

In engraved letters on the frame of the picture are the folloWing words:

" Manifesting a high degree or patriotic zeal and loyal devotion of Gen. Will.iam Moultrie to the cause of Am-erican independence-1781."'

It will be hung in the rooms of the committee at the capitol, just at the entrance to the Chamber of the Senate.

PENSIONS AND INCREASE OF PENSIONS

Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana, from the Committee on Pensions, to which was referred the bill (H.. R. 13518) granting pensions and increase of pensions to certain soldiei:S. and sailors of the Civil War and certain widows and dependent children of soldiers and sailors of said war, reported it with amendments and submitted a report <No~ 1191) thereon.

ENROLLED BILl:. PRESENTED

Mr. GILLET!', from the Committee on Enrolled Bills, reported that on to-day that committee presented to the President of the United States th~ enrolled bill (8. 4400) to legalize a pier constructed in Chesapeake Bay at Annapolis Roads, Md., and to legalize an intake pipe in Warren Cove, at Plymouth, Mass.

REPORT OF POSTAL NOMINATION

Mr. PHIPPS~ as in executive session, from the Committee on Post Offices and Post Roads, reported f_avorably sundry post-office nominations.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The repor.ts will be placed Qn the Executive Calendar.

BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS INTRODUCED

Bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first time and, by unanimous consent, the second time, and referred as follows:

By Mr. MOSES: A bill (S. 5393} granting an increase <Jf pension to Lizzie

Berry; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. McKELLAR: A bill <S. 5394} granting a pension to Sarah Lancastel'

(with accompanying papers}; and A bill <S. 5395) granting a pension to Mollie A. Bellomy

(with accompanying papers}: to the Committee on Pensions. ' · By Mr. GLENN:

A bill (S. 5396) tor the relief of Wilbur Rogers; to the Committee on Military Affairs.,

By Mr. GOLDSBOROUGH:. A bill (S. 5397) to correct the military record of Alexander

M. Proctor; to the Committee on Military Affairs. By Mr. NYE: A bill (S. 5398) to extend the time :or repayment of cer

tain loans to farmers for seed, feed, or fertilizer, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agrkulture and Forestry.

By Mr. SWANSON: A bill (S. 5399) to confer citizenship upon certain mem..:

bers of the Byrd antarctic· ex:pediti.on; to the Committee on Immigration.

By Mr. METCALF: A bill <S. '5400) for the relief of Maurice M. Keleher (with

an accompanying paper); to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. CAPPER: A bill <S. 5401) for the relief of George A. Banta (with

1 accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Finance. . A bill fS. 5402} granting a; pension to Mary Jane Simms

(with accompanying papers}; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. WATSON: A bill (S. 5403) for the relief of Edward Ellis; to the Com

mittee on Claims. By Mr. PATTERSON: A bill <S. 5404) granting a pension to Mollie T. Graham

(with accompanying papers) ; and A bill (8. 5405) granting a pension to Francis Marion

Loughead <with accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. McNARY:. A bill (8. 5406) granting a pension to Margaret E. Fisher

<with accompanying papers) ; to the Committee on Pensions:. A bill (S. 5407) to enable coordinated Federal effort to

meet emergencies caused by forest-destroying insects and diseases; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry.

By Mr. BARKLEY~ A bill (S .. 5408) for the relief of Kate M~ Hayes; to the

Committee on Claims. By Mr. RANSDELL: A bill (8. 5409) for the relief of Robert G. Lynn; to the

Committee on Claims By .Mr. FLETCHER: A bill (S. 5410) to provide for the establishment of the

Everglades National Park in the State of Florida, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Public Lands and Surveys.

By Mr. HOWELL: A bill (~ 5411) to regulate the practices Of professional

engineering and land surveying; creating a registration buard for professional engineers and Iand smveyors of the District of Columbia; defining its powers and duties; also imposing certain duties thereon in. connection with public work; and providing penalties; to the Committee on the District of Columbia. ·

By Mr. SCHALL~ A bill <S. 5412) to amend section 33 of the Judicial Code,

as amended, with respect to the removal of actions against receivers of the courts of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. TYDINGS: A bill (S. 5413) granting a pension to Minnie T. Harris

(with accompanying papers) ; and A bill <Sr 5414) granting a pension to George W. McElroy;

to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. BRATTON: A joint resolution <S. J. Res .. 222) relating to the authority

of the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a contract with the Rio Grande project; to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation.

By Mr. TYDINGS: A joint resolution <S. J. Res. 223) extending the time for

the closing of Center Market in th€ city of Washington; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

AMENDMENT TO STATE, JUSTICE, ETC., APPROPRIATION BILL

Mr ~SMOOT submitted. an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the State .. Justice, Commerce, and Labor appropriation bill for the fiscal year 19.:32,. which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed, as foiiows:

At the proper place in too bill insert the following: " BUREAU OF MINES

"Fuel research at Salt Lake City: For inquiries and scientific and te.chnologic investigations concerning the mining, preparation, treatment, and use of mineral fuels, and for investigation of mineral fuel& belonging to or for the use of the Uhited States, With a

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 925 view to their most efficient ut111zation. and for investigation of related fuel problems, such investigations to be conducted at the mining experiment station at Salt Lake City, Utah, $5,000."

INVESTIGATION OF MINERAL RESOURCES Mr. THOMAS of Oklahoma submitted the following reso

lution (S. Res. 377), which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry:

Resolved, That the Secretary of Agriculture be hereby requested to investigate, through the agency of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics the mineral resources of the country as related to farm lands, both as to the extent and as to the value of such resources as a farm asset, and to report such findings to the Senate and to recommend any legislation which may be deemed practicable and desirable to encourage cooperation among farmers with a view to the more efficient use of such resources as assets.

EDITORIAL ENTITLED "A SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR SPEAKS" Mr. ASHURST. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent

to have printed in the RECORD an editorial from the Charleston (S. C.) News and Courier entitled "A South Carolina Senator Speaks."

There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

[From the Charleston, S. C., News and Courier of Tuesday, December 9, 1930}

A SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR SPEAKS

In the United States Senate last Wednesday a strikingly able and illuminating speech was delivered on the bill for the regulation of interstate transportation by automobiles. The Senator clearly, forcibly, convincingly explained the nature of the automobile as a vehicle, the tremendous advantages that it has brought to the people, the common people, the independence of movement with which it has armed them, how it has made the individual his own master in travel and in hauling his goods and those of his neighbors. He warned the Senators against the danger of depriving the people of the benefits which the invention of the internalcombustion engine has conferred upon them, pleaded that legislation containing the peril of limiting the new liberty be postponed, and that the States be trusted in the exercise of their sovereignties to impose necessary restrictions upon these vehicles, so different in their nature from railroad trains. He pointed out that the whole people are threatened with the danger of losing the immense values that the invention has brought them, insisting and urging with great clearness and power that popular rights of utmost importance are at stake, and that the public interest can not suffer by deferring legislation that might impair them. It was an admirable exposition of the subject, a speech for the defense of the rights not only of South Carolina but of all the States.

The Senator was ELLISON D. SMITH. Not in a long time has a Senator of South Carolina rendered so great a service to the American people as was his contribution to this debate.

MODERNIZATION OF BATTLESHIPS Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I move that the Senate pro

ceed to the consideration of the conference report on the bill <H. R. 14804) making supplemental appropriations to

· provide for emergency construction on certain public works during the remainder of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1931, with a view to increasing employment.

However, it has been suggested to me just at this moment that there has been a sort of understanding that we should take up the motion of the Senator from Utah [Mr. KINe] to reconsider tlle vote by which the bill (S. 4750) to authorize alterations and repairs to certain naval vessels was passed. If that will not take very much time, I am willing to withhold my motion to consider the conference report until that may have been disposed of; but the conference report relates to an emergency matter, upon which action should be taken promptly. If we do not dispose of it to-day, We shall have to call it up for action at a later time, so that from every standpoint expedition should be had in connection with it.

Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, I gave notice yesterday and thought it was generally understood that it would be in order for me to call up the battleship authorization measure this morning. I wish to say in this connection that the bill merely provides an authorization to modernize battleships; that it is in pursuance of a policy we have had for the past 10 or 15 years and in pursuance of the naval treaty entered into at London. Unless the authorization is made appropriations can not be made immediately. The authorization must be granted and an appropriation must be made or else our Navy will be greatly inferior to that of Great Britain. The measure is recommended by the Navy

Department. If this work is not to be done now in our navy yards, hundreds of men will be thrown out of work. I do not know how many thousands of people will be employed in modernizing the battleships, and that work should be completed by February or March. If the authorization and the appropriation measures ·are not passed, all these people will be thrown out of employment.

Mr. JONES. What does the Senator think about the possibility of extensive debate on the measure?

Mr. SWANSON. I do not think there will be extensive debate.

Mr. JONES. Very well; I will withdraw temporarily my motion to proceed to the consideration of the conference report and give an opportunity to act on the bill to modern· ize battleships.

Mr. SWANSON obtained the floor. Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President---The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Virginia yield to the Senator from Alabama? Mr. HEFLIN. No, Mr. President; I wish to speak in my

own time. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Vir·

ginia has the floor. Mr. SWANSON. Mr. President, the pending question is

a motion entered by the Senator from Utah [Mr. KING] to reconsider the action of the Senate in passing Senate bill 4750, relating to the modernization of battleships. I want Senators to have an opportunity for all the debate that is necessary upon the matter. Of course, a motion can be made, if the debate takes too long, to lay upon the table the motion to reconsider, but I do not want to. do that unless the debate becomes too protracted. I have never made such a motion and will not do so now unless the debate is too prolonged, because I want the matter disposed of in the proper way. I therefore renew my motion to proceed to the consideration of the motion of the Senator from Utah to reconsider.

Mr. BROOKHART. Mr. President, I desire to say that there is going to be considerable debate on the question. Several of us are opposed to the bill, and we think with good reason. We do not want the measure to pass here on any momentary consideration, as it was passed the other day.

Mr. SWANSON. We can proceed with the debate and see what it develops.

Mr. BROOKHART. I think the Senator ought to permit the matter to remain on the calendar and come up in its regular order.

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, may I interrupt the Senator? I think the Senator from Iowa is laboring under a misapprehension as to what the motion is, if I understand him. The Senator is not opposed to the present motion, which is to reconsider. If the passage of the bill is reconsidered, then is the time for the Senator to debate the question.

Mr. BROOKHART. That is true. Mr. SWANSON. I have no purpose to make a motion to

lay on the table the motion to reconsider until there has been a fair debate. I renew my motion that we proceed to the consideration of the motion of the Senator from Utah to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the motion submitted by the Senator from Virginia.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I want to acquaint the Senate with the parliamentary situation which now confronts us. If a motion is made to lay upon the table the motion of the Senator from Utah [Mr. KING] to reconsider, then all debate is ended. I, for one, am in favor of the appropriation of $60,000,000 in order that we may feed people who are starving in the drought-stricken areas of the country. Action on the battleship measure can wait a while. There are hundreds of thousands, and even millions, of people in distress. Their distress is not brought about by any fault of their own. Those people live out in the rural districts and are uninfluential men and women in the common walks of life who have not the great power to come to the Senate to put over m~sures which are in their behalf and for their benefit. The Senate ought to pause for a moment to con-

926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 sider the people back in the States who are in distress. Cold Mr. WATSON. And I presume they were not reports that weather is now upon us. The House has held up the could be very well sent up here. The Senator from Wisdrought relief appropriation bill. consin [Mr. LA FoLLETTE] offered a resolution requesting the

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will settle the Committee on Appropriations to call before it Colonel woods matter. All debate is out of order, and a point of order will and also Judge Payne and Mr. MacDonald. I hope that that lie against the motion, so that it may not be renewed until· resolution will be · adopted to-day by unanimous consent. 2 o'clock. . Then those gentlemen can come here and tell what they . Mr. HEFLIN. Very well; I make the point of . order know.

against the motion. Mr. CARAWAY. The President states that-The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The point of order is These were confined to guidance in formulation of the recom-

sustained. mendations which I have already laid before Congress. such notes Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I renew my motion that the and discussions are necessarily passing and tentative, and they rep

Senate proceed to the consideration of the report of the resent _that confidential relation of the President with the Govcommittee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two ernment officers which should be pres~rved. Houses on the bill (H. R. 14804) making supplemental ap- Mr. President, of course, the harm is now already done, propriations to provide for emergency construction on cer- but I was just anxious, as the Senator from Indiana was tain public works during the remainder of the fiscal year lecturing on cooperation, that there may be in the future ending June 30, 1931, with a view to increasing employment. .some cooperation between the President and his leader here

Mr. SWANSON. In order that there may be no misun- in the Senate. derstanding, I give notice that to-morrow, after the routine Mr. BARKLEY and Mr. WATSON addressed the Chair. morning business, I shall renew my motion to proceed to The PRESIDENT pro tempore. To whom does the senator the consideration of the motion of the Senator fr.om Utah from Arkansas yield? [Mr. KING] to reconsider the action of the Senate with Mr. CARAWAY. I am very glad to yield first to the reference to the battleship modernization .measure. Senator from Kentucky.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. It will then be in order. Mr. BARKLEY. Perhaps Colonel Woods did not confide The question is on the motion of the Senator from in the Senator from Indiana any confidential information Washington. and therefore any important information. ' INFORMATION FROM EMERGENCY COMMITTEE ON UNEMPLOYMENT Mr. CARAWAY. But if he had any information-and I

Mr. CARAWAY. Mr. President, noticing that the Senator doubt if he had-it was confidential . . I presume the Senator from Indiana [Mr. WATSON] is present, I should like to have from Indiana will pass this off as he did the other day when him explain something. Yesterday the President refused we were appealing to him to help people who are .starving, to transmit to Congress the report of his emergency relief .and he said he would refer it to the colored barber down committee headed by Colonel Woods. I read from the here in the barber shop. President's message: Mr. WATSON. I .said nothing of the kind; but that is

neither here nor there. 1 do not want to engage in a per-The President's emergency committee has made no report on 1 It t• "th th S t ·

unemployment. I have received notes . and verbal suggestions sona a erca 10n Wl e ena or from Arkansas. I per-from Col. Arthur woods from time to time, and from the depart- sonally called on Colonel Woods on my own responsibility; ments in the Government, on this subject. These were confined I had two conferences with him. That is all there is to it. to guidance in formulation of the recommendations which I have I did not ask the President anything about it; I asked Colalready laid before Congress. Such notes and discussions are necessarily passing and tentative, and they represent :the con- onel Woods. Now, if the Senator wants to know what the fidential relation of the President with the Government officers, President meant by his message he must talk to the Presi-which should be preserved. dent about it.

Mr. President, day before yesterday, when the leader of Mr. CARAWAY. I do not think I would get any informa-the majority, the distinguished Senator from Indiana [Mr. tion if I should do so. WATSON] was referring to a telephonic message from Colonel Woods and telling the Senate what the Woods commission had ascertained and w:Q.at it recommended, he was evidently not cooperating with the President of the United States, who said that information was confidential. I hope the Senator from Indiana will tell us how it was that he broke the confidence that existed between the administration and Colonel Woods and made public this information?

The President · this morning assures the country and Congress that all communications as to information possessed by Colonel Woods touching the relief the Government should extend to the unemployed were confidential and must not be revealed. I am merely inquiring how it was that. that confidential information was transmitted to the Senator from Indiana and by him given to the Senate?

Mr. WATSON. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Arkansas yield to the Senator from Indiana? Mr. CARAWAY. I yield to the Senator. Mr. WATSON. The Senator from Arkansas asked me a

question. All I know about the matter is that I called Colonel Woods on my own initiative and talked to him about it.

Mr. CARAWAY. I hope the Senator realizes now that was a breach of confidence?

Mr. WATSON. I do not. Mr. CARAWAY. The President has stated that the infor

mation Colonel Woods had was confidential. Mr. WATSON. My understanding is that Colonel Woods,

from time to time, made certain reports to the President from here and there and yonder--

Mr. CARAWAY. Principally yonder.

APPROPRIATIONS FOR EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION-cONFERENCE REPORT

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. This debate is wholly out of order. The question recurs on the .motion submitted by the Senator from Washington IMr. JoNES].

Mr. McKELLAR. Will the Presiding Officer state what that motion is?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The pending question is the motion of the Senator from Washington to proceed to the consideration of the conference report on House bill 14804.

The motion was agreed to; and th~ Senate proceeded to consider the report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 14804) making supplemental appropriations to provide for emergency construction on certain public works during the remainder of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1931.

Mr. LA FOLLETTE and other Senators addressed the Chair.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Washington [Mr. JoNES] retains the floor. To whom does he yield?

Mr. JONES. I yield to the Senator from Wisconsin.

INFORMATION AS TO UNEMPLOYMENT Mr. LA FOLLETrE. I ask unanimous consent for the

immediate consideration of Senate Resolution 376, which provides for the calling of Colonel Woods, Judge Payne, and certain others before the Appropriations Committee.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is Uhere objection?

\.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 927 Mr. JONES. 1 I have not seen that resolution, but I under

stand from the Republican leader of the Senate that it is unobjectionable.

Mr. WATSON. I trust that unanimous consent may be granted to proceed to the consideration of the resolution.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Wisconsin for the immediate consideration of the resolution?

Mr. BRATTON. Mr. President, let me ask the Senator from Wisconsin to state what is the general nature of the resolution.

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. The objective of the resolution is to request the Appropriations Committee to hear Colonel Woods, John Barton Payne, Colonel Roop, Thomas H. MacDonald, Major General Brown, and James A. Wetmore.

Mr. BRATTON. I am familiar with the resolution. I assume that what the Senator desires is that the committee may have hearings in order that the Senate may have the information in official form? ·

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. I assume, of course, that the information will be made available to the Senate, if the Senate requests that this be done, because, obviously, it is the intent of the resolution that this information should be made available for the Senate.

Mr. BRATTON. That is my understanding and I hope the resolution will be promptly adopted.

Th.e PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the consideration of the resolution at this time?

There being no objection, the resolution (S. Res. 376) submitted by Mr. LA FoLLETTE on December 16 was considered and agreed to, as follows:

Resolved, That the Committee on Appropriations is hereby requested to call before it Col. Arthur Woods, chairman of the President's Emergency Committee for Employment, to ascertain:

( 1) Any information in his possession relating to the extent of unemployment.

(2) Measures for the relief of distress caused thereby in the various cities and States of the country.

(3} His recommendations concerning the extent to whi~h public works must be expanded if a substantial reduction in unemployment during the ensuing year is to be brought about.

Resolved further, That the Appropriations Committee is requested to call before it John Barton Payne, chairman of the American National Red Cross, to ascertain:

(1} Conditions in the drought-stricken States. (2} Whether the American Red Cross can provide adequate re

lief to all needy persons in said States. (3} Conditions in the cities and towns of the country caused

by the economic depression and resultant unemployment. Resolved further, That the Committee on Appropriations is

hereby requested to call Col. J. Clauson Roop, Director of the Budget, to ascertain among other things the following:

(1} How much the Budget estimates for public works were reduced, if at all, between July and November, 1930.

Resolved further, That the Appropriations Committee is hereby requested to call Thomas H. MacDonald, Chief of the Bureau of Public Roads, to obtain any and all plans which mal have been worked out by the bureau with the various highway commissions or departments of the several States concerning road building in the existing unemployment situation.

Resolved further, That the Appropriations Committee is hereby requested to call Maj. Gen. Lytle Brown, Chief of Army Engineers, to ascertain:

(1} What sum of money could be expended on rivers and harbors during the ensuing calendar year if all possible effort were made to accelerate the work on existing authorized projects.

Resolved further, That the Appropriations Committee is hereby requested to call James A. Wetmore, Acting Supervising Architect, to ascertain:

( 1) What sum of money could be expended on public bull dings during the ensuing calendar year if all possible effort were made to accelerate the work on public-building projects now authorized.

APPROPRIATIONS FOR EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION-CONFERENCE REPORT

The Senate proceeded to consider the report of the committee of conference on the dissenting votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 14804) making supplemental appropriations to provide for emergency construction on certain public works during the remainder of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1931, with a view to increasing employment.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the conference report.

Mr. JONES .. Mr. President, I think I should explain the situation. It will take only a few minutes.

Mr. President, the conferees have had a regular conference and have submitted a report substantially the same as the tentative conference report, except that the four amendments which the Senate insisted should go back, and which I agreed I would bring back if the conferees could not reach an agreement, are reported in disagreement.

As to the appropriation of $80,000,000 for road construction, which was discussed very considerably the other day and which was thrown into conference by amendments adopted by the Senate, I have a letter from the Bureau of Public Roads regarding those particular amendments from which I quote, as follows:

With respect to amendments Nos. 6 and 7, it is suggested that the original language which is stricken out by amendment No. 6 is preferable to the language substituted or inserted by amendment No. 7. As originally worded, provision was made for an advance of funds which the States could use to match their regular apportionments of Federal aid. Under this procedure the States would receive a 100 per cent payment on projects constructed under this act. This payment would be made up of the Federal pro rata to be charged to their regular Federal-aid apportionment, the balance being an advance under the terms of this bill. Amendment No. 7-

Which is a part of the same provision-apparently makes no provision for advancing Federal funds to supply funds required of the States, but would provide an additional $80,000,000 which under the Federal highway act would have to be matched with State funds. This would not relieve the present situation, in which many States find themselves unable to promptly take up their Federal-aid funds because of a temporary shortage of State funds with which to match the Federal funds.

That is the opinion of the Bureau of Public Roads. So, by reason of that opinion, we receded from amendments numbered 6 and 7, and reinserted the language of the House bill.

That, in brief, is the conference report. If the conference report shall be adopted, then the question will come on the four additional amendments. I expect to make 'a motion separately to recede from them, and then it will be for the Senate to act, but I think first it should formally adopt the conference report.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the conference report.

The report was agreed to. Mr. JONES. Now, Mr. President, as to amendments num

bered 11 and 12, I think we should act upon them together, because they involve exactly the same principle. They relate to the States of Alabama and Georgia. The States of Alabama and Georgia, of course, can take advantage of the provisions relating to the $80,000,000.

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, may I interrupt the Senator?

Mr. JONES. Certainly. Mr. NORRIS. In order to get information, let me inquire

if the bill has been printed with the amendments numbered so that we can secure a copy of it?

Mr. JONES. It has been printed with the amendments numbered.

As I was about to say, under the $80,000,000 appropriation the apportionments that may be due under the language of the bill to the States of Alabama and Georgia can be advanced by- the National Government, so that they may get immediate benefit from this act. In other words, they are put on the same basis as all the other States in the Union. If we go further and match the remainder of the amounts of money which we appropriated for them some time ago, on the condition that they should be matched by the States, we give them really a different treatment from that accorded the other States, and give them additional benefits.

We could not get the House conferees to agree to these amendments. As I understand the rule, we are not permitted really to disclose what took place in conference; but the Senate conferees, I will say, had the idea that the amendments would simply provide an additional amount for those States to aid in the unemployment situation, and while we recognized that to adopt the amendments would be . in one sense a discrimination against the other States. yet we felt that under the emergency we would be justified

928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17. in doing 't. However, we ronld not get the House eon- Mr . .JONES. And it can get the same benefit that the ferees to agree to those two amendments. other States get. It is put .on the same basis.

Now, the question before the Senate i:s as to -whether or Mr. BARKLEY. But the special arrangement in this bill not ]t-will delay this bill further nn account nf ill.at -par- for Georgia and Alabama does not contemplate an advance ticnlar situation, which :really iiLvo1ves the uestion whether on that score. 'They .are to be able to use the unallotted we will accord different treatment to Georgia and Alabam-a amount of this appropriation without being required to than that which we accord to the IQther States. As I have match it. They do not have to repay it. said, without the amendments they are given their propor- Mr .. JONES. Yes; as I understand the language proposed, tionate part -of the $80,000,000 as a loan on the same 'Con- they really do intend to have that matched and then repay dition ·as the proportionate part due to the other States is . dt all .again after iive years. They intend to do that. That advanced; and the amendments would provide what might s what they contemplate by their amendments. be termed an additional loan to the -states 'Of Georgia .and Mr, £MOOT. Absolutely. Alabama under the conditions which 1 have .set out. MI. BARKLEY~ What is the Senator's reaction to the

Mr. HOWELL. Mr. President-- suggestion that in view of this emergency provision, the 'The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from mileage limit of $15.;000 as the contribution •of the Federal

Washington :yield to the Senator from Nebraska? Government toward the building of these Federal and state Mr. JONES. J: yield. highways ought ito be raised to a larger amount? Mr. HOWELL.. Are not several other states in the same Mr. JONES. 'Th~t. of course, is a legis1ative proposition.

situation in which Georgia anti Alabama find themselves. Mr. BARKLEY. Yes; I realize that. and If they were included, as Georgia .and Alabama are 'Mr. JONES. I have not -given it any consideration, so I included, would they not correspondingly be benefited? lShoUldnot want to express an gpinion.

Mr. JONES. It may be :t.hat ther..e are other States in Mr. BARKLEY These are circumstances that I have no exactly the situation as are Alabama and Geor_gia. As I doubt exist in ·other states which will handicap them in understand, however, all those -other States that received JUSing this additional fund unless there is some liberalization a'PJ)ropriations from the Federal Government for :fiood of the requirement of the law. damage -on cendition that it wou1d be matched have Mr. JONES. But .they will get the same treatment as matched .that appropriat10n in full, .at least- 1<1ther States.

Mr . .BARKLEY. Mr~ President- Mr. President, I think the Senate should recede. I do not .Mr. JONES. Just .a moment. At :least no other State has :remember whether I made the motion or not.

come in .and set -UP .a different condition of things from TI:te PRESIDENT pro tempGre. The Chair understands that. So we have gone on the theory that the only two . the Senator from Washington to move that the Senate States which have come in and pointed out that they have :recede from -amendment numbered 13.. not .been .able .to match the amount of mo~y thus appre- Mr. :SMOOT. Amendments -numbered 11 and 12. I will prlated are the onlY two States in that .category. :put the two together, because they are un the same basis.

Mr. BARKLEY. .MI:. President- The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agree- . Mr . .JONES. 1: yield. :ing to the motion 'Of the Senator from Washington. Mr. "BARKLEY. Since this bill passed I received .a letter Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, if the conferees have -passed ·

from 'the chairman of the State Highway Commission of upon these amendments upon the theory that they present Kentucky-! received it yesterd~-setting out the fact that ·a discrimination -against any -other State, or :an unfair out nf the million nine hundred and some odd thousand :advantage to Alabama and Georgia, it shows that they have dollars which have been appropriated for the reconstruc- .Passed upon them witbout a knowledge of the real undertion of highways in Kentucky as the result of the floods in :lying policy. 1927 and 1928, there is still remaining $1,206,000 ·of that Mr. JONES. That is not the sole ground of ubjection on fund which the State is not able to match. Therefore, the part of the House conferees. unless -there is some provision that would cover the state Mr. "BLACK. That may not be the sole ground of -objec-df Kentucky, it will be unable to use that -$1,200,000. tion on their part. As the Senator said, he has not revealed

iin addition te that, I am informed that the State has ·all that occurred; but lle gives that as an argument. Of exhausted its ordinary sources of State revenues for road course, there may be other arguments .()n the part of the pur.poses to .match an additional $1;300,000 that has been Rouse conferees. allocated to the State of Kentucky out of ordinary appro- I discovered very speedily, before I had been 'here very priations for Federal highways. If this situation had ·been long, that the House conferees can usually 'find plenty of called to the attention of the committee before the bill objections to any Senate amendment which would deviate a passed either ·the Senate or the House it might .have been hm.r's breadth from their course. It is not a discrimination, included; but now, as I understand the parliamentary situa- :and I will explain it to the Senate so ths;t they can see it. tion, .the bill .having 'Passed both House and Senate, there is .It is a question of benefit to the Federal Government. no opportunity for an amendment to include Kentucky. The first bill of this kind that was passed was passed for

Mr. JONES. The Senator is -correct. the State of Vermont. They had a very severe :fiood during Mr. BARKLEY. How can that situation be remedied? the administration of President Coolidge. This body and

We are on exactly the same basis as Georgia and Alabama, the other body very promptly passed a bill, which was signed but we did not .have that information until it was too late by the President, providing that on account of the fact that to insert an amendment to cover the State. the Federal-aid highways in Vermont had been injured by

.Mr. JONES. Of course, that would have to be dealt with floods, and _it was difficult for them to restore those roads, in the future by such legislation as Congress might .deem it an unusual contingency was presented, .and one which called wise to pass. for action on the part of the Federal Government. There-

-Mr. BARKLEY. Would the Senator be willing -to waive fore at that time they passed a bill which provided that, in any parliamentary technical points that might be raised addition io the regular money allocated from Federal funds, against an amendment to the appropriation bill carrying Vermont should have another appropriation to restore these the regular .appropriation for highways so as to take in Ken- ·roads which should be matched by the State of Vermont. tucky under the same arrangement with Alabama and Later, that was followed with several other -enactments. Georgia? Otherwise this whole appropriation will be IQf no At a later period the States of Alabama and Georgia and benefit whatever to my State. It will not employ a single Kentucky and several -others suffered from very severe floods. man in addition .fur the purpose of building highways. 'Bills were passed in accordance with the precedent which

Mr. J"ONES . .But the State of Kentucky can get an .ad- 'had been established in regard to the State of Vermont, prevance of the .proportionate part to which it is entitled of viding that these roads should be restored by the payment this $80,ooo;ono. · of Federal funds, hich funds were to be matehed by the

Mr. BARKLEY. "Yes; it can get an .advance. State.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 929 It was to the interest of the Federal Government to re

store these roads. They are Federal-aid highways. One of them, in Alabama, extends from the northern to the southern boundary. A few days ago I had a complaint about the fact that a part of the main Federal-aid highway extending through the state was abnost impassable. The State of Alabama, by reason of a condition which exists there, has not been able to match the funds which have already been appropriated by this body, by the other body, and the bill signed by the President. So the money has already been appropriated, recognizing that it is to the advantage of the Government to spend this money to restore these Federalaid highways injured by floods. The result is that this money has already been appropriated. It is for the benefit of the Federal Government, as for others, to have these roads restored.

Mr. JONES. Mr. President, does not the Senator think that there ought to be in the RECORD, in connection with his remarks, the statement that this was on the condition that the money should be matched by the State?

Mr. BLACK. I thought that was in the RECORD, Mr. President. If it was not, I will add it. There was originally a provision in the bill that it should be matched by the State.

While personally I favor an appropriation by the Government which shall not be matched by the States under the conditions under which I voted for the Senator's amendment, I have not proposed in this amendment that the State of Alabama shall be treated differently from the others. I simply propose that pending the time when the State can match this money, as provided with reference to the other money, this money which has already been appropriated shall be released and the highways which were injured by the floods shall be restored; and this body has already gone on record in a number of instances that it is the duty of the Government to do that very thing.

What injury is that, for instance, to the State of Indiana, from which I understand some of the members of the conference committee hail? What injury can Indiana suffer by reason of the fact that this advancement, this appropriation which has already been voted and which is lying up, ready to be spent on Federal roads necessary to-day for two 1·easons--to improve the highways and to give employmentis allowed to be spent now in putting men to work in the South, where they can work in the wintertime, and later be matched by the State as provided in the original bill?

It is another instance of the stubbornness which has ex- . isted in this capitol for a long time against permitting the deviation of a hair's breadth, the dotting of an " i,'' or the crossing of a " t " from anything which the administration proposes or which the House conferees think we should adopt. There is no injury to anybody. There is no discrimination against any State.

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Alabama yield to the Senator from Nebraska? Mr. BLACK. I yield to the Senator. Mr. NORRIS. I should like to ask the Senator with ref

erence to the language of amendment numbered 11, which I do not quite understand. It provides that this money shall be released-

Without the reqUirement that the State match said expenditure except in the manner provided herein.

What provision is there "herein" for the matching? Mr. JONES. Mr. President, may I suggest to the Senator

that that matter was considered in conference, and if we should finally agree in substance to this amendment the amendment will be changed so as to conform to the statement I made a while ago-that it wm be dealt with just the same as the $80,000,000. I do not think the language of the amendment makes that clear at all.

Mr. NORRIS. At least I could not understand it. Mr. JONES. I will say that that will be made clear in

case we should adopt the amendment. Mr. BLACK. It was intended, I may state to both Sena

tors, to refer to the method of matching as provided in this

LXXIV--59

bill, which is that in afteryears, as "Provided with reference to the $80,000,000, it shall be matched by the State. But here is the concrete situation: One million six hundred and sixty thousand dollars was voted to restore Federal highways injured by floods. It has already been voted. The appropriation was made a year ago. It was made on condition that the State should match it; but the Government was interested by reason of the fact that it desired its Federalaid highways restored. The State is unable to match that money at the present time.

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President, I wish to inquire of the Senator-and I do so entirely for information, because I want to understand the amendment, and I do not quite understand it now-if this amendment stays in, will the ultimate result be that the State of Alabama will have to match the particular amount of money that is released?

Mr. BLACK. That is correct. Mr. NORRIS. Then am I right in the conclusion that the

only difference brought about by this amendment is that Alabama has additional time in which to match it? Is that · the effect of it?

Mr. BLACK. That is all That is the so1e and single effect of this amendment.

Mr. NORRIS. It is not a proviSion, then. that will utilize Federal funds in the State of Alabama that ultimately will not be matched by appropriations by the State of Alabama?

Mr. BLACK. It is not; and I would not ask that for Alabama alone, because that would be a discrimination and unfair as to the other states.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. BLACK. I yield to the Senator. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Is this the language that

has relationship to the colloquy between the Senator from Alabama and the Senator from Nebraska?-

Provided, That the sums so advanced shall be reimbursed to the Federal Government over a period of five years, commencing with the fiscal year 1933, by making deductions from regular apportionments made from further ~thorizations for carrying out the provisions of such act as amended and supplemented.

Mr. B~CK. That is correct. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I can not see how anyone

who wishes to use the Federal-aid system as a means of facilitating highway construction can have reasonable objection to this amendment. It seems to me that it simply makes payable a fund appropriated for another purpose for the purposes of road construction, and gives the States the privilege of reimbursement for it, which is in a measure equivalent to matching the fund.

Of course, it makes that additional fund available for the use of the State of Alabama; but if the State can use it in working out the present unemployment problem, what can be the objection to it? What objection has been urged against it?

Mr. BLACK. I will state to the Senator that I can not imagine any possible objection that could be urged.. except that it is a departure from the bill as passed by the House. It changes the language of the bill as passed by the House. This was an extraordinary situation. If the State of California, for instan~ or the State of Indiana, or the State of New York, or any other State, had suffered from floods, and it was to our interest to get the roads rebuilt, certainly I would not stand on this .floor and object to their having the privilege of spending that money now. at a time when it should be spent and at a time when it is neceSsary and at a time when the State is ready to spend it, purely on the ground that it would permit a little more to ·be spent in Alabama than somewhere else in proportion to the allotment.

Mr. GLASS. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Alabama yield to the Senator from Virginia? Mr. BLACK. I yield to the Senator. Mr. GLASS. I understand from the chairman of the

committee that the objection urged upon the conferees was that Alabama, along with other States, had been given the opportunity to utilize this fund, and all of the other States

930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 except Alabama and Georgia had matched the Federal appropriations, instituted and completed the work, and these two States had not.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President--The PRESIDiNG OFFICER (Mr. FEss in the chair).

Does the Senator from Alabama yield to the Senator from Kentucky?

Mr. BLACK. I yield. Mr. BARKLEY. Did I understand the Senator from Vir

ginia to state that the information came to the conferees that all the other States involved in a similar way had matched the Federal appropriation?

Mr. GLASS. That I understood; yes. Mr. BARKLEY. Did that information come from the

Treasury or from the Public Roads Bureau? Was it information which could be regarded as reliable?

Mr. GLASS. I do not know that it was definite information from them. The objection raised was to the effect that this was an effort to have us do something for these particular States which we had not been asked to do for any other of the States for which the flood money had originally been appropriated. In other words, these two States had not availed themselves of their opportunity to match the Federal fund to repair the damaged roads under the provisions of the law enacted. That was my information.

Mr. BARKLEY. I was wondering whether that information came officially from any of the departments, or whether it was given by members of the conference committee on the part of the House simply as a rumor. As a matter of fact, it turns out that Alabama and Georgia are not the only States.

Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I stated a while ago that there was no suggestion brought by anybody that any other State was in the condition of Georgia and Alabama. I do not think we got any official communication from the Treasury Department. But this matter has been pending for some little time, and we just assumed that as no requests had come in from other States, no:fie of the others were in the condition in which Georgia and Alabama find themselves. But the Senator from Kentucky has suggested that Kentucky is in a similar situation.

Mr. BARKLEY. The committee is not to be blamed for that situation. It is just one of those matters which did not come to us until after the bill had been passed, in time to enable us to offer amendments on the floor of the Senate.

Mr. JONES. The Senators from these States had not been advised af it. Let me suggest this to the Senator from Alabama for what it is worth; the Senator can give it such attention in his address as he cares to.

As indicating how the House committee really .feels about the matter, and that they have no serious antagonism to the States being given more time to meet this item, I find in the Agricultural appropriation bill a provision, on the last two pages of the bill, extending the time, providing that the unexpended balance of the appropriations for these purposes-that is, to meet these amounts-shall be continued until June 30, 1932. That relates to Alabama and Georgia. I also call attention to the fact that apparently South Carolina is in the same position, because they mention South Carolina as one of the States.

Mr. BLACK. South Carolina has just voted a bond issue. Mr. JONES. They do not mention Kentucky, however. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Mr. President, if the Sena-

tor will yield to me, the difference between the provision in the House agricultural appropriation bill and the Senate amendment in the conference report now under consideration, then, is that the Committee on Agriculture of the House proposes to extend the time until 1932, whereas this amendment gives five years?

Mr. JONES. No; not exactly that. The provision of the House bill does not pretend to incorporate in it the provisions relating to this $80,000,000.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I know that, but I mean with respect to the item relating specifically to the State of Alabama. -

Mr. JONES. That is what I have in mind. The House provision simply extends the time for a year for this matching to take place.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. The Senate provision, if it is retained, would give five years.

Mr. JONES. The State would match the monzy given by the United States Government, and then after 1933 Alabama would be given five years, and the money would be taken out of the apportionment to the State. It would not come out of the treasury of Alabama at all, but its apportionment under the regular highway act would be diminished proportionately over the 5-year period.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. That is what I was attempting to say.

Mr. JONES. The Senator stated it correctly. Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, there has been a lot of talk

in the papers and elsewhere about wanting to put people to work. I am going to explain what the real difference is. It is said that this great program will pu~ people to work, and that the desire is to put people to work. If this money is appropriated it will put people to work immediately building $1,200,000 worth of roads. If it is not authorized to be expended, the authorities will not be able to p~t people to work immediately building $1,200,000 worth of roads.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Alabama yield to the Senator from Kentucky? Mr. BLACK. I yield. Mr. BARKLEY. I do not know how accurate my informa

tion may be, but I have been informed from two or three sources that there is something like $169,000,000 of Federalaid appropriations backed up in the Treasury or in the Department of Agriculture which has not been accepted or matched by the various States; in other words, that the States, taking the country as a whole, have been unable to use a total of about $169,000,000 or $170,000,000 which we have heretofore over a period of years appropriated. · If that be true, I am wondering how much real good the appropriation of $80,000,000 would do toward the employment of men in building highways if there is already backed up in the Treasury $165,000,000 or $170,000,000 the States have been unable to use.

1\Ir. SMOOT. Mr. President, I am quite sure the Senator's information, or the report made to him, is incorrect. I can state positively that there is not that much money which has not been made use of.

Mr. BARKLEY. My information is that that was a statement made by the Secretary of Agriculture before one of the committees.

Mr. SMOOT. I think the statement is wrong. Mr. BARKLEY. There is evidently a considerable amount.

That may not be the right figure. Mr. WAGNER. Mr. President, if I may volunteer, the

information I got was that there was over $40,000,000 which has . been apprcpriated and is waiting for the States to match the sums allotted. That is still undisposed of.

Mr. GEORGE. What was the amount? Mr. WAGNER. I understood it to be about $40,000,000. Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, let me make a brief state-

ment. The $80,000,000 appropriated in this bill will enable the States to utilize not only the $80,000,000 but any sum not exceeding $80,000,000 now appropriated under the Federal aid bill.

Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, I have no doubt that the $40,000,00 spoken of by the Senator from New York is available, and that the States are going to take advantage of it. It is only a question of time. Some of the States had to advertise for the purpose, and just as soon as the bonds are authorized to match the Government appropriation all of that $40,000,000 will be used.

Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, I presume that is true, but the $80,000,000, if made immediately available, will enable the States to ask for any appropriation standing to their credit. In any event, the $40,QOO,OOO will be added to the $80,000,000 if this conference report is agreed to. That is the point I was trying to make.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 931 Mr. SMOOT. All I wanted to call the Senate's attention

to was that the $40,000,000 now spoken of is more than likely going to be made available to the States; and if it is not, it will be on account of inaction on the part of the States.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, I desire in a very brief form, so that Senators can get the exact issue, to try to state it so that it will be clear.

This appropriation does not affect the $80,000,000; it does not reduce it, it does not increase it, it does not touch it. The appropriation was made a year ago. The sole effect is this, that instead of Alabama being compelled to match it next year, or next month, when it spends the money, the time for matching it will be postponed as provided in the bill.

Mr. SMOOT. Not as provided in this bill. It is the postponement of appropriations that have already been authorized. In other words, the Senator desires now, not only for Alabama to avail themselves of the provision in the bill, but he wants Alabama also to be treated differently from the way any other State is treated, by having the time extended as it has not been for other States.

Mr. BLACK. I call the Senator's attention to the fact that while his language is technically correct, the plain import of it is misleading, of course not purposely, to this extent: Alabama does not claim that it is surrendering its right to a part of the $80,000,000. This has nothing to· do with the $80,000,000. This amendment covers an appropriation which was made a year ago on account of extraordinary circumstances. At that time the committee unanimously· thought that, in accordance with what had been done for Vermont, in accordance with what had been done for other States, it was right that this action should be taken, and the Senate unanimously passed it, and it unanimously passed the House, so that the policy is settled. The real issue is this: Is there a real desire to spend the money now in order to give employment now, or is there a desire to withhold the spending of the money until, later, it can be matched by the States? Eventually it will be reimbursed under either condition. It has already been appropriated. If the real object of this administration and the real object of the leaders of this administration is to put people to work, they will not oppose this amendment in the conference of the two Houses. Of course, if the object is to have sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal, and to have it loudly announced and published to the world that they are going to remove all depression and give everybody employment without spending any money, then they ought to decline to agree to it.

Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, there is this about it: Under the pending conference report bill Alabama will receive her proportion, just the same as any other State will.

Mr. BLACK. Which nobody denies. Mr. SMOOT. Under the provisions of the bill, that

money need not be matched. That money Alabama could go right on and get.

Mr. BLACK. That is correct. Mr. SMOOT. And not only this year, but next year and

the year following, before there will be a dollar asked from Alabama under the provisions of this bill. It applies exactly the same to others.

Mr. BLACK. Nobody has questioned that at all. Mr. SMOOT. I thought there was some idea that Ala

bama, in this particular appropriation, was being treated differently from the way other States were being treated. She is not.

Mr. BLACK. Of course she is not. Mr. SMOOT. She gets the same proportion of money

the State of Florida will get out of this appropriation for road building, or any other State of the Union will get.

Mr. BLACK. Just let me make that clear. I will make it clear so that the Senator will see that nobody has asserted or insinuated or suggested that.

The $80,000,000 is to be allocated among the States, Alabama included. That is clear. It is to be advanced to the States. That is clear. But an appropriation was m~ade

about a year ago for an extraordinary situation, which can not be released now unless it is matched. The State of Alabama can not match it now. The Government will be out no money, not one dime, if this amendment is accepted; but if it is accepted men will be put -to work on roads immediately. The projects are ready, the plans are drawn, they are ready to do everything and proceed with the work and put people to work in a State where such work can be done in the wintertime.

Mr. SHORTRIDGE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me?

Mr. BLACK. I yield. Mr. SHORTRIDGE. I think I understand the purpose

and the meaning and the effect of the proposed amendment. As I now understand, it is merely to give Alabama time in which to match the appropriation?

Mr. BLACK. The Senator has clearly stated it. Mr. SHORTRIDGE. To match the amount devoted to

Alabama. Am I right? Mr. BLACK. Under a law enacted last year. Mr. SHORTRIDGE. Yes. And the Senator advises us

that Alabama will ultimately, in the way suggested, match the Federal appropriation.

Mr. BLACK. The bill so provides. Mr. SHORTRIDGE. All, therefore, the Senator is seeking

is that Alabama be relieved from immediately matching the Federal appropriation?

Mr. BLACK. That is correct. Mr. SMOOT. Not the appropriation in the conference re

port bill, but appropriations which have already been made. Mr. HOWELL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to

me? Mr. BLACK. I yield. Mr. HOWELL. As I understand it, $40,000,000 have not

been matched by the States; not for the particular reason that is advanced in the case of Alabama but for cogent reasons, undoubtedly, the States have not been able to match this $40,000,000. In those States people might be put to work immediately if we could include this $40,000,000.

Mr. BLACK. They are included in the $80,000,000. That is the regular appropriation. They are included in that. That takes care of that $40,000,000.

Mr. HOWELL. I am talking about the $40,000,000 which have not been matched.

Mr. BLACK. That is provided for in this bill. The object and purpose of this bill is that this $40,000,000 may be put to work now, and the States will get it, whether the Alabama appropriation is made less or larger, is taken from or added to. It has not the slightest connection with it. It can not affect Nebraska injuriously. It is impossible for Nebraska to lose a dime. It is impossible for any State to lose a dime.

Mr. HOWELL. When, may I ask, are the States to mat-.:~1 the $40,000,000?

Mr. BLACK. As provided in this amendment. Mr. HOWELL. But when is that? I am talking about

the $40,000,000. Mr. BLACK. It deals with the advancing of money to

those States which can not match what is already in the Treasury.

Mr. JONES. The $80,000,000. Mr. BLACK. That is correct. Mr. JONES. It does not deal with the $40,000,000 at all. Mr. HOWELL. Ought we not in fairness to include the

additional $40,000,000? Mr. BLACK. In the · first place, if anybody had wanted

that done they would, of course, have offered an amendment providing for it. I voted for the amendment offered by the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. BLAINE], which I thought was right and still think was right, providing that in this emergency the money should be paid to the States for expenditure without being matched at all. That amendment was rejected. We have now authorized an appropriation of $80,-000,000 to be advanced to those States which are not able to match it to-day. Of course, those which are not able to

932 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 match it are those which have the $40,000,000 lying in the Treasury at this time.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, if the Senator will permit me-. Mr. BLACK. I yield.

Mr. BARKLEY. That $40,000,000 has already been appropriated. It is not in this bill. It is an appropriation now lying in the Treasury. In order to match that $40,000,-000, if that is the correct amount, they will have to take $40,000,000 of the $80,000,000 when appropriated here to match the $40,000,000 already to their credit.

Mr. SMOOT. The $40,000,000 includes Alabama and Georgia funds and also includes money not drawn by some States that no doubt will draw it. That is the amount which is authorized and has been matched and, more than likely, outside of Alabama and Georgia, will all be drawn.

Mr. BARKLEY. In order to match that $40,000,000 those States · will have to take $40,000,000 of this $80,000,000 to match it?

Mr. SMOOT. Oh, no; this $40,000,000 lies there to their credit until July 1, and any time between now and July 1 they can get it by matching it, because it is there appropriated by the Federal Government to be matched by those States. · Mr. BARKLEY. But it has to be matched, and it has to

be matched out of this $80,000,000. Mr. SMOOT. No; it is already available there for the

States to match. Mr. BARKLEY. What are they going to do with the

money we are going to advance to them to match Federal funds?

Mr. SMOOT. Under this bill the allocation will be made and they do not have to pay it back for three years.

Mr. BARKLEY. What money is it they are · going to match with this $80,000,000?

Mr. SMOOT. The $80,000,000 that we are appropriating now?

Mr. BARKLEY. Yes. Mr. SMOOT. The money that will come to the States

after three years hence. Mr. BARKLEY. But after we make the appropriation of

$80,000,000 which is to be advanced to the States, which is to match something already available on the part of the Federal Treasury, are we going to take $40,000,000 of this $80,-000,000 and match the other $40,000,000 in the Treasury?

Mr. SMOOT. Oh, no. Mr. BARKLEY. Either the Senator is very much mud

dled about the situation or I am. Mr. SMOOT. No one knows until July 1 what the amount

will be. Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, let me ask the Senator from

Utah a question. What is his understanding as to the time when Alabama will get her share of the money provided in the bill?

Mr. SMOOT. Alabama has a perfect right up to July 1 to match the money that has already been appropriated at the last session of Congress, just as any other State has that right. All of that appropriation has been made available, with the exception of $40,000,000; and ·up ·to July 1 of ·this year any other State can take advantage of that allocation.

Mr. HEFLIN. Suppose it fails to do so by the 1st of July? Mr. SMOOT. Then the law lapses as far as the unex

pended amount of money is concerned which has not been taken advantage of by the States.

Mr. HEFLIN. The Senator is aware, perhaps, that 39 counties out of 67 in Alabama are listed as in the droughtstricken area, and that there are 28 . others out of the 67 which are suffering greatly on account of the drought. Practically all of the counties in the State, all but 10 or 12, are suffering severely. Our State is hard hit at this particular time. Why not have an extension at this time and give us additional time to match the funds provided?

Mr. SMOOT. All of the States have that right for three years to receive the allocation of the amount appropriated without matching it at all, but at the end of three years, and in the fourth year when the appropriation is made for this

purpose, they, of course, pay the amount they have already drawn.

Mr. BLACK. Mr. President, I apologize to the Senate for occupying so much time. The $40,000,000 has nothing to.do with the matter . directly or indirectly. It has no possible bearing on the question. It neither raises nor reduces the ·$80,000,000. The sole question is, shall this money be paid now without matching and let it be matched later, or shall we force the matching? The result of the two possibilities is this: If we force Alabama to match it, it can not be done now, and therefore the money can not be spent now; but if Alabama is not forced to match it, I have authority to state that if it is made available now the projects are ready, the plans are drawn, and the authorities are ready to start the restoration of this particular highway. · The sole issue is, Shall we match the fund now or shall

we have the delay? The answer to t_hat question depends on this situation: If we want to give people work now, we will certainly not put any strings around the appropriation which has been already made. If, on the contrary, it is thought wiser to put them to work 6 or 12 months from now, when starvation is more general, if possible, than it is to-day, then we should vote against the amendment.

Mr. FLETCHER. Mr. President, may I suggest to the Senator that Alabama gets a certain portion of the sum, and I was wondering if they could not use the proportion coming to ·Alabama under the $80,000,000?

Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, that is the reason why we proposed the amendments. We will not get enough out of the $80,000,000 to make this special appropriation available. I shall be very glad to explain that.

Mr. GLASS. Mr. President, before the Senator proceeds further will he permit me to make a brief statement?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Georgia yield to the Senator from Virginia?

Mr. GEORGE. Certainly. Mr. GLASS. If the Senator from Georgia will bear with

me just a moment, as a conferee on this particular bill and hearing the matter discussed in conference and hearing it discussed here on the floor. I am beginning to wonder if I exactly understand what it is all about. My understanding in conference was that the Congress made a special appropriation for the special purpose of relieving certain States which had been afflicted by damaging floods, and that certain of these States availed themselves of the ot!er to match the Federal fund and reconstruct the damaged roads. Certain others of the afflicted States have not matched the Federal fund, and it is now proposed to divert from this lump-sum appropriation, as I understand it, a sufficient amount to the applying States to correct their omission to match the Federal appropriation. Is not that it?

Mr. GEORGE. No; that is not it at all. If the conferees acted upon that assumption, they acted on a mistaken state of fact.

Mr. GLASS. I did, on the theory that this was an additional opportunity to the delinquent States to match Federal funds out of the lump sum of $80,000,000.

Mr. GEORGE. ·No; this will not affect that fund by a single penny. If the conferees proceeded on that theory, they proceeded on a mistaken theory.

Mr. GLASS. I did so. Mr. SMOOT. I will say to the Senator that I did not. Mr. GEORGE. Mr. President, if the Senate will bear

with me a moment I think it can be easily understood. Th~ Senate will recall that the Senator from Montana

[Mr. WALSH] objected to certain language appearing in line 23 and going down to line 25 of the bill when we had it before the Senate. That language was eliminated in the Senate, but with the understanding that if the elimination of that· language interfered with the use of the $80,000,000 appropriated to the several States, that is, if it placed any limitation upon the use by the States of the $80,000,000, when and if advanced by the Government to the States, that language would be restored in conference.

The Senator in charge of the conference report has already submitted his report upon amendments Nos. 6 and

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 933 7 and the original language has been restored, so that the where the confusion arises, and I want to have that made $80,000,000 is to be prorated among the several States pre- clear. Does the Senator have reference to the fund availcisely as the appropriation for aid to the highway system able to the seve1·a1 States under the general Federal-aid is made under the general law. In fact the $80,000,000 is fund? but an advance. Every penny of it is to be repaid by the Mr. WAGNER. There is a sum which the State of Gearstates. It is to be repaid beginning with 1933 over a period gia will receive under this emergency act allocated to it out of five years. Twenty per cent of it in each of the five of the $80,000,000? years is to be repaid by deducting that amount from the Mr. GEORGE. Exactly. Georgia will get its pro rata appropriation made under the usual highway bill to the proportion. several States. Mr. WAGNER. That is, Federal money appropriated for

Georgia faces this peculiar situation and Alabama is in State aid? this peculiar situation-and I invite the attention of the Mr. GEORGE. Yes. Senator from Kentucky [Mr. BARKLEY] because the ques- Mr. WAGNER. As I understand, the Senator proposes to tions he propounded indicate that he does not understand use that sum, Federal money, allocated to the State of the exact situation. Georgia has standing to her credit of Georgia, for the purpose of matching an appropriation now the general highway fund an amount of money which she lying in the Treasury waiting to be matched by the State of has not been able to match. Very well. The State will be Georgia? able to take its part of the $80,000,000, under the language Mr. GEORGE. A similar amount-that is the purpose of which has now been restored by the conferees, and which this bill. should have been restored, and say to the Federal Govern- Mr. WAGNER. I say that without an authorization such ment, " We are now ready to match the money standing to as the amendment proposes Federal money so allocated our credit under the general highway law." If Georgia's could not be used for that purpose. Is not that a fact? In pro rata part of the $80,000,000 were sufficient to enable other words, it would require some special authorization in the State to match the amount standing to her credit order to permit the State of Georgia to use the Federal under the general highway law and the special appropria- money for the purpose of matching an appropriation here-tion, this amendment would not have been presented. I tofore made? · · hope Senators understand the situation. Mr. GEORGE. No; the State of Georgia has to obtain

The case of Kentucky, as I understand it, is that while the money. Kentucky has not been able to match this special appro- Mr. WAGNER. Exactly. It has to borrow in this case. priation made for the purpose of repairing bridges and por- Mr. GEORGE. That is the whole purpose of this bill, tions of the highway destroyed by flood, nevertheless when namely, to advance to the States $80,000,000. Kentucky gets her pro rata part of the $80,000,000 she will be Mr. WAGNER. To borrow it from the Federal Gov-able to match all funds standing to her credit in the Bureau ernment. of Public Roads, including the unexpended balance of the Mr. GEORGE. Yes; in a sense to borrow it from the special appropriation. But whether I am correct in that or Federal Government. New York is borrowing it from the not, of course, it was not my duty, nor did I have the infor- Federal Government, as is every other State borrewing its mation with regard to Kentucky or any other State when I pro rata part from the Federal Government. offered the amendment, to include them. Mr. WAGNER. My ptrrpose in asking the question is to

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield bring out the situation clearly. there? Mr. GEORGE. Every State is borrowing its part from the

Mr. GEORGE. If the Senator will allow me to make a Federal Government. full explanation, then I will yield. Mr. BLAINE. Mr. President--

Mr. President, the retention of amendment No. 11 and The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from amendment No. 12 relating to the States of Alabama and Georgia yield to the Senator from Wisconsin? Georgia will not increase the $80,000,000 appropriation; it Mr. GEORGE. I yield. will not toll the $80,000,000; it will not affect it one whit. Mr. BLAINE. It seems to me that there is some confusion I hope that has been made clear. over the terms which have been used. The States do not

Mr. GLASS. Mr. President, on that point, it seems to me, borrow the $80,000,000, as I understand. The $80,000,000 from the Senator's own statement, that my statement made as provided by the bill, as it now stands with the Senate a while ago is accurate. In other words, from the Senator's amendment, is advanced to the States to be expended upon statement; Georgia, instead of matching the Federal appro- the Federal highway projects, and that $80,000,000 is reimpriation out of its own revenues, proposes to borrow from its bursable by the States .within five years from the date fixed proportion of the $80,000,000 a sum with which to match the in the bill. Federal appropriation. As I understand, the special appropriation made to the

Mr. GEORGE. That is the purpose of the amendment. State of Georgia for the reconstruction of Federal-aid high-Mr. GLASS. That is what I said. ways was necessitated by reason of floods, and the State of Mr. GEORGE. That is the whole purpose of the amend- Georgia had to match that appropriation 50-50.

ment. The State will not borrow the amount from the Mr. GEORGE. That is correct. $80,000,000 but-- Mr. BLAINE. Under this bill, with amendment No. 12,

Mr. GLASS. It is diverted from the $80,000,000. as I understand the language of the bill, the State of Mr. GEORGE. No; it will not be diverted, if the Senator Georgia will not be required to match the flood aid-! call

will pardon me. it "floor aid "-or money advanced for the construction Mr. BLACK. It is already provided by another appro- of highways destroyed by flood; the State of Georgia will

priation. not be required to match that half million dollars; but the Mr. GEORGE. Yes. State of Georgia will be required to reimburse the Federal Mr. WAGNER. Mr. President-- Government within the same 5-year period that the State The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from of Georgia will reimburse the Federal Government for its

Georgia yield to the Senator from New York? pro rata share of the $80,000,000. Mr. GEORGE. I yield. Mr. GEORGE. That is exactly it. Mr. WAGNER. I merely want to ask a question for infor- Mr. BLAINE. In other words, what the amendment does

mation. Without the authorization provided for in this is to take from the Treasury of the United States presently, amendment, the fund which the State of Georgia would draw so far as the State of Georgia is concerned, $506,067.50 and from this $80,000,000 could not be used to match an appro- to withhold from the State of Georgia during the 5-year priation already made and waiting matching by the State period beginning in 1933 that much of its pro rata share of of Georgia? the Federal aid. So, as a matter of fact, the Federal Gov-

Mr. GEORGE. What does the Senator now refer to--the ernment will within the 5-year period be a beneficiary. I! general road fund or this special appropriation? That is _ the . two amendments proposed by the Senators from the

934 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 State of Alabama and the State of Georgia shall be adopted, · that-that of the general appropriationS for roads and the the Federal Government will presently part with the money allocations to Kentucky-there is another $1,300,000 which that it has appropriated · for the reconstruction of roads is unmatched, making altogether two and a half million

- destroyed by floods, but the two States will reimburse the dollars of Federal funds available for Kentucky if that state Federal Government for that amount. I may be mistaken is able to match the amount. Out of this $80,000,000, as I in my interpretation, but that, in my opinion, wi]). be the understand, only about one million and a half, or a little result. more than that, will be allocated to Kentucky; so it is

Mr·. GEORGE. Mr. President, I repeat that the two obvious that unless Kentucky has something more than amendments, Nos. 11 and 12, do not increase nor diminish $1,000,000 already available to match one of these funds or the $80,000,000 appropriation carried in this bill. The to go toward matching one of these funds it would not be $506,000 provided in amendment No. 11 for the State of able to match both of them out of .the allocation. Georgia will not toll that $80,000,000 ~ppropriation. The Mr. GEORGE. That is, if Kentucky has no other funds $80,000,000 will be prorated to the several States just as if which she can use for that purpose? these amendments had not ·been incorporated in the bill Mr. BARKLEY. Yes. and just as it will be prorated if these amendments are Mr. GEORGE. That is true; but I apprehend the Sen-stricken out of the bill. But if the amendment remains in ator will not vote against the amendments which the senthe bill the State of Georgia will have the opportunity of ators from Alabama and Georgia succeeded in getting into using $506,000 already appropriated to it in a bill passed the bill. more than a year ago, which money is now standing await- Mr. BARKLEY. No; I would not vote against the amend-ing the meeting of conditions by the State which the State ments; I am in favor of the amendments. is not able to meet. That $506,000, however, will not be de- Mr. GEORGE. I join in the request that Kentucky be ducted from the $80,000,000; the $506,000 has already been ap- now allowed to insert a similar amendment if the parliapropriated by a law passed by the Congress of the United mentary situation permits. I" think as a matter of justice it States. The passage of the pending bill will not affect the law should be done. except in the one particular of releasing that appropriation Mr. BRATTON. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for without the necessity on the part of the State of Georgia of a question? presently meeting the conditions upon which it was originally Mr. GEORGE. I yield to the Senator from New Mexico. made. Mr. BRATTON. Did the original act require the State of

The only reason for offering the amendment is this: The Georgia to match the fund appropriated from the Federal state of Georgia will have available to it out of the $80,000,- Treasury? 000 appropriated its pro rata part of that sum, but its pro Mr. GEORGE. To the extent of $506,000; yes. rata part of the $80,000,000 will be sufficient only to enable Mr. BRATTON. Would this amendment relieve the state it to carry on its work under the general Federal highway of that obligation? act, to meet the funds appropriated to it under that act. It Mr. GEORGE. No; this amendment would allow its rewill not be able to match the special appropriation already lease to the State without presently matching it, but it made of ..$506,000. · would be required to match it during the 5-year period

The particular appropriation of $506,000 was made to the beginning in 1933. State because-that is to say, it was the chief reason-an Mr. BRATTON. If it be true, -Mr. President, that the interstate highway was destroyed by fiood. Georgia's pro amendment takes no additional money out of the Treasury rata _part of replacing that interstate highway amounts, let and does not relieve the State of the obligation to match the us say, to a million dollars. That appropriation was made appropriation at a later date, what objection can there be to enable Georgia to replace that particular highway origi- to this amendment? nany· built by the State, aided by Federal funds; but Georgia Mr. GEORGE. I do not know of any, except that the has not been able to meet that particular special appro- conferees probably misunderstood the whole purpose of it. priation, as Alabama has not been able to meet a similar The House conferees may have insisted that there be nothappropriation, for this reason: The State has now a deficit ing written in the bill except what the House was pleased to of some $5,000,000. The governor has already announced send over to this body. In the last analysis that is a proper his purpose to call an extra session of the legislature for statement. the purpose of reforming the taxing system of the State; Mr. BRATTON. If this amendment merely permits the but no moneys can be raised in the State under a new tax use of tht; money now to accelerate the reconstruction of law until the end of 1931. So the $506,000 will remain those roads destroyed by fiood and defers the date at which unused in the Treasury unless this amendment shall be the State must match it, I am unable to see any valid objec-retained in the bill. tion whatever to the amendment.

In all kindness I want to say to the conferees that the two Mr. GEORGE. I do not think there can be any valid who have spoken have not understood the purpose of the objection to the amendment if it is properly understood. amendment, and do not now understand the purpose of this The matter stands in this way, and this is the whole of it. amendment. If this amendment is stricken out, the State of Georgia

If Kentucky is in a similar situation, Kentucky should will not be able to use the $506,000 already appropriated have offered a similar amendment. Let me make that sug- to it-not in this bill but in a law that was passed and gestion. I do not think Kentucky is in the same shape, be- approved a year ago-perhaps until 1932, maybe until 1933. cause I believe that on examination it will be found that the Of course, the appropriation could be kept alive, and we pro rata part of the $80,000,000 which Kentucky will receive will try to see to it that it is kept alive, so far as that goes. will be sufficient to enable Kentucky to match not only Ultimately the State will be able to use it. her general road fund-that is, the amount appropriated If this amendment is retained, the State will be able now under the general highway act-but the amount appropri- to use that special appropriation, but it will be required to ated under any similar special legislation, such as was en- repay every cent of it in 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, and 1937-acted in the case of Alabama and Georgia. that is, during five years. It will be required to repay it out

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President-- of the general road fund. Mr. GEORGE. I yield to the Senator from Kentucky. Mr. BLAINE. Mr. Presideht---Mr. BARKLEY. With reference to Kentucky, as I said The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from

a while ago, the exact information as to the situation in that Georgia yield to the Senator from Wisconsin? State was not available until this bill had . passed both Mr. GEORGE. I yield to the Senator. Houses. So in a parliamentary way it was impossible to Mr. BLAINE. If these two amendments are retained in offer an amendment. The situation is this: Out of $1,900,000 the bill, as a matter of fact, at the end of five years after which was approp1·iated specially two years ago for the bene- the beginning of the fiscal year 1933 the Government will fit of Kentucky on account of floods there is · still left have saved >in the general highway Federal-aid fund a little $1,200,000 which the State has not matched. In addition to over $2,000,000 because of these two amendments--one the

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 935

amendment carrying ·$1,660,000 -and the other the amendment carrying $506,000. In round numbers, at the end of about eight years, the Federal Government will have saved a little over $2,000,000. The two States will have that amo_unt to be expended during the emergency. That is the financial result.

Mr. GEORGE. That is, its appropriations will be nearly $2,000,000 less on the joint accounts of the States of Georgia and Alabama than otherwise they would have be~n.

Mr. President, I am perfectly willing to answe1· any questions. I am sorry there has been so much colliusion. I want to repeat that the conferees who have spoken here, the Senator from Utah [Mr. SMOOT l and I think I may say the Senator from Virginia [Mr. GLASS], seem not to upprehend clearly the whole purpose and whole effect of these amendments.

These amendments do not affect the $80,000,000 appropriation. Under the language of the bill, the $80,000,000 is in effect an advance to the States--all of the States. Those States that do not need to use it will not use it, because if states already have ample funds in their treasuries with which to match existing appropriations they would not have ·to avail themselves of it. But those States that are compelled to use. it if they do any highway construction within the next year will, of course, be able to utilize their portion of the $80,000,000 as an advance with which they can commence work presently, and also as an advance on the basis of which they can ask the Federal Government to release to them any road appropriations already authorized for them.

The $500,000 in the case of Georgia, and the balance of the $1,600,000 in the case of Alabama, do not depend upon this bill so far · as the appropriation goes. They depend upon their sepa1·ate acts, already passed, already approved. a part of the law of the land. This bill merely enables the Treasury to release these special funds to the States of Alabama and Georgia· without requiring them presently to match those particular funds, as they are now required to do under the terms of the. special acts under which the appropriations were made. Georgia will get no ultimate advantage, however, because she must repay every penny of that fund beginning in 1933; and Alabama will get no advantage because Alabama will have to repay every penny of that fund beginning in 1933.

I therefore think, Mr. President, that these amendments ought to be adhered to and the conferees ought to be instructed not to recede from them.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, rna I engage the attention of the Senator from Washington [Mr. JoNEs]? I desire 'to ask the Senator from Washington if he would be willing to waive the parliamentary ·objection which precludes the offering of an amendment at this time to include Kentucky in the same terms as the amendiDents · with reference to Georgia and Alabama.

I will say to the Senator that, as I have already stated, the information upon which I make this request came here after the bill had passed both Houses, so that it was impossible to offer an amendment. It can be done now only by unanimous consent. I am wondering, in view of that, if the Senator from Washinooton would be willing to waive the parliamentary situation so as to permit the offering of such an amendment.

Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I appreciate the situation the Senator is in; and, if I were at liberty to act on my ·own personal inclination, I would do it. As the Senator in charge of this bill. however. I do not feel that I should consent to a new amendment going into this · measure at this stage of the legislation, so I feel that I should have to object.

Mr. BARKLEY. I am sorry the Senator feels that way ·about it.

Mr. HEBERT. Mr. President, in the course of a speech delivered here on the 15th instant by the senior Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. LA FoLLETTE] he read a telegram purporting to outline the situation in Rhode Island regarding unemployment. That telegram is printed in the RECORD of December 15, on page 705. -

It happened that i was called out of the Chamber just at that moment, and my attention was not drawn to the telegram until late that evening. It occurred to me as I read it that the conditions as outlined in it were somewhat overdrawn. In order to reassure myself I took occasion to telegraph to some of the charitable organizations in Providence, and I have this morning a telegram which I am going to read to the Senate and ask to have inserted in the RECORD.

The telegram to which I have reference, and which was read by the Senator from Wisconsin, was addressed to President William Green, of the American Federation of Labor, by William J. Fallon, secretary of the Providence Central Federated Union. For the information of the Senate I shall read it:

PROVIDENCE, R. I., December 10, 1930. President WILLIAM GREEN,

American Federation of Labor, Washington, D_ C.: Replying your telegram of December 9, unemployed in this city

too great to give a clear estimate. Providence labor greatly handicapped by out-of-town help being brought in on contract work. Hunger, fuel, and lack of employment working great hardship on countless numbers; charitable organizations taxed to limit; breadline groups of men in all walks of life. Number of unemployed increasing daily as per report at meeting of Central Federated Union held on this date. Manufacturers' agreement with President Hoover's plan being violated to a great extent. Only the fact that winter is mild is the greatest help to our people. ·Christmas buying very lax. Requests for assistance at every meeting; tor example, will report 97 per cent of musicians unemployed.

WILLIAM J. FALLON, Secretary Providence Central Federated Union.

I addressed a communication to Mr. Florri.mon M. Howe, of Providence, who is president of one of our large banking institutions, and _who was in charge of raising the usual community fund in Providence a few weeks ago, knowing that he would be in close touch with conditions there and would know whether or not the telegram sent by Mr. Fallon really contained a true statement of the facts. Mr. Howe telegraphs me as follows: • ·

PROVIDENCE; R. I., December 16, 1930. Hon. FELIX HEBERT,

United States Senate: Replying telegram. At meeting just concluded, at which follow

ing were represented, municipal director of public aid, Family Welfare Society, Church House, Salvation Army, Community Fund, St. Vincent De Paul, following resolutions passed: "We rea.1firm former statements and policies of long standing that the city . and voluntary agencies are prepared to meet the needs for relief in the present emergency. By relief we mean the furnishing of food, fuel, clothing, and shelter to families and individuals found to be in actual needs. This committee believes that the existing private charitable agencies of the city of Providence and the department of public aid are able to take oo.re of the actual distress in Providence, and it believes that the proposal that the Federal Government appropriate money for relief is unwise and unnecessary at the present time:• I feel local charities can and will care for any distress. Salvation Army and Church House supplying substantially greater amount of meals. Have no reliable figures regarding unemployment. Have been reduction in wages in isolated cases, but feel employers endeavoring to retain all labor best they can. Christmas buying satisfactory.

F. M. HoWE.

Mr. President, I have other telegrams, which I shall not take the time to read but which I wish to summarize.

Henry F. Burt, secretary of the Providence community fund, says:

Nobody is going hungry or cold in Providence 1f we know about it. Some cases are not brought to our attention promptly, and there may be suffering on that aceount, but certainly when they are discovered their needs are taken care of. I think the picture of conditions here as given in the telegram of Fallon to Green is overdrawn. As far as I've been able to study the situation, our organizations- have taken care of all cases brought to their attention.

It is true that charity orga~zations have been overtaxed, but not anywhere near as much as in other parts of the country, according to reports from the Russell Sage Foundation. I do not think there is any need in Pjovidence for the Federal Government to take care of our people who are hungry. We are perfectly able to take care of the situation. The community fund and the director o:f public aid have given assurance to the relief agencies that they will back them up to the fullest extent.

Edward P. Reiclv, director of public aid of Providence, says that the local situation has not got beyond the capacity of local agencies, and he sees no need of Federal aid in supplying relief.

• 936 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17

Robert E. Shepard, president of Shepard Stores, says that retail business for November is only off 12 per cent from a year ago, with one less business day this year, making the actual decrease only 9 per cent. He expects better business in December. From other sources comes the information that the total of Christmas club checks distributed by Providence banks is substantially higher this year than a year ago.

Col. Joseph Samuels, president of the Outlet Co., says that business at present is very good.

I am informed, too, that Providence pay-roll withdrawals from banks in November, 1930, were $9,270,000, as compared with a total of $9,714,400 in the preceding month of October and $11,212,000 in the month of November, 1929.

Mr. President, from my own knowledge of conditions in Providence and in other cities and towns in the State of Rhode Island, I feel assured that no one there will suffer because of existing conditions in the industrial field. Ours is an industrial State, and any amount of depression is felt there ordinarily perhaps as quickly as anywhere else in the country. At the same time there is a better condition in the cotton industry than we have had for some months back; in other words, the cotton industry is looking up to some extent in New England and in Rhode Island, so that there is some additional employment in that field. That is true also to some extent in other industries. At any rate, I know the people of Rhode Island, know their generosity; I know that there will be no suffering and no hunger there that will go unattended. We have recently raised in Providence a community fund of approximately a million dollars to take care of just such exigencies. I feel I can promise on behalf of the people of Rhode Island the fullest measure of cooperation in the care of those in want as well as in the efforts that are making for the amelioration of existing conditions.

Mr. GOFF. Mr. President, at this time I shall take a few moments to discuss a question similar to that which the Senator from Rhode Island has just addressed his remarks.

On December 15, as appears on pages 706 to 709 of the RECORD of that day, there was a general discussion of certain telegrams read by the senior Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. LA FoLLETTE]. He read a telegram sent by Frank Healey, secretary of the Ohio Valley Trades and Labor Association, to William Green, president of the American Federation of Labor, Washington, D. C., as follows:

Approximate number of unemployed in the city of Wheeling, 7,500. Various lodges and churches are doing wonderful work to aid the poor. No doubt there will be a great deal of suffering if conditions don't improve before the new year. We are not able to estimate the number of people who are suffering from hunger and the lack of clothing, but we presume there are many. This information will include all workers.

I forthwith sent a telegram signed by Senator HATFIELD and myself to the Bon. Thomas Y. Beckett, mayor of the city of Wheeling, W.Va., r~ading as follows:

DECEMBER 16, 1930. Hon. THOMAS BECKETT,

Mayor City of Wheeling, Wheeling, W. Va.: Senator LA FoLLETTE read in Senate to-day telegram from Mr.

Healey to William Green, stating approximate unemployed in your city 7,500; that lodges and churches were doing wonderful work to meet the ensuing depression and suffering; and that it was not possible to estimate the number now suffering from hunger and lack of clothing, but the presumption is there are a great many. Will you kindly answer, collect, exactly what the situation is and especially whether your municipality is able to cope with the suffering ensuing from the present depression?

HATFIELD AND GoFF.

I am just in receipt . of this answering telegram from the mayor of the city of Wheeling:

WHEELING, W.VA., December 16, 1930. GuY D. GoFF: ,

Survey shows approximately 3,000 unemployed in Ohio County. Conditions have been greatly exaggerated to you. We now have a charity and employment drive on for $250,000, and the citizens of Ohio County will certainly take care of their own obligations.

T. Y. BECKETT, Mayor.

I desire to add that I am assured from many other sources .of unquestioned reliability that the unemployment situation in the city of Wheeling, as well as in other cities and towns

in my State, is being met conformable to the outline contained in the telegram of the mayor of the city of Wheeling. It is merely confirmatory of the contention which I advanced in the argument on Monday, December 15, that until the local communities are shown to be unable to meet the pressing depression of the moment, the · Federal Government is not called upon or justified in interceding and appropriating relief funds to meet a local charitable condition in any city, town, or village in any State of this Federal Government. It will be noted, Mr. President, that the mayor of the city of Wheeling says that the unemployment in Ohio County, which also includes the city of Wheeling and embraces a much larger territory, is about 3,000, and not 7,500, as reported in the telegram of Mr. Healey and as read and submitted by the Senator from Wisconsin. West Virginia will take care of those who are unemployed and will protect the interests of those who are idle, unemployed, and in need of food, clothing, and shelter.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Washington [Mr. JONES].

Mr. McKELLAR. Does the Senator from Washington want a vote now?

Mr. JONES. I do. Mr. McKELLAR. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called th~ roll, and the following

Senators answered to their names: Ashurst Fess Kendrick Barkley Fletcher King Bingham Frazier La Follette Black George McGill Blaine Gillett McKellar Blease Glass McMaster Borah Glenn McNary Bratton Goff Metcal1 Brock Goldsborough Morrison Brookhart Gould Morrow Broussard Hale Moses Bulkley Harris Norbeck Capper Harrison Norris Caraway Hastings Nye Carey Hatfield Oddie Connally Hawes Patterson Copeland Hayden Phipps Couzens Hebert Pine Cutting Heflin Pittman Dale Howell Ransdell Davis Johnson Reed Deneen Jones ~obinson, Ark. Dill Kean Robinson, Ind.

Schall Sheppard Ship stead Shortridge Simmons Smith Smoot Steiwer Swanson Thomas, Idaho Thomas, Okla. Townsend Trammell Tydings Vandenberg Wagner Walcott Walsh, Mass. Waterman Watson Wheeler Williamson

The PRESID ro tempore. The Chair wishes to an-nounce the absence of his colleague the junior Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. KEYES] on account of a death in his family, and will ask that this announcement may stand for the day.

Ninety-one Senators having answered to their names, a quorum is present.

PROPOSED HOLIDAY RECESS

Mr. WATSON. Mr. President, I would like to make a brief statement about the question of the adjournment for the holiday recess.

Some three or four days ago Representative TILsoN, the majority floor leader of the House, came over to see me about a resolution providing for the holiday recess. At that time we had reason to believe that the relief legislation would have been passed by Saturday and out of the way, and, of colirse, we assumed that neither Senators nor Representatives wanted to go or would go home for the holiday recess until after the passage of that legislation. So it was tentatively arranged that there should be an adjournment on Saturday.

Since that time there has been a change in the situation. The drought relief bill is not only in the House but was in the Committee on Agriculture and was voted out just a few moments ago by a vote of 16 to 1, I was informed, in favor of the appropriation of $30,000,000. I notice that Senators smile when I say" 16 to 1."

Just when they are going to pass it in the House I could not ascertain. The probabilities are it will not be passeq

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 937 over there before to-morrow. When it comes here I do not know what the position of the chairman of the Committee on Agliculture and Forestry [Mr. McNARY] will be with reference to it, but at all events it is quite certain that we can not adjourn on Saturday.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The hour of 2 o'clock having arrived, the morning hour is concluded; but in line with rulings by the Chair the Senate will continue its discussion of the conference report.

Mr. JONES. No, Mr. President; I ask that the unfinished business may be laid before the Senate.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the unbroken line of rulings by the present occupant of the chair, by Vice President Dawes, and othe1·s, the unfinished business does not lose any of its rights, the conference report being a privileged rna tter.

Mr. JONES. I understand; but the Senator from New York [Mr. CoPELAND] expected to make an address on the Wlfinished business.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair intends to deal with that question immediately.

Mr. JONES. I thought it was proper to have that legislation before the Senate when he addresses himself to it.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Washington desire to lay aside the conference report?

·Mr. JONES. Yes; because we have agreed to vote at 3 o'clock on the motion to recommit the unfinished business, and as soon as that is disposed of I shall again call up the conference report.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Indiana still has the floor.

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President .. will the Senator from Indiana yield for a question?

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from Indiana yield to the Senator from Alabama?

Mr. WATSON. Certainly. Mr. HEFLIN. So far as I am concerned I want to sug

gest to the Senator that I think we ought to remain in session until the Senate and the House pass the $60,000,000 bill and the President signs the measure, before we take a recess for the Christmas holidays.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the unanimousconsent agreement entered into yesterday the Senator from New York [Mr. CoPELAND] is entitled to the floor. The Chair intends to recognize him immediately. The Chair does so, however, with the distinct understanding that the right of recognition is inherent in the Chair and can not be set aside even by a unanimous-consent agreement of the Senate. This also is in line with many rulings made by the Chair. The Senator from New York is recognized. Does he yield to the Senator from Indiana?

Mr. COPELAND. I yield to the Senator from Indiana. Mr. WATSON. Mr. Presitlent, it is evident that this par

ticular bill will not have been disposed of by Saturday evening and therefore that we can not adjourn at that time. The Hoilse leaders have informed me that they want to adjourn, if at all, on Tuesday, and at all events not before that day. Therefore I want to impress upon every Senator and lay it on his heart to shape his course so as to stay here until this legislation shall have been passed and signed by the President and becomes a law. It is the Executive policy, it is the legislative policy, the country demands it, the people w~nt it, and it is our business to attend to that legislation.

Mr. McNARY. Mr. President, I have heard with significant interest the statement made by our able leader. It may be that we shall have to provide for an adjournment on Tuesday; but in the opinion of the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry we still can adjourn on Saturday. I propose, if the bill passes the House to-day or to-morrow, to call the conferees together and stay in conference until the bill is disposed of. It is my opinion that we shall be able to bring the bill back here in time to permit us to adjourn before Saturday, if need be.

Mr. WATSON subsequently said: Mr. President, I stated a moment ago what had just been reported to me from the

House of Representatives, that the Committee on Agriculture had reported out the drought measure by a vote of 16 to 1. I merely obtained that information and then came in here to make a statement about the Christmas holiday recess. Subsequently I learned that a vote had been taken in the committee on the question of the substitution of $60,000,000 for $30,000,000, and that the Democratic members of the committee and, I am informed, one Republican member, voted for that proposed amendment. That failed, and then the only question was whether or not the joint resolution should be reported as amended, and that was the vote then taken, as I understand, which resulted 16 to 1.

Of course, I had not any desire to say that that was the only vote taken in the committee; I did not know anything about it; ancl I inadvertently stated the committee action, although that might be considered an unusual thing. At all events, the joint resolution was reported out of the committee.

To repeat, I certainly had no desire to say that that was the only vote taken in the committee, much less to give the impression to the Senate that the joint resolution had been reported out by a vote of 16 to 1 without any · further consideration or without any amendment having b~zn voted on. I feel it proper and right, in the interest of fairness and of harmony, to make that statement.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I was not in the Chamber when the Senator from Indiana [Mr. WATSON] made the statement to which he has just referred, but I was advised by persons who heard it that the impression growing out of the statement was that the House committee had disclosed an attitude of 16 to 1 in hostility to the position taken by the Senate with respect to certain features of the proposed drought-relief legislation.

I do not know how appropriate it is in the Senate to go into the details of what happens in a House committee; we all know the rules relating to such matters, and I certainly do not wish to transgress them; but I do not wish the impression to go to the country that the attitude of the mel!lbers of the committee at the other end of the Capitol was that of 16 to 1 in favor of reducing by one-half the amount which the Senate unanimously voted.

As usually happens, the committee took a vote on substituting the amount in the Senate joint resolution for the amount in the House measure. The House pursued the singular course of apparently ignoring the measure already passed by the Senate on the subject. Those in charge of the proceedings in the House undertook to secure consideration by a suspension of the rules of a measure carrying only $30,000,000, and that effort failed. Then the announcement was made that nothing further would be done in the early future. When the committee met this morning the vote came first on substituting the amount in the Senate joint resolution for the amount carried in the House measure. That failed by a narrow vote; every Democrat in the committee and one or more Republicans-

Mr. WATSON. One Republican. Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Voting, as stated by the

Senator from Indiana, to make the substitution. That motion having failed, the question, of course, recurred on reporting the House measure; and no doubt members of the committee felt that it was necessary to report a joint resolution in order to assure any action upon the subject.

My purpose in taking the floor is to give emphasis to the fact that any statement that the vote of the House committee reflected the attitude of 16 to 1 on the part of the committee having jurisdiction there with respect to the subject matter which is indirectly in controversy between the two Houses creates a wrong impression. The vote was actually close, and if a vote could be taken in the House of Representatives oh the proposition, the difficulties which have arisen in the enactment of this emergency legislation could be quickly solved.

We all realize the necessity for speedy action; we ought not to permit differences that arise here or at the other end of the Capitol or between the two Houses to be protracted when sut!ering is occwTing, or to interfere with the opera-

938 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 tion of the legislative machinery of the Nation. But there is an orderly process and that ought to be pursued.

The Senate first passed a measure on the subject. It would have been respectful had the body at the other end of the Capitol seen fit to give consideration to that measure. Failing to do that-refusing to do that, as I take it-we are now confronted with a threatened impasse between the two Houses. I do not want that to occur if it can be averted, and I do not desire the impression that has been made to continue that a vote of 16 to 1 reflects the attitude of the members of the House committee on the differences of which I have been speaking in respect to this legislation.

Mr. BARKLEY. Mr. President, did the House committee l'eport--

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FESS in the chair). The Senator from New York has the floor. Does he yield to the Senator from Kentucky?

Mr. COPELAND. I am very anxious to proceed at the earliest moment and to conclude. I am speaking under a unanimous-consent agreement limiting my time.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. I thank the Senator for yielding to me. I should like to answer the question of the Senator from Kentucky, and then I will not trespass further.

Mr. BARKLEY. Did the House committee report out the Senate joint resolution as amended, or did it report out its own joint resolution?

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. AI3 I understand, the House gave no consideration to the Senate JOint resolution. I inquire of the Senator from Indiana is not that correct?

Mr. WATSON. That is my understanding. . Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. It refused to consider the

Senate joint resolution, although it had already passed this body and gone over there several days ago. It took up a House joint resolution, and it became necessary to move to amend the House joint resolution by inserting $60,000,000 in place of $30,000,000. That motion failed by a small vote, every Democrat on the committee and one Republican voting for it, as stated by the Senator from Indiana.

Mr. BARKLEY. Then if the House should act upon the joint resolution reported out by its committee and should pass it, the House would be acting on one measure, and the Senate, having already acted on another, there could be no conference between the two Houses on that subject until both Houses had acted on the same measure.

Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. Until the Senate shall act on the House joint resolution. ·In other words, the House ignores the action of the Senate completely.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. By unanimous consent the pending question, the conference report, will be temporarily laid aside and the Chair lays before the Senate the unfinished business, which is Senate bill 255.

WELFARE OF MOTHERS AND INFANTS The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill <S. 255)

for the promotion of the health and welfare of mothers and infants, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from New York [Mr. CoPELAND] is recognized for 30 minutes.

Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, we have before us the maternity pill. The statement has been made, particularly by the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM] that the measure has been of no importance to the country. I find on page 420 of the RECORD for December 9 that the Senator from Connecticut, when speaking about Massachusetts, used this language:

Its neighboring State, New York, whose Senator just spoke to us about the advantages of this legislation, adopted the act of 1923, when its infant death rate was 72. In 1929, after having enjoyed the advantages of the act for six years, it was 61, a fall of 11 points in seven years, as compared with a fall of 19 points in the same length of time in the neighboring State of Massachusetts, which did not enjoy the benefits of the act. If New York had only followed the example of Massachusetts and not adopted the act they might have had their infant mortality rate fall as it fell in 1\•Iassach usetts.

Of course-and I say it in all respect to a layman-anyone who has any familiarity whatever with mortality statistics and with health matters realizes the absurdity of this state-

ment. There are many incidental things which affect statistics relating to the incidence of disease and the death rate. I spoke yesterday about the effect of the influenza epidemic on the maternity death rate in the city of New York. - It was a very significant thing that the mortality rate was higher among pregnant women than among any other class of our population. Anything which affects the general welfare of the community is sure to have its effect upon the maternity and infant death rate.

We are facing now an economic situation which I view with great apprehension. There can ·be no question that the nourishment and the proper feeding of the people are matters which have much to do with health and resistance to disease. We are facing an economic situation now which has in it the probability of an increase in undernourishment. If the people have not the money with which to buy food, if they have not the money with which to buy fuel to heat their homes, we have created a combination of circumstances which will do much to increase the prevalence of disease and, I am sorry to say, to increase the death rate. I have no doubt, I can have no doubt, and I think any other student of the subject must realize that we will have an increase in tuberculosis by reason of the economic condition facing the country. There is no other disease which thrives so well in the face of economic distress as does tuberculosis. If we have an increase in the prevalence of that disease and of the undernourishment associated with that disease we are bound to have an effect upon the mortality of pregnant women and also of newborn infants.

I was quite distressed to have one of the Senators say that infant mortality is not lowered by such a measure as the one which we have before us. Of course, that is the statement of a layman. It is a statement which can not be and never will be indorsed by any informed physician. The opposition of physicians to this measure is not founded at all upon the belief that such public-health measures have nothing to do with the welfare of the people. Their position, as I stated previously, is based principally upon the objection of the medical profession to anything in the way of State medicine and not at all upon the effect which r.u~h measures have upon the death rate.

I recited yesterday at some length the objections which were raised by the Medical Society of the State of New Jersey, and gave the reasons why, in my opinion, the first three of the six objections of this organization were hardly sustained by the facts. I find that the fourth reason advanced by the Medical Society of New ·Jersey is that-

The $7,000,000 (approximately) expended by the National Gover.nment added to a like sum from the several States was largely wasted. Neither the Nation nor the States can afford to repeat such wastefulness.

Of course, if there was any waste of those funds it was because of waste on the part or the several States and not on the part of the Federal Government. I say this, because not a dollar of the money for medical purposes was expended by the Federal Government or by the Children's Bureau. That money was turned over to the States and administered wllolly on the medical side by the health authorities of the various States. Therefore I am quite confident that there is no foundation for the fourth criticism of the Medical Society of New Jersey.

The fifth objection raised by the Medical Society of New Jersey is that-

It is unfair to tax progressive States that do look after the health interests of their people to give to backward or careless States that do not show active interest in the welfare of their own citizens.

Disease is no respecter of geographical boundaries. If we have a given condition of health in one State, it is sure to be reflected in other States. If by reason of the failure of the so-called backward States-and that is not my own language-or if any State fails to administer its health laws properly, it is bound to result in such ill health and such failure of physical and mental development on the part of infants that when they move into other States those other States, no matter how "progressive," using the term in

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HENATE 939

quotation marks, they are sure to be affected atlversely by this failure of other States to do their duty as regards this particular matter.

The sixth objection raised by the Medical Society of New Jersey is:

It is unwise, if ·not beyond the constitutional privileges, for the National Government to enter into the practice of medicine in the States, just as unwise and as wrong as it would be to in,terfere with the public schools or the pollee force.

I am frank to say I would object seriously to any interference with the public schools or the police force in my State. But it is perfectly absurd to say that the Federal Government is going into the practice of medicine in the States, because the bill does not contemplate by any stretch of the imagination that the Federal Government is to have anything to do with the care of the individual citizens in tb..e States.

These are my own views regarding what I think is the mistaken idea of the officials of the Medical Society of New Jersey. But I want to make sure that the ·senate is fully advised regarding the attitude of physicians generally and also to state that the majority of outstanding members of the profession, so far as I know, are heartily in favor of the legislation.

I have here, found in the hearings before the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce of the House of Representatives on January 24-25, 1925, letters presented from various prominent physicians. For instance, here is a letter from Dr. Charles H. Mayo. I think undoubtedly the Mayo brothers are more widely known--and I say that in all deference to other physicians-perhaps more highly respected than any other men in American medicine. It is very interesting to me to find under date of January 30 this letter from Dr. Charles H. Mayo:

Federal aid to States for maternal and child hygiene activities is justifiable and advisable in reducing excessive mortality rate among mothers and infants.

And so Doctor Mayo says: I am heartily in favor of Newton bill, especially if appropria

tion is used for educational activities under advice and cooperation of physicians, especially State health ofiicer.

That is exactly what is proposed by this bill. I have letters here from other eminent physicians-from Rudolph Holmes, Doctor Rockwood, and others--and I ask unanimous consent, Mr. President, that, at the close of my remarks, the pages which I have indicated may be included in the RECORD.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. COPELAND. Likewise I wish to include in the RECORD a statement of Grace Abbott, Chief of the Children's Bureau, having charge of the nonmedical admin.istration of the act, and of Mrs. Elizabeth McKenna, of New York City.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. ·

Mr. COPELAND. I wish to quote very briefly a few words from Miss Abbott's report. There was recently held in Washington the child's welfare conference. It was my pleasure to attend that conference and to hear many of the discussions. I find a statement here that-

The committee on prenatal and maternal care, of which Dr. Fred L. Adair, of the medical faculty of the University of Chicago, is chairman, stated that prenatal care is of the very greatest value for the prevention of many maternal and fetal diseases and deaths.

Further quoting from that section of the report of the child's welfare conference:

Until the public at large is educated to the necessity for adequate maternal cart., and demands that the maternal and fetal mortality that now exists in this country be reduced, little real progress can come.

So I think I may say for the outstanding members of the medical profession that there is indorsement for this measure. I am sure that the objections which have been raised to its enactment are not well founded from the standpoint of the medical profession.

Mr. President, it is my great privilege, by reason of the opportunity given me by certain newspapers and the radio, to talk on health to many citizens of this country. Because of this opportunity to address myself to a large audience, many responses in the way of letters have come to me. The other day I had one from a cUltured woman, I judge from her letter, living in upper Canada. Apparently she is the wife of a mining engineer. She was living 80 miles by horseback from the nearest doctor. She was about to have her first baby, and, of course, had many questions she wanted to ask regarding her condition and what might be done to help her in her troubles.

Mr. President, there are many people living in our country, not, perhaps, 80 miles by horseback from the nearest doctor, but remote from the attention which women should be able to receive in this critical and trying time when they deserve certainly the greatest care that can be given. I want to impress upon the Senate that accidents at delivery are responsible many times for the crippling of infants. We have in our population about 6,000 cripples for every million of the population-just think of that, 6,000 cripples--and most of those cripples are in that condition by reason of hasty obstetrics or the failure of proper care at delivery.

Mr. President, I have it not in my heart, regardless of any philosophy of government, to deny to p1·ospective mothers of America such care as they deserve to have and are entitled to have in this critical time of their lives. I would not for a moment stand here and defend any philosophy of government that would interfere with the happiness of these women and their welfare.

When a woman walks down into the valley of the shadow of death, as every woman does under these trying circumstances, it is a dreadful thing, indeed, to think that she has not had everything that medical science and nursing ability may give her to prepare her for the ordeal, to take her through it safely, and to save the precious little life which she has been carrying through the months.

Mr. President, I wonder how many of the Senators have read this touching little book, Beside the Bonnie BrieT Bush, by Ian Maclaren, or Dr. John Watson, as he was in real life-a touching story. It goes straight to the heartthis chapter, Through the Flood, where Doctor MacLure has charge of Annie Mitchell. She was in the pains of childbirth, and I can quite imagine that there were conditions, by reason of the failure of proper care beforehand that threatened her very life:

He was a dull man, Tamma.s, who could not read the meaning of a sign, and labored under a perpetual disability of speech; but love was eyes to him that day, and a mouth.

"Is't as bad as y1r lookin', doctor? tell's the truth; wull Annie no come through?" and Tammas looked MacLure straight in the face, who never flinched his duty or said smooth things.

"A' wud gie anything tae say Annie hes a chance, but a• daurna; a' doot yir gaein' tae lose her, Tammas."

I ask, Mr. President, that this chapter may be inCluded at this point in my remarks, because if time permitted I had intended to read it. I wanted the author to picture in his inimitable style the human suffering of our sister and for you to observe the beautiful treatment of the subject by this human writer.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FEss in the chair). Without objection, the chapter referred to by the Senator from New York will be printed in the RE.CORD.

The matter referred to is as follows: THROUGH THE FLOOD

Doctor MacLure did not lead a solemn procession from the sick bed to the dining room and give his opinion from the hearthrug with an air of wisdom bordering on the supernatural, because neither the Drumtochty houses nor his manners were on that large scale. He was accustomed to deliver himself in the yard. and to conclude his directions with one foot in the stirrup; but when he left the room where the life of Annie Mitchell was ebbing slowly away, our doctor said not one word, and at the sight of his faee her husband's heart was troubled.

He was a dull man, Tammas, who could not read the meaning of a sign, and labored under a perpetual disability of speech; but love was eyes to him that day, and a mouth.

"ls't as bad· as yir lookin', Doctor? Tell's the truth; wu11 Annie no come through? " And Tammas looked MacLure straight in the face, who never flinched his duty or said smooth things.

;

940 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 "A' wud gle anything tae say Annie hes a chance, but a'

daurna; a' doot yir gaein' tae lose her, Tammas." MacLure was in the saddle, and as he gave his judgment he laid

his hand on Tammas's shoulder with one of the rare caresses that pass between men. .

" It's a sair business, but ye'ill play the man and no vex Annie; she 'ill dae her best, a 'll warrant."

"An' a'll dae mine," and Tammas gave MacLure's hand a grip that would have crushed the bones of a weakling. Drumtochty felt in such moments the brotherliness of this rough-looking man and loved him.

Tammas h id his face in Jess's mane, who looked round with sorrow in her beautiful eyes, for she had seen many tragedies. and in this silent sympathy the stricken man drank his cup, drop by drop.

"A' wesna prepared for this, for a' aye thocht she wud live the langes~ • • • She's younger than me by 10 years, and never wes ill. • • We've been mairit twal year laist Martinmas, but its juist like a year the day. • • • A' wes never worthy o' her, the bonniest, snoddest (neatest), kindliest lass in the Glen. • • • A' never cud mak oot hoo she ever lookit at me, 'at hesna hed ae word tae say aboot her till it's ower late. • • • She didna cuist up tae me that a' wesna worthy o' her, no her, but aye she said, ' Yir ma ain gudeman, and nane cud be kinder tae me.' * • • An' a' wes minded tae be kind, but a' see noo mony little trokes a' micht hae dune for her, and noo the time is bye. • • • Naebody kens hoo patient she wes wi' me, and aye made the best o' me, an' never pit me tae shame afore the fouk. • * • An' we never hed ae cross word, no ane in twal year. • We were mair nor man and wife, we were sweethearts a.' the time. • • • Oh, rna bonnie lass, what 'ill the bairnies an' me dae withoot ye, Annie? "

The winter night was falling fast, the snow lay deep upon the ground, and the merciless north wind moaned through the close as Tammas wrestled with his sorrow dry-eyed, for tears were dented Drumtochty men. Neither the doctor nor Jess moved hand or foot, but their hearts were with their fellow creature, and at length the doctor made a sign to Marget Howe, who had come out in search of Tammas, and now stood by his side. · "Dinna mourn tae the brakin' o' ylr hert, Tammas," she said, •.• as if Annie an' you hed never luved. Neither death nor time can pairt them that luve! there's naethin' in a' the warld sae strong as luve. If Annie gaes frae the sicht_ o' ylr een she 'ill come the nearer tae yir hert. She wants tae see ye,- and tae hear ye say that ye 'ill never forget her nicht nor day till ye meet in the land where there's nae pairtin'. Oh, a' ken what a 'm sa yin', for it's five year noo sin George gied awa, an' he's mair wi' me noo than when he wes in Edinboro' and I wes in Drumtochty.'' ' "Thank ye kindly, Marget; thae are gude words and true, an' ye hev the richt tae say them; but a' canna dae without seein' Annie comin' tae meet me in the gloamin', an' gaein' in an' oot the boose, an' hearin' het· ca' me by rna name, an' a'll no can tell her that a' luve her when there's nae Annie in the boose.

"Can naethin' be dune, doctor? Ye savit Flora Ca.mmll, and. young Bw·nbrae, an' yon shepherd's wife Dunleith wy, an' we were a sae prood o' ye, an' pleased tae think that ye hed keepit deith frae anither hame. Can ye no think o' somethin' tae help Annie, and gie her back tae her man and bairnies? " and Tammas searched the doctor's face in the cold, weird light.

"There's nae poorer in heaven or airth like luve," Marget said to me afterwards; "it maks the weak strong and the dumb tae speak. Oor herts were as water afore Tammas's words, an' a' saw the doctor shake in his saddle. A' never kent till that meenut hoo he hed a share in a'body's grief, an' carried the heaviest wecht o' a.' the Glen. A' peetied him wi' Tammas lookin' at him sae wistfully, as if he hed the keys o' life an' deith in his hands. But he wes honest, and wudna hold oot a false houp tae deceive a sore hert or win escape for himsel'.''

"Ye needna plead wi' me, Tammas, to dae the best a' can for ylr wife. Man, a' kent her lang afore ye ever luved her; a' brocht her intae the warld, and a' saw her through the fever when she wes a bit lassikie; a' closed her mither's een, and it wes me hed tae tell her she wes an orphan, an' nae man wes better pleased when she got a gude husband, an' a' helpit her wi' her fower bairns. A've naither wife nor bairns o' ma own, an' a coont a~ the fouk o' the Glen ma family. Div ye think a' vmdna save Annie if I cud? If there wes a man in Muirtown 'at cud dae mair for her, a'd have him this verra nicht, but a' the doctors in Perthshire are helpless for this tribble.

"Tammas, rna puir fallow, if it could avail, a' tell ye a' wud lay doon this auld worn-oot ruckle o' a body o' mine juist tae see ye baith sittin' at the fireside, an' the bairns roond ye, couthy an' canty again; but it's no tae be, Tammas, it's no tae be.''

" When a' lookit at the doctor's face," Marget said, " a thocht him the winsomest man a' ever saw. He was transfigured that nicht, for a'm judging there's nae transfiguration like luve.''

" It's God wull an' maun be borne, but it's a sair wull for me, an' a'm no ungratefu' tae you, doctor, for a' ye've dune and what ye said the nicht," and Tammas went back to sit with Annie for the last time.

Jess picked her way through the deep snow to the main road, with a skill that came of long experience, and the doctor held converse with her according to his wont.

" Eh, Jsss wumman, yon was the hardest wark a• hae tae face, and a' wud raither hae ta'en ma chance o• anither row in a Glen Urtach drift than tell Tammas Mitchell his wife wes deein'.

"A' said she cudna be cured, and it wes true, for there's juist ae man in the land fit for't, and they micht as weel try tae get the

mune oot o'·heaven. Sae a' said naethin' tae vex Tammas's hert, for it's heavy eneuch withoot regrets.

"But it's hard, Jess, that money wull buy life after a', an' if Annie wes a duchess her man wudna lose her; but bein' only a puir cottar's wife, she maun dee afore the week's oot.

"Gin we hed him the morn there's little doot she wud be saved, for he hesna lost mair than five per cent o' his cases, and they 'ill be puir toon's craturs, no strappin' women like Annie.

" It's oot o' the question, Jess, sae hurry up, lass, for we've hed a heavy day. But it wud be the grandest thing that was ever dune in the Glen in oor time if it could be managed by hook or crook.

"We '111 gang and see Drumsheugh, Jess; he's anlther man sin' Geordie Hoo's deith, and he wes aye kinder than fouk kent "; and the doctor passed at a gallop through the village, whose lights shone across the white frost-bound road.

"Come in by, doctor; a' heard ye on the road; ye 'ill hae been at Tammas Mitchell's; hoo's the gudewife? a doot she's sober."

"Annie's deein', Drumsheugh, an' Tammas is like tae brak his hert."

: ·That's no lichtsome, doctor, no Uchtsome ava, for a' dinna ken ony man in Drumtochty sae bund up in his wife as Tammas, and there's no a bonnier wumman o' her age crosses oor kirk door than Annie, nor a cleverer at her wark. Man, ye 'ill need tae pit yir brains in steep. Is she clean beyond ye?"

"Beyond me and every ither in the land but ane, and it wud cost a hundred guineas tae bring him tae Drumtochty."

" Certes, he's no blate; it's a fell chairge for a short day's work; but hundred or no hundred we 'ill hae him, an' no let Annie gang, and her no half her years.''

"Are ye meanin' it, Drumsheugh?" and MacLure turned white below the tan.

"William MacLure," said Drumsheugh, in one of the few confidences that ever broke the Drumtochty reserve, "a'm a lonely man, wi' naebody o' ma ain blude tae care for me livin' or tae lift me intae ma coffin when a'm deid.

"A' fecht awa at Muirtown market for an extra pund on a beast, or a shillin' on the quarter o' barley, an' what's the gude o't? Burnbrae gaes aff tae get a goon for his wife or a buke for his college laddie, an' Lachlan Campbell 'ill no leave the place noo withoot a ribbon for Flora.

" Tika man in the Kildrummie train has some bit fairin' in his pooch for the fouk at hame that he's bocht wi' the siller he won.

" But there's naebody tae be lookin' oot for me, an' comin' doon the road tae meet me, and daffin' (joking) wi' me aboot their

·falrin', or feeling rna pockets. Ou ay, a've seen it a' at ither hooses, though they tried tae hide it frae me for fear a' wud lauch at them. Me lauch, wi' ma cauld, empty hame I

" Yir the only man kens, Weelum, that I aince luved the noblest wumman in the glen or anywhere, an' a' luve her still, but wi' anither luve noo.

"She hed given her heart tae anither, or _a've thocht a' micht hae won her, though nae man be worthy o' sic a gift. Ma hert turned tae bitterness, but that passed awa beside the brier bush whar George Hoo lay yon sad simmer time. Some day a'll tell ye ma story, Weelum, for you an' me are auld freends, and will be till we dee.''

MacLure felt beneath the table for Drumsheugh's hand, but neither man looked at the other.

"Wee!, a' we can dae noo, Weelum, gin we haena mickle brichtness in oor ain hames, is tae keep the Iicht frae gaein' oot in anither hoose. Write the telegram, man, and Sandy 'ill send it aff frae Kildrummie this verra nicht, and ye '111 hae yir man the morn."

"Yir the man a' coonted ye, Drumsheugh, but ye 'ill grant me ae favour. Ye 'ill lat me pay the half; bit by bit--a• ken yir wullin' tae dae't a'-but a' haena mony pleasures, an' a' wud like tae hae ma ain share in savin' Annie's life."

Next morning a figure received Sir George on the Klldrummie platform, whom that famous surgeon took for a gillie, but who introduced · himself as "MacLure of Drumtochty." It seemed as if the East had come to meet the West when these two stood together, the one in traveling furs, handsome and distinguished, with his strong, cultured face and carriage of authority, a characteristic type of his profession; and the other more marvelously dressed than ever, for Drumsheugh's topcoat had been forced upon him . for the occasion, his face and neck one redness with the bitter cold; rough and ungainly, yet not without ·some signs of power in his eye and voice, the most heroic type of his noble profession. MacLure compassed the precious arrival with observances till he was securely seated in Drumsheugh's dogcart--a vehicle that lent itself to history-with two full-sized plaids added to his equipment--Drumsheugh and Hillocks had both been requisitioned-and MacLure wrapped another plaid round a leather case, which was placed below the seat with such reverence as might be given to the queen's regalia. Peter attended their departure full of interest, and as soon as they were in the fir woods MacLure explained that it would be an eventful journey.

" It's a' richt in here, for the Wind disna get at the snaw, but the drifts are deep in the Glen, and th'ill be some engineerin' afore we get tae oor destination.''

Four times they left the road and took their way over fields, twice they forced a passage through a slap in a dyke, thrice they used gaps in the paling which MacLure had made on his downward journey.

"A' seleckit the road this mornin', an' a' ken the depth tae an inch; we 'ill get through this steadin' here tae the main road, but oor worst job 'ill be crossin' the Tochty.

•

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 941 " Ye see the bridge hes been shakin' wi' this winter's flood, and

we daurna venture on it, sae we hev tae ford, and the snaw's been melting up Urtach way. There's nae doot the water's gey big, and it's threatenin' tae rise, but we 'ill win through wi' a warstle.

" It micht be safer tae lift the instruments oot o' reach o' the water; wud ye mind haddin' them on yir knee till we're ower, an' keep firm in yir seat in case we come on a stane in the bed o' the river."

By this time they had come to the edge, and it was not a cheering sight. The Tochty had spread out over the meadows, and while they waited they could see it cover another two inches on the trunk of a tree. There are summer floods, when the water is brown and flecked with foam, but this was a winter flood, which 1s black and sullen, and runs in the center with a strong, fierce, silent current. Upon the opposite side Hillocks stood to give directions by word and hand, as the ford was on his land, and none knew the Tochty better in all its ways.

They passed through the shallow water without mishap, save when the wheel struck a hidden stone or fell suddenly into a rut; but when they neared the body of the river MacLure halted to give Jess a minute's breathing.

"It 'ill tak ye a' yir time, lass, an' a' wud raither be on yir back; but ye never failed me yet, and a wumman's life is hangin' on the crossin'."

With the first plunge into the bed of the stream the water rose to the axles, and then it crept up to the shafts, so that the surgeon could feel it lapping in about his feet, while the dogcart began to quiver, and it seemed as if it were to be carried away. Sir George was as brave as most men, but he had never forded a Highland river in flood, and the mass of black water racing past beneath, before, behind him, affected his imaginatiQn and shook his nerves. He rose from his seat and ordered MacLure to turn back, declaring that he would be condemned utterly and eternally if he allowed himself to be drowned for any person.

" Slt doon," thundered MacLure; "condemned ye will be suner or later gin ye shirk yir duty, but through the water ye gang the day." . -

Both men spoke much more strongly and shortly, but this is what they intended to say, and it was MacLure that prevailed.

Jess trailed her feet along the ground with cunning art and held her shoulder against the stream; MacLure leant forward in his seat, a rein in each hand, and his eyes fixed on Hillocks, who was now standing up to the waist in the water, shouting directions and cheering on horse and driver.

"Haud tae the richt, doctor; there's a hole yonder. Keep oat o't for ony sake. That's it; yir daein' fine. Steady, man, steady. Yir at the deepest;' sit heavy in yir seats. Up the channel noo, and ye 'll be oot o' the swirl. Weel dune, Jess, weel dune, auld mare! Mak straicht for me, doctor, an' a'll gie ye the road oot. Ma word, ye've dune yir best, baith o' ye this mornin'," cried Hlllocks, E>plashing up to the dogcart, now in the shallows.

"Sail, it wes titch an' go for a meenut in the middle; a Hielan' ford is a kittle (hazardous) road in the snaw time, but ye're safe noo.

"Gude luck tae ye up at Westerton, sir; nane but a rlchtbearted man wud hae riskit the Tochty in flood. Ye're boond tae succeed aifter sic a graund beginnin'," for it had spread already that a famous surgeon had come to do his best for Annie, Tammas Mitchell's wife.

Two hours later MacLure came out from Annie's room and laid hold of Tammas, a heap of speechless misery by the kitchen fire, and carried him off to the bam and spread some corn on the threshing floor and thrust a flail into his hands.

"Noo we've tae begin, an' we 'ill no be dune for an' oor, and ye've tae lay on withoot stoppin' till a' come for ye, an' a 11 shut the door tae haud in the noise, an' keep yir dog beside ye, for there maunna be a cheep aboot the boose for Annie's sake."

"A'll dae anything ye want me, but if-lf--" "A'll come for ye, Tammas, gin there be danger; but what are ye

feared for wi' the Queen's ain surgeon here? " Fifty minutes did the flail rise and fall, save twice, when

Tammas crept to the door and listened, the dog lifting his .head and whining. .

It seemed 12 hours instead of 1 when the door swung back, and MacLure filled the doorway, preceded by a great burst of light. tor the sun had arisen on the snow.

His face was as tidings of great joy, and · Elspeth told me that there was nothing like it to be seen that afternoon for glory, save the sun itself in the heavens. ·

"A' never saw the marrow o't, Tammas, an' a'll never see the like again; it's a' ower, man, withoot a hitch frae beginn.in' tae end, and she's fa'in' asleep as fine as ye like."

" Dis he think Annie • • • 'ill live? " " Of coarse he dis, and be aboot the hoose inside a month;

that's the gude o' bein' a clean-bluided, weel-livin'--" "Preserve ye, man, what's wrang wi' ye? It's a mercy a' keppit

ye, or we wud hev hed anither job for Sir George. "Ye're a' richt noo; sit doon on the strae. A'll come back· fn

a whilie, an' ye '.ill see Annie juist for a meenut, but ye maunna say a word."

Marget took him in and let him kneel by Annie's bedside. He said nothing then or afterwards, for speech came only once

in his lifetime to Tammas, but Annie whispered, " Ma ain dear man."

When the doctor placed the precious bag beside S1r George 1n our solitary first next morning, he laid a cheque beside it and was about to leave.

"No, no," said the great man. "Mrs. Macfadyen and I were on the gossip last night, and I know the whole story about you and your friend.

"You have some-right to call me a coward, but I'll never let you count me a mean, miserly rascal," and the cheque with Drumsheugh's painful writing fell in 50 pieces on the floor.

As the train began to move a voice from the first called so that all in the station heard. ,

"Give's another shake of your hand, MacLure; I'm proud to have met you; you are an honour to our profession. Mind the antiseptic dressings."

It was market day, but only Jamie Soutar and Hillocks had ventured down.

"Did ye hear yon, Hillocks? Hoo dae ye feel? A1l no deny a'm lifted."

Halfway to the junction Hillocks had recovered, and began to grasp the situation. .

"Tell's what he said. A' wud like to hae it exact for Drumsh~ugh."

" Thae's the eedentical words, an' they're true; there's no a man in Drumtochty disna ken that, except ane."

"An' wha's that, Jamie?" "Lt's Weelum MacLure himsel. Man, a've often girned that he

sud fecht awa for us a', and maybe dee before he kent that he hed githered mair luve than ony man in the Glen.

"'A'm prood tae hae m.et ye ', says Sir George, an' him the greatest doctor in the land. ' Yir an honour tae oor profession.'

"Hillocks, a' wudna hae missed it for 20 notes," said James Soutar, cynic-in-ordinary to the parish of Dnnntochty.

Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, I do not want it to come to pass that this shall be the time of which the Master spoke. I have read in the twenty-third chapter of st. Luke the story of Jesus on his way to Calvary, and of the great crowds which followed after Him. Many mothers were in the multitude, and He turned to them, saying:

Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.

For, behold, the days are. coming, in which they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bare, and the · paps which never gave suck.

Mr.' President, I do not want this to be the time when it shall be a blessed thing for our women to be barren. On the contrary, I want to feel, and I want every mother in America, every woman in America, every prospective mother to know that the Government of the United States is interested in the welfare of the women of America. I fear sometimes we are more interested in material things than we are in human things.

As I conceive it, the purpose of government is not only to protect property-it is that, of course-but it is also to protect human beings. If the purpose of government is to serve humanity, here is a bill which should be enacted. We should send out to the women of America a message of cheer. We should assure every prospective mother in America that her welfare is of the keenest interest to her Government.

So, Mr. President, I hope that when we come to vote upon recommitting this bill we will vote down the motion over whelmingly, and when it comes to its passage, that we shall enact it into law, because in my judgment it is a bill which will make for the welfare of the mothers of our country.

Senators, if you have gone into the room and have seen the white-faced, white-lipped little mother. hollow-eyed, suffering, almost at the entrance to the valley of death, and if you felt that there were things that might have been done to relieve her of her misery and to make easier this great ordeal, I am sure by a vote for this bill you will have proved· you are worthy of the high trust imposed upon you. I beg of Senators not to give regard to some doubtful philosovhy of government, but to think of the human side and to respect the humane instincts of your heart. Let us do what we can do to relieve the misery of every prospective mother in America.

(The extracts ordered printed at the conclusion of Mr. CoPELAND's remarks are as follows:)

ROCHESTER, MINN., January 30, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

House of Representatives: Federal aid to States for maternal and child-hygiene activities

is Justifiable and advisable to reduce the excessive mortality rate among mothers and infants. I am heartily in favor of Newton bill, especially if appropriation is used. for educational activities ~der advice and cooperation of physicians, especially State health ofllcer.

CHARLES H. MAYO.

942 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 STATEMENT OF RUDOLPH WIESER HOLMES

(Fellow of American Medical Association; specialist in obstetrics and gynecology, associate clinical professor in obstetrics and gynecology, Rush Medical College, Chicago; chief department of obstetrics, Augustana Hospital; obstetrician, Passavant Memorial Hospital; member Illinois State Medical Society, Chicago Medical Society, Chicago Gynecological Society; fellow of American College of Surgeons, Institute of Medicine, Chicago; American Gynecological Society)

JANUARY 13, 1929. The following statement is submitted by Dr. Rudolph W.

Holmes, of Chicago. Illness prevented Doctor Holmes from appearing before the committee to state his support of the bill: - I would state these few facts, which you may use if you so desire:

First. The medical profession has felt that the SheppardTowner Act was for the purpose of the Federal Government going into the practice of medicine--the entering wedge of State medicine. The profession does not know the real purpose of the Sheppard-Towner law, neither the purpose of the proposed Newton bill.

Second. I have followed the effects of the maternity and infancy act and feel very strongly that its essential purpose and result has been a highly profitable educational campaign; it has brought to the attention of women, especially of rural and small communities, the knowledge what prenatal care will do in safeguarding their lives and the lives of their infants. At the same time this knowledge has been brought to the rw·al physicians and midwives. As both physicians and prospective mothers have been educated as to the vital necessity of adequate prenatal care, and have seen to it that this care has been meted out to the prospective mothers, the advance in rural obstetrics, especially in the South, has been of startling value. I firmly believe that the Sheppard-Towner Act has effected such progress in rural obstetrics that at the present moment the gains are surely 25 years ahead of where they would have teen without this act. I firmly believe that the Newton bill should become the law so that the Children's Bureau may continue the good work.

I would point out that such aid can not show results in a yearthe full benefit will accrue as the years pass. Inspired by the

· Sheppard-Towner Act, improved obstetrics has been brought to the poor woman in the backwoods and the mountain sections; each year the gain in the .lowered mortality and morbidity rate will show marked improvement.

No one has se1iously objected to appropriations for the eradication of the boll weevil, corn borer, hog cholera, etc.; why should there be objection to the saving of maternal and infant life when such life is worth at least $10,000 per capita to the Nation?

Truly yours, R. W. HOLMES.

STATEMENT OF DR. H. L. ROCKWOOD (Fellow of American Medical Association, specialist in internal

medicine) DEPARTMENT OF PuBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE,

Cleveland, Ohio, January 9, 1929. Hon. WILLIAM H. NEWTON,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. NEWTON: Referring to House bill 14070 which you have

introduced to promote the welfare and hygiene of mothers and children and aid in the reduction of infant and maternal mor-

\ tality, I beg to advise that I am in entire sympathy with the purposes of this bill and believe that our Federal Government can well take notice of the needs in the promotion of pe;tlth and welfare of children in such State and Territorial agencies as are not at the present time able. to render these needed services in public health.

Surely our Federal Government should be as much concerned in these matters as in those activities which call for appropriations for the reduction of diseases in such matters as the animal and plant industries or in forest conservl).tion, etc.

Yours very truly, H. L. RocKWOOD, M. D.,

Commissioner of Health.

STATEMENT OF DR. C. S. BACON

(Fellow of American Medical Association, specialist in obstetrics and gynecology; member of Chicago Gynecological Society, Illinois Medical Society, Chicago Medical Society (president, 1905-6) , Physicians' Club; corresponding member Society of Physicians, Vienna, Austria; American College of Surgeons, Chicago Pathological Society; professor of obstetrics, Chicago Policlinic since 1895; head of department of obstetrics and gynecology, University of Illinois Medical School since 1903; attending obstetrician to Henrotin, Policlinic, University, Evangelical, Deaconess, Grant, and Chicago Lying-in Hospitals; chief of staff Salvation Army Hospital; author Obstetrical Nursing, 1915; also numerous papers on gynecological and obstetrical subjects)

JANUARY 10, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

Member of Congress, Washington, D. C. DEAR SIR: Lhave watched -with considerable care and much in

terest the operation of the Sheppard-Towner blll, and ·have become· convinced that it has done much good in most of the States in improving prenatal care and decreasing maternal mortality in

childbed. Consequently it seems to me regrettable that the act was not renewed. I understand that the blll introduced by you (H. R. 14070) has for its purpose the extension of the work begun under the Sheppard-Towner Act. This purpose is certainly good, and the provisions of the bill seem to be wise. Hence I am glad to indorse it and I hope it will become a law.

Very truly yours, C. S. BACON,

Professor Emeritus of Obstetrics, University of Illinois.

STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT L. DE NORMAND~ (Instructor in obstetrics in the Medical School of Harvard Uni

versity; fellow of American Medical Association; specialist in gynecology and obstetrics)

BOSTON, January 8, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. NEWTON: Ever since the Children's Bureau was

formed I have followed with interest and with much profit its work. When it became clear that the Sheppard-Towner Act was to stop, it was with great pleasure that I found you had introduced a bill into Congress for a child-welfare extension service.

The educational work that is coming from the Sheppard-Towner Act can not as yet be wholly evaluated, and to have this splendid work cease functioning now seems to be a great mistake. Your bill makes it possible to continue the educational work that 1B just begun.

I am very glad to see that in your bill you have kept the administration of the work with the Children's Bureau, for it was .this bureau that had the vision and enthusiasm to initiate and to carry out this work when another department of the Government said it was not interested.

I do hope that Congress will act favorably upon your bill. Sincerely yours,

ROBERT L. DE, NORMANDIE.

STATEMENT OF DR. RICHARD OLDING BEARD (Associate professor of physiology and physical chemistry, Univer

sity of Minn::sota; member of American Roentgen Ray Society; Hennepin County Public Health Association-officers, William F. Kunze, president; Dr. F. Denton White, vice president; Dr. Henry Wireman Cook, vice president; Mrs. Willis Endsley, secretary; Charles H. Briggs, treasurer; Dr. Richard Olding Beard, executive secretary)

MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., January 4, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR SIR: The work done through the agency of the Chll

dren·s Bureau under the Sheppard-Towner Act has laid a broad foundation in many States of the Union for the saving of mothers who· to the number of some 17,000 are annually sacrificed in maternity, of stillborn babies who, to the number of some 100,00o--and most of them needlessly-die before birth, and of infants who in approximately the same number are born alive, but from similar causes succumb within the first year of life. This work most urgently needs to be carried on to its full fruition under the improved mechanism of the Newton bill recently introduced by you in the Congress.

The Newton bill, should it be enacted, promises to be even superior to the excellent Sheppard-Towner Act in the following respects:

( 1) It provides for the more flexible use of the funds to be devoted to its beneficent purposes.

(2) Without conditioning State participation upon State appropriation it gives opportunity to the several States to share in the support of this service.

(3) It extends its benefits to their directed use not only by State health commissions, but through them by county, munlcipal, .and voluntary health institutions which are competently engaged i.n promoting the salvage of maternal and infant life, and even by individuals who are devoting approved efforts and personal means to the same ends.

(4) It calls for the appointment of a larger body of representative and expert persons for the direction of the service.

There are no more valuable assets than this bill is designed to save to the Nation. To the lofty sentiment of all mankind the mother and the child appeal. Of the economy of life-saving at its best there is no denial. To the value of human health the American people are more keenly alive than at any previous period of its history. In the protection and improvement of young life it finds the fullest promise of its own future. ·

No lover of h.is kind but will merge political considerations and personal interests in support of this bill.

Very respectfully yours,

Hon. WALTER H. NEwToN,

RICHARD 0LDING BEARD, Executive Secretary.

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA, Minneapolis, January 19, 1929.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. NEWTON: I have previously written to you at times

. regarding legislation ·relative to maternity and infancy. I have for many years past been considerably interested in developing a program which would insure better care for mothers.

' '.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 943 While I am not 1n entire sympathy with plans of Federal sub

sidy and Federal control of State and local activities, the plan seems to be carried out with reference to many forms of activities other than health. As long as this seems to be definitely established by other precedents, I do not feel any serious compunction in applying the same sort of policy to health activities.

I think excellent work has been done by the Children's Bureau in educating the laity to the importance of proper maternal care. It would take many years to determine the r.esults of such an educational program. I am fully aware that this has met with antagonism from medical men and medical organizations. I fail to see how the carrying out of this program has been detrimental to the best interests of the medical profession. The source of this antagonism is, I believe, due more to a fear of possible interference with private practitioners and the dread of the possibility of the establishment of so-called State medicine.

I believe we all regard the carrying on of health activities as essentially local affairs, but so long as the Federal board continues its past policy of noninterference in ways and means, and limits its action to an educational program and stimulation of local activities by financial and other methods of support, I am very glad indeed to approve of their plan.

Trusting that this letter will explain to you my position relative to your bill which has been introduced into Congress, I am

Very sincerely yours, FRED L. ADAIR, M. D.

STATEMENT OF DR. WOODARD COLBY, OF ST. PAUL (Assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Minnesota

Medical College and affiliated with the following organizations: Northwest Pediatrics Society, Minnesota Medical Association, Medical Forum (Twin Cities); chairman of the child welfare committee of the Wilder Amhurst Charities of St. Paul)

ST. PAUL, MINN., November 9, 1927. Miss MARGARET WELLS,

President Minnesota League of Women Voters, Minneapolis, Minn.

DEAR Miss WELLs: With considerable evidence in your possession in the form of previous letters from mothers who have benefited by one or several of the services offered by the division of child hygiene, you already know what the maternal phase of the Sheppard-Towner program has accomplished in Minnesota. I regret that since my own experience in the work has been definitely that of a pediatrist, I shall be unable to add anything to your knowledge from an obstetrical point of view.

However, having conducted during the last five years more than 50 clinics for infants and young children I do feel distinctly conscious of the fundamental factors in the pediatrics program of the infancy-maternity work. First, I think the majority of mothers in Minnesota honestly want to do everything in their power to bring healthy babies into the world and help them develop into strong children and to do it in such a way as to maintain the necessary health and strength in themselves which the fulfillment of motherhood requires.

Second, I think certain sections of Minnesota, particularly northern Minnesota, have very great need of health education of this type, and that there is no section of the State whi~h does not have some need of it. That this need of public-health measure is not fully realized is shown by the fact that the giving of toxin-antitoxin as a prophylaxis against diphtheria, which is a well-established practice in cities, is just being adopted in the country. Proper infant care, proper infant feeding, prophylactic procedures in the control of contagious diseases of childhood, period physical examinations, systematic routine, and balanced diet for your children are still only partly carried out.

That some progress has been made is shown by the fact that the clinics are larger and more in demand and that the parents return year after year to have their children examined. This demonstrates that the work of the division of child hygiene and the department of public health is showing the way but it is only begun.

Health promotion in a sense is advertising which, to the medical profession, is still ethically taboo. For this reason and until the time comes when this prejudice is outgrown a central agency such as child hygiene and the department of public health must show the way and promote the health standards of this country.

Sincerely yours, WooDARD CoLBY.

THE CHILDREN's HoSPITAL, St. Paul, Minn., November 8, 1927.

Miss MARGUERITE M. WELLS, President Minnesota League of Women Voters,

. Minneapolis, Minn. MY DEAR Miss WELLS: I postponed answering your letter of

October 12 in order to make some further inquiries among the physicians as to how they felt about the department of child hygiene created in association with the State board of health under the Sheppard-Towner Act.

I have been working in close cooperation with this bureau for several years and I have never had any doubt as to its great value in promoting education among the masses of the people, and especially among the mothers, resulting ill immense benefits to the health of the children.

I think that the department of child hygiene 1s extremely popular with the people. There has been some misunderstanding on the part of a few physicians who have had the old attitude that before anything much could be done for a child it had to first get good and sick. Prevention is a comparatively new idea, and, of course, the great future of medicine will be preventive medicine. Even the country doctor is gradually finding out that an educated people is better than an ignorant one, and that intelligent people bring their children regularly to the physician for examination, which the ignorant do not do.

I believe it would be a calamity to have this act repealed, inasmuch as we have no Cabinet officer representing public health, and the nearest thing to it is the Children's Bureau in the Department of Labor. From this bureau disseminates uniform information regarding the health and care of children, which is distributed widely by means of the department of child hygiene 1n the different States. The department of child hygiene is, therefore, doing a great service which would not be carried on uniforinly, except in a few States, if it were abolished.

You may register me as decidedly in favor of the continuation of the Sheppard-Towner Act.

Very sincerely yours, Dr. WALTER R. RAMSEY.

STATEMENT OF DR. GEORGE GELLHORN (Fellow of American Medical Association, specialist in obstetrics

and gynecology, professor of gynecology and obstetrics. and director ~f department, St. Louis University Medical School; gynecolog:st in chief, St. Mary's and Missouri Pacific Hospitals; gynecologlSt, Bernard Free Skin and Cancer Hospital; gynecologist and obstetrician, St. Luke's and City Hospitals; consulting gynecologist and obstetrician, Jewish Hospital; medical director, Municipal Prenatal Clinics and St. Louis Obstetric Dispensary; member of American Gynecological Society, Am~rican Gynecological Club (president, 1915), St. Louis Medical Sdcfety, etc.) .

ST. LOUIS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, St. Louis, Mo., January 12, 1929.

Han. WALTER H. NEWTON, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR MR. NEwToN: For the past six years I have watched with interest the work that has been accomplished in Missouri as the result of State and Federal cooperation under the SheppardTowner Act. The State health department, through its division of child hygiene, has done valiant service by holding child-health conferenc~ in rural and inaccessible districts, and by advising and helpmg mothers who asked for instruction and aid both before and after childbirth. I am attaching a sheet that carries a few figures which show some of the things accomplished. I am convinced that this work has appreciably lessened the infant death rate in Missouri.

It is important that this excellent attempt at reducing useless sacrifices of life should go on without interruption. It was, therefore, with great pleasure that I learned of the bill you are sponsoring which will provide for a child-welfare extension service in the Children's Bureau to promote the welfare and hygiene of mothers and children and aid in the reduction of infant and maternal mortality.

With best wishes for the early enactment into law of your splendid measure, I am,

Yours sincerely, GEORGE GELLHORN,

Professor of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

STATEMENT OF DR. SAMUEL M'CLIN'I'OCK HAMILL (Fellow of American Medical Association, specialist in pediatrics;

member of American Pediatric Society, Philadelphia Pediatric Society, Philadelphia Neurological Society, Pathological Society of Philadelphia, Medical Society of State of Pennsylvania (first chairman section of pediatrics), College of Physicians of Philadelphia; member of General Medical Board and chairman of National Child Welfare Committee of Council National Defense; director child welfare for State of Pennsylvania, 1917-18; delegate Cannes Medical Conference of Red Cross Society, 1919; president and director of Philadelphia Child Health Society; member American ASSociation for Study and Prevention of Infant Mortality (president 1915-16); member executive committee American Child Health Association since 1923; professor diseases of children, Philadelphia Polyclinic and College for Graduates in Medicine, 1901-1919; postgraduate department of medicine, University of Pennsylvania, 1919-20; visiting pediatrician, Presbyterian Hospital, formerly St. Christopher's Hospital for Children and Philadelphia Polyclinic)

PHILADELPHIA, January 14, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR Sm: I have read with a great deal of interest a copy of

the excellent and comprehensive bill introduced by you to provide a child-welfare extension service and known as the Newton bill.

I have followed the administration of the Sheppard-Towner Act very closely during the years it has been effective and thoroughly convinced myself of its value in the saving in life and the upbuilding in health of mothers and chlldren. However, evidence

944 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 much · more valuable than that which I can give-namely, the unanimous support of the health officers of the country thrC~ughcut lts entire history-is available to you. I have never quite comprehended the animus of the opposition to the SheppardTowner Act. The assumption that the States are capable of meeting the maternity and child-health· needs of the country is not well founded. I know of no State in the entire country in which there is a sufficiently large appropriation to meet the health needs, and all the health officers have a tremendous struggle from year to year to secure the paltry sums granted them. · We have thought so ·many years in the terms of ill health that the great American public has not yet become educated to the point of realizing that most of the ills we aJ,:e subject to are preventable. The tremendous cost to the Nation of sickness, not alone to the individual family but through its handicapping influence to every art and industry, does not seem to be understood. Most of these handicaps have their beginnings in infancy and childhood. We appropriate vast sums of money for the education of our children, but health, which is fundamental to all else in life, is given very little consideration.

A few years ago Doctor Tigert, Chief of the Bureau of Educat~on, issued the statement that 50 per cent of the children in the first grades of our schools were repeaters. Each repetition costs the country $80. As a very large percentage of these repetitions were due to ill health, and as there were 4,000,000 children in the first grades of our schools, you can readily compute the cost to the country of these handicapping influences.

The thing that is most needed in the health field to-day is the work which has been made possible by the Sheppard-Towner Act and which should be continued under the conditions defined in the Newton bill. Aside from the bill's direct value it has an educational influence that is highly important. . · If there is any service· I can render in furthering the progress of this bill, I should be very pleased to have you call upon me. With the backing of every health officer of the country and of ~veryl thinking pediatrician, I should think you would have sufficient evidence to convince the most skepticaL

With sincere appreciation of your effort in behalf of the mothers and children of the Nation, I am, ·

Very truly yours, S. McC. HAMILL.

PHILADELPHIA, January 17, 1929. Han. WALTER H. NEWTON,

Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

MY DEAR CoNGRESSMAN NEWTON: May I take the liberty of writ• ing you . my assurance of support of your bill (H. R. 14070) to provide a child welfare extension service.

The deaths among mothers and babies have been materially reduced through the operation of the Sheppard-Towner Act; and I pray that Congress will approve your bill, that the citizens of this great State may thereby continue to enjoy increasing protection of the health of its women and children.

I feel sure that all thoughtful physicians in Pennsylvania will wish your measure success.

Very sincerely yours, HOWARD CHILDS CARPENTER, M. D.

ST. LOUIS, Mo., January 19, 1929. Ron. WALTER H. NEWTON,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR Sm: In spite of the leadership in public-health matters

taken by the United States, it ranks very low among the nations of the world in the matter of maternity care. A dozen European countries have a percentage death rate lower than that in the United States. The reason for this is twofold: (1) The unusual .extent of territory to be covered in the care of the expectant mother. (2) The absence of a proper system for supplying medical service in the outlying districts of this country.

The Sheppard-Towner bill was an important step in the right direction, since it assisted those States that needed help in carrying out the necessary maternal welfare work. The Newton bill will prevent a return of this country to the lamentable conditions prevailing previous to 1921. The Newton bill is superior in that it supplies aid where it is most needed. It is- a proper function of the Federal Government to give equally to every mother in this country equal opportunities for a safe delivery of her child and safe care of her newborn infant:

I sincerely trust that the Newton bill will be passed by the pre~ent session of Congress.

Very sincerely yours, FRED J. TAUSSIG.

PHILADELPHIA, PA., January 22, 1929. Han. WALTER H. NEWTON,


MY DEAR CONGRESSMAN NEWTON: I wish to record my hearty support of your bill (H. R. 14070) providing for continuance of the work so ably begun under the Sheppard-Towne1· Act. The State of Pennsylvania has benefited greatly by Federal funds appropriated under this act. The infant mortality rate has been materially lowered, the maternal . mortality rate has been somewhat reci_uced, and I feel that a great impetus has bee_n given to

educational work in maternity and infancy hygiene. Such valuable work should by all means go on.

With sincere good wishes for the success of so vital a measure, · I am,

Sincerely yours, RALPH M. TYSON, M. D.

Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,' PHILADELPHIA, PA., January 22, 1929.


MY DEAR CoNGRESSMAN NEWTON: I wish to record my hearty support of your bill (H. R. 14070) providing for continuance of the work so ably tegun under the Sheppard-Towner Act. Where this act bas been operative maternal and infant mortality show a decline that can be directly traced to the influence of this measure. Educationally it h.as proved of enormous value and from both angles therefore should be continued. It would be a most distressing calamity at this stage if your meritorious bill should fail of passage.

Sincerely yours, EDWARD L. BAUER, M.D.,

Professor of Children's Diseases, Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia, Pa.

STATEMENT OF DR. W. P. JACKSON (Fellow of American Medical Association, specialist in internal

medicine) [Excerpt from a letter dated January 12, 1929, from Dr. W. P.

Jackson, of the Jefferson Hospital, Roanoke, Va.) In answer to some questions that I put·to the State department

of health, they state that their nurses, supported partially from the Sheppard-Towner fund last year, held as a part of their duty 300 health conferences, instructed 1,600 mothers in prenatal care, and ov~r 1,400 girls in the care of infants and children, and they made approximately 118,576 home visits for instructive health education. There were, I think, approximately 50 nurses in this work. No one can estimate how many future lives were saved by such a program nor can we estimate the financial saving of such a program, even after considering from Doctor Dublin's calculation that every person thus saved and reared to the age of 18 years, if the peak of his earning capacity through life is only $2,500 a year. This, of course, is the record of only one State. Such magnificent work I feel can not be too strongly indorsed and I feel it a great privilege to write you a note indorsing the bill. I certainly hope it will be passed. I wish there was something mare I could do to help foster such a great campaign. The improvement of child health and child welfare seems to me to offer one of the greatest opportunities of the day.

CHICAGO, January 10, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

Membe-r of Congress, Washington, D. C. DEAR Sm: I have watched with considerable care and much

interest the operation of the Sheppard-Towner bill and have become convinced that it has done much good in most of the States in improving prenatal care and decreasing maternal mortality in childbed. Consequently it seems . to me regrettable that the act was not renewed. I understand that the bill introduced by you (H. R. 14070) has for its purpose the extension of the work b'egun under the Sheppard-Towner Act. This purpose is certainly good and the provisions of the bill seem to be wise. Hence, I am glad to indorse it and I hope it will become a law.

Very truly yours, c. s. BACON, M. D.,

Professor Emeritus of Obstetrics, University of Illinois.

STATEMENT OF DR. WILLIAM B. M'ILWAINE (Specialist in pediatrics; diseases of children; 434 West Washington

Street) PETERSBURG, VA., January 11, 1929.

Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR Sm: I am very much interested in the passage of the Newton bill at this short session of Congress.

Virginia has derived much benefit from the Sheppard-Towner fund, and I believe that the present Newton bill will be of even a greater help to the State and the mothers and infants it will take care of. .

I am sure all the doctors in this community join me in hoping that this bill will not be put off but acted on at this time.

Very truly yours, WM. B. MciLWAINE, M. D.

PROVIDENCE, R. I., January 10, 1929. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR Sm: I am writing to you at this time to indicate my inter

est and approval of the infancy and maternity bill, H. R. 14070, in which you· have shown much concern.

As a member of the executive committee of the Conference of .State a,nc;l Provincial Health Authorities of North America, I have considered rather carefully your bill, and, with a few changes

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 945 suggested by this committee, it meets with my hearty approval. Our committee very greatly appreciates your interest in this

·matter, and the members of the same anticipate your success in _securing the passage of this bill during the present session of Congress.

Respectfully, B. M. RICHARDS, M. D.,

Commissioner oj Public Health.

DEPARTMENT OF PUIILIC HEALTH AND WELFARE, Cleveland, January 9, 1929.

Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. NEWTON: Referring to House bill 14070, which you have introduced to promote the welfare and hygiene of mothers and children and aid in the reduction of infant and maternal mortality, I beg to advise that I am in entire sympathy with the purposes of this bill, and believe that our Federal Government can well take notice of the needs in the promotion of health and welfare of children in such State and Territorial agencies as are not at the present time able to ren<~er these needed services in public health.

Surely our Federal Government should be as much concerned in these matters as in those activities which call for appropriation for the reduction of diseases in such matters as the animal and plant industries or in forest conservation, etc.

Yours very truly, H. L. RocKwooD, M. D.,

Commissioner oj Health .

CHARLESTON, W. VA., November 20, 1928. Hon. WALTER H. NEWTON, ,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. -DEAR Sm: Will you please advise, at your earliest convenience,

the progress that has been made on H. R. 14070, introduced by you May 26, creating a child welfare extension service in the Children's Bureau.

This department is materially interested in the passage of thls bill, since the financial participation provided by the SheppardTowner Act will expire June 30, 1928. Under its . provisions this department had approximately $25,000 to be disbursed through counties and communities for the promotion of public health, and I fear it will be a difficult matter to induce the incoming legislature to take care of this item from State revenues only.

I feel absolutely sure that the West Virginia delegation in Congress will aid you in every manner possible in securing the passage of the measure.

Very truly yours,

lion. WALTER H. NEWTON,

w. T. HENHAW, State Health Commissioner.

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, Des Moines, Iowa, January 11, 1929.

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR Sm: I want to heartily indorse the new maternity and

infancy bill introduced by you in Congress last year, but as modified at the conference of the State health officers and the League of Women Voters at a meeting held in Chicago in October, 1928.

As you know, the modification· makes definite provision as to the agency through which the Federal-aid funds are to be spent in the State. I trust that with suah modification the bill will be passed.

Very sincerely yours,

Mr. NEWTON,

HENRY ALBERT, M. D .• Commissioner.

P~OENIX, ARIZ., January 14, 1929.

House of Representatives: We indorse any legislation which will provide Federal funds to

those States otherwise unable to continue their present infancy and maternity programs. Arizona must have Federal aid to continue its present program.

F. T. FAHLEN, M. D .• State Superintendent oj Public Health.

WASHINGTON, D. C., December 17, 1930. MY DEAR SENATOR COPELAND: Much has been made of the opposi

tion to the American Medical Association to the Children's Bureau administering the maternity and infancy act.

May I call your attention to the fact that the pediatric section of the American Medical Association-composed as you know of men and women physicians who are specialists on the diseases of children-have always supported the Children's Bureau.

A motion to approve the Sheppard-Towner Act was carried unanimously by the section on diseases of children of the American Medical Association in St. Louis, May, 1922. The following reference to it, taken from the minutes of the meeting, was printed in the American ·Medical Association Journal for June 10, 1922, page 1509:

"Dr. H. F. Helmholz, Rochester, Minn., submitted a resolution that the section declare its approval of the principles encouraging

LXXIV-60

public education in the hygiene of maternity and infancy embodied in the Sheppard-Towner Act. - "Dr. H. F. Helmholz, Rochester, Minn., moved the adoption of

this resolution. Seconded, carried unanimously." I quote, also, a resolution adopted at the January meeting of

the Chicago Pediatric -Society in 1923, showing how Chicago physicians, who knew the situation, felt about having the SheppardTowner Act adopted in their State:

" Whereas the statistics of infancy and .maternity in illinois show that more than 10,000 babies and more than 1,000 mothers die every year, more than half of whom could be saved by proper care; .

"And whereas the methods proposed by the State department of health for administering the Sheppard-Towner law in education and welfare work for mothers and babies will undoubtedly reduce this mortality: Therefore be it

"Resolved, That the Chicago Pediatric Society express its approval of the Sheppard-Towner law and urge the State legislature to make a sufficient appropriation to adequately carry out its provisions."

The Senator from Connecticut has made a great deal of the fact that his State refused to accept the benefits of the SheppardTowner Act. Here is what Professor Winslow, of Yale, had to say about it in a speech given at the health congress in Atlantic City, May 18, 1926:

" • * * New England, in particular, seems to have adopted very much the attitude characteristic of South Carolina 65 years ago in regard to State rights. For myself, however, though I come from Connecticut, I still feel that ~he Government at Washington is my Government quite as much as that at Hartford. I can .not regard it as an alien tyranny against which my personal liberties require defense. In any case, I am quite certain as a public-health worker that * * * the Sheppard-Towner bill has been among "the most beneficient pieces of legislation ever enacted in the hiStory 'of the Union, and I rejoice that even those States which, like my own, have nobly waved aside .the tainted gold of Washington, have at least been inspired by the Sheppard-Towner bill to carry out its admirable program with their own funds on the exact lines contemplated by the bill. • • * "

I join with hundreds of thousands of other mothers who, from their personal experience, are aware of the benefits of the maternity and infancy act in the hope that the Congress of the United States will reenact its provisions in the present measure introduced by Senator JoNES.

Thanking you for your efforts on behalf of the mothers and children of this country, I am

Sincerely yours, ELIZABETH McKENNA,

New York Cit y. P. S.- I am inclosing a copy of the speech made by Miss Grace

Abbott, Chief of the Children's Bureau, before the American Academy of Political and Social Science, and reprinted from the Annals, Philadelphia, September, 1930.

STATEMENT OF MISS ABBOTT The section on medical service of the White House conference

on child health and protection which met in Washington, November 19-22, 1930, the membership of which included many of the leading pediatricians and obstetricians of the country, has brought together a significant body of information and expert opinion concerning the need f?r extension of maternal and infarit hygiene services. For example, Dr. Kenneth D. Blackfan, of the medical school of Harvard University, chairman of the committee on growth and development of this section, reported as follows:

"What we are just beginning to appreciate is the value and importance in the prevention of disease of building up and maintaining the general health of the child. Here again our efforts to establish sound health habits and to foster adequate nutrition and opportunities of growth are doubly rewarded: They form the bulwark against disease and at the same time constitute an end in themselves."

The committee on prenatal and maternal care, of which Dr. Fred L. Adair, of the medical faculty of the University of Chicago, is chairman; stated that prenatal care is of the very greatest value for the prevention of many maternal and fetal diseases and deaths. Adequate prenatal care, the committee states, is part of a necc_ssary progr.am; and it is only a link in the chain of events associated with maternity, the full value of which can only be realized by proper subsequent care during confinement and puerpez:ium. The committee regarded educational problems rel2.ting to maternity and infancy as of great importance and listed the personnel engaged in educational schemes of this type as including doctors, nurses, midwives, the laity, and social workers. "Until the public at large is educated to the necessity for adequate maternal care," the comm1ttee stated, "and demands that the high maternal and fetal mortality that now exists in this country be reduced, little real progress can come." With reference to the midwife, the committee reported that she can not be eliminated in some sections, and that every effort should be made to improve her efficiency as rapidly as possible. Instruction of midwives in certain sections was an important activity carried on under the Sheppard-Towner Act, and was a type of work practically unknown theretofore in most of the United States.

With reference to the Sheppard-Towner Act, Doctor Adair's committee made the following statement:

"The Children's Bureau h~ given valuable service in the · direction of the administration of the Federal maternity and infancy

946 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17. act and in other demonstrations, in addition to the publication of many bulletins of educational and practical value dealing with maternal and infant and child welfare. There should be an increase rather than a curtailment of these activities and adequate appropriation and personnel should be provided.

"The practical results of the maternity and infancy act of 1921 are impossible to evaluate, but it is significant that all but three of the State bureaus of ch ild hygiene cooperated fully in carrying out the demonstrations. Most of them are continuing maternal and child-welfare work. Through the continued cooperation of the State bureaus of child hygiene much valuable work may be done and information secured."

The committee on dependency and neglect of section 4, dealing with handicapped children, called attention to maternal mortality as a cause of child dependency and recommended legislation comparable in scope and purpose to the Sheppard-Towner Act, with the Children's Bureau in the same administrative relationship as before.

A similar recommendation was made by the committee on national, State, and local organizations for the handicapped.

The drought and the industrial depression are putting back to an extent impossible to ass.ess the child-health movement. Many children are suifering from an inadequate supply of milk and other foods, and the general insecurity means great nervous strain and physical losses. Private medical and dental care will be curtailed so that an expansion of public-health service is greatly needed. These results will be cumulative for a period of years following business recovery, for families will be burdened with debt, and children will be suifering from the effects of. deprivation which, to a growing child, can never be fully recompensed. The reasons which, in 1927, made continuation of Federal aid seem desirable are reenforced to-day by the compelling necessities of the present emergency.

GRACE ABBOTT, Chief.

Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I ask to have inserted in the RECORD some telegrams from my State; and I ask to have read by the clerk a telegram from the commissioner of health of West Virginia.

Th PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the telegram will be read.

The Chief Clerk read as follows: CHARLESTON, W.VA., December 9, 1930.

Ron. H. D. HATFIELD, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.:

Re tel. this date, I am unreservedly in favor of the reestablishment of Sheppard-Towner Act or a substitute that will cooperate with the States in the promotion of the health and welfare of infants and expectant mothers. The discontinuance of Federal financial participation in the health department of West Virginia has mt>st seriously crippled our program. Without the renewal of this appropriation we can do no more than mark time for the next biennium in the furtherance of the purposes for which our department was created and for which you are more largely responsible than any other individual. Will write you more fully to-morrow.

I

W. T. HENSHAW.·

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The other telegrams Will be printed in the RECORD, as requested by the Senator from West Virginia.

The telegrams are as follows: WHEELING, W. VA., December 1.0, 1930.

Senator H. D. HATFIELD, United States Senate, Washington, D. 0.:

West Virginia Federation Women's Clubs unanimously indorse Sheppard-Towner bill as now before Senate. Desire it resumed under same management.

Mrs. J. G. HEARNE, President.

.WHEELING, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator H. D. HATFIELD,

United States Senate Office: I ask your support for the maternity and infancy bill.

EDNA ENGSTROM.

MOUNDSVILLE, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator H. D. HATFIELD,

Care Senate: Interested in Jones infancy and maternity bill. Appreciate your

support. Mrs. C. E. CARRIGAN.

WHEELING, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator HATFIELD,

United States Senate Office: Counting on your support for infancy maternity blll to-day.

Mrs. RuSSELL H. ROSENBERG, President Child's Study Club.

WHEELING, W.VA., December 10, 1930, Senator HENRY D. HATFIELD,

Senate Office Building: I am hoping for your hearty support of the infant maternity bill.

ANNE M. _CuMMINS.

WHEELING, W.VA., December 10, 1930. Senator H. D. HATFIELD,

United States Senate Building: We strongly urge your support in the infancy maternity bill.

HARRY HEFFRIN, President Elmgrove Parkview Teachers' Associ ation.

ELM GROVE, W. VA., December 10, 1930. HENRY D. HATFIELD,

Senate Office Building: We emphatically urge indorsement and support of infancy

maternity bi~l. FLORENCE CRITTENDEN HOME, ELI.zAt!ETH RUNGEE, Superintendent.

WHEELING, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator HENRY D. HATFIELD:

Ohio County Council of Parents and Teachers begs your support of infancy maternity bill.

Mrs. JoHN W. Gn.MaRE.

WHEELING, W.VA., December 10, 1930. Senator H. D. HATFIELD,

United States Senate Office: We, Ohio County League of Women votes, strongly urge your

support and indorsement of the infancy and maternity bill. Mrs. H. B. CoPELAND, President.

ELM GROVE, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator HENRY D. HATFIELD,

Senate Office Building: We strongly urge your support of infancy maternity bill.

Hon. H. D. HATFIELD,

WOMEN'S CLUB OF ELMGROVE, Mrs. GLIA MITcHELL, President.

WHEELING, W. VA., December 10, 1930.

United States Senate Office Building: Confidently depending on your support of infancy maternity bill.

HENRIETTA ARBENZ ROMINE.

WHEELING, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Ron. H. D. HATFIELD,

United States Senate: We call upon your every effort behalf passage maternity infancy.

WEsT VIRGINIA LEAGUE WoMEN VaTERS, Mrs. EARL M. GIESEY, Secretary.

WHEELING, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator H. D. HATFIELD,

Senate: Expect you to vote for maternity infancy bill.

. liARRIETl' B. JONES, M. D.

MOUNDSVILLE, W. VA., December 10, 1930. Senator H. D. HATFIELD,

Care of Senate: We are hoping for your support of the Jones infancy and mater

nity bill. LEAGUE OF WoMEN VOTERS OF GLENDALE, Mrs. RUSSELL ROBERTS, President.

Mr. HATFIELD. I have a letter from the same source that I should like to have printed in the RECORD. I ask unanimous consent to have that done.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection. the letter will be printed in the RECORD.

The letter is as follows: CHARLESTON, December 10, 1930.

Han. H. D. HATFIELD, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR HATFIELD: Your telegram of yesterday was re- · ceived just after the office had closed for the day, and I was unable to comply with your request for a letter to be in your possession this morning. I did, however, wire my unqualified approval o! the reestablishment of the Sheppard-Towner appropriation, to be used for the same purposes for which the act was originally passed.

The administration of this specific fund was exceedingly broad and constructive. lt is true that the greater portion of the service employed by it was for the definite purpose of preventing the high mortality rate of children and mothers at maternity. In our own State it accomplished as much, if not more, than was expected. The infant and maternity mortality rate was markedly reduced in those communities where the appropriation was expended on a cooperative basis. During the entire period in which · the appropriation was employed there was not a single complaint or protest from a member of the medical profession or a layman in West Virginia against the methods employed in rendering the service.

The discontinuance of the appropriation has seriously crippled the administration of public health in West Virginia. As you are aware. the legislature has not provided suill.cient appropriations

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 947 for competent health service as a state-wide proposition. The more llnUted the appropriation the more restricted the health servtce and vice versa.

As you know, it has been the policy of the incumbent to have a decentralized organization rather than a large central staff; ln other words, to assist financially the various communities in the State to establish and maintain full-time local health organizations, the only organizatiOns, by the way, that meet the approval of competent sanitarie.ns.

We have a medical practice act, of which you are the author, that is broad and comprehensive and that serves as a basis for giving the people the best of health service, if they so desire, but the end result depends entirely on the amount of money that ls available to carry out the purposes of the law.

If I can be of any personal service in securing the appropriation by appearing in Washington, I will be only too glad to do so.

I want to add in conclusion my appreciation of your continued 1nterest in public-health matters, an interest, by the way, that has never flagged since you have become interested in upbuilding the manhood of the State.

Sincerely yours, W. T. HENSHAW,

State Health Commissioner.

Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I have listened with a great deal of interest to the discourse of some of my learned colleagues on the floor of this body in their discussion of the merits and demerits of Senate bill 255, a bill that carries with it the title, "For the promotion of the health and welfare of mothers and infants, and for other purposes."

Mr. President, history records that the central governments of many nations interest themselves, through their executive and legislative bodies, in internal affairs which affect the health and intelligence of the people.

It was a distinguished physician by the name of Harvey who in the far-distant mystical period of the past discov-

. ered the circulation, and presented to his colleagues his conclusions; and as a reward he was promptly and summarily dealt with by his professional associates. It was no less a character than the King of England who came to the rescue of Doctor Harvey in support of his theory which gave to the world the knowledge that the blood vessels that course the human body are charged with the responsibility of carrying the most highly nutritious fluid that is essential to life.

It was the great Edward Jenner who made the first observation, and demonstrated the merits of his conclusion, that immunization was possible in the prevention of some forms of infectious and contagious diseases, but not until he had the support of the central government of which he was a citizen.

Farther on in the progress of medical science W:J find the great Pasteur unfolding to the amazement of chemical science other great discoveries of immunization for the welfare of humanity.

Mr. President, I can do no better than to quote this great benefactor to the human race. At the inauguration of the Pasteur Institute he closed his oration with the following words:

Two opposing laws seem to me now in contest. The one, a law of blood and death, opening out each day new modes of destruction, forces nations to be always ready for the battle. The other, a law of peace, work, and health, whose only aim is to deliver man from the calamities which beset him. The one seeks violent conquests, the other the relief of mankind. The one places a single life above all victories, the other sacrifices hundreds of thousands of lives to the ambition of a single individual. The law of which we are the instruments strives even through the carnage to cure the wounds due to the law of war. Treatment by our antiseptic methods may preserve the lives of thousands of soldiers. Which of these two laws wlll prevail, God only knows. But of this we may be sure, that science, in obeying the law of humanity, will always labor to enlarge the frontiers of life.

So it is the aim of this legislation not only to save life but to add to its desirability and happiness.

Those who oppose this legislation seem to have in mind limiting the support of the Federal Government to problems specifically enumerated in the Constitution. They at the same time disclaim the duty of the Government to extend support in a cooperative way in the absence of specific reference to such problems that possibly belong more specifically to a lesser unit of government. These intermediate problems are just as serious and, in many instances, more meritorious than the direct ones. . .

It is difficult for me to understand how any opposition could be offered by the Congress in the way of cooperation which has for its purpose the welfare and protection of the most sacred, the most important asset that any nation possesses-that is the expectant mother, whose new-born child in many instances is largely, and sometimes solely, dependent upon the care and protection afforded by the local, State, or National Government. If the young life is properly cared for, who knows what specific benefit the child may bring to humanity in later life because of the thoughtfulness of the Government whoe lawmakers were sensitive to the duty and responsibilities that were theirs by the enactment of legislation for those who could not care for themselves?

In our evolutionary development of science it has been only a period of 75 years since Dr. Joseph Lister, of England, because of his father's intense interest in optical s<:ience, developed microscopical lenses by means of which he found many diseases, bacterial in nature, which wreck the human body. It was left to our own distinguished scientist, Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes, to make the observation and discovery that the expectant mother is liable to the ravages of an almost hopeless disease when once contracted. Doctor Crede-because, no doubt, of the suggestions of Pasteur, Lister, and Holmes-discovered that the new-born child was liable to a disease which destroyed its eyes, and that the awful results were preventable if immediate preventive treatment at the time of birth was resorted to.

The discoveries of Crede and Holmes concerning the ravages ·of these two outstanding diseases have excited the sympathy of the citizenship of our land and caused legislative bodies of our States, through proper legislation, to provide funds with which to combat the possibilities of these complications to mothers and children. These diseases are communicable. They are carried from one , individual to another in every land and every clime, just like cholera and other maladies of a serious nature that formerly frequented the various States of the Nation, necessitating quarantine restrictions, and not unlike the disease which is fought and stamped out in the animal kingdom, such as the foot-andmouth disease. We all know with what promptness our Congress responds to the elimination of these outbreaks.

Mr. President, to me there can be no line of demarcation that we can justifiably recognize in the way of appropriation, service, and cooperation in the way of Federal legislation when it comes to stamping out contagious or preventable diseases to which the people are heir and from which many are dying yearly and others are maimed for life.

No possible harm or injury can come to the individual, the community, or the State by receiving assistance from the Federal Government in support of so worthy a causeassistance in the way of furnishing money, expert advice, and pamphlets in order that the uninformed may be prepared to ward off the possibilities of contracting these dangerous diseases, which mean the loss of vision and entail human misery and also a great economic sacrifice.

That prenatal care and education of the laity and even of the medical profession in regard to the prevention of blindness are necessary and successful, is shown by a comparison of figures for the blind for 1910 and for 1920. In 1910 there were enumerated 57,272 cases of blindness. Ten years later there were 52,617, or a decrease of the number in 10 years of 4,655. This. decrease was the result of a concerted effort made by the States and the National Government to prevent blindness in infancy by instruction as to the proper method of prevention.

It is estimated that ophthalmia neonatorum causes 20 per cent of the blindness in the United States. In Great Britain this disease is responsible for 50 per cent of blindness in infancy.

Mr. President, the economic side of the case may appeal to some. It is estimated that $400 a year is necessary to educate each of the 10,000 children blinded by acute eye infection in infancy, or a total of $4,000,000 must be spent yearly from Government funds, ~ither State or National,

948 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 1~

for this purpose. It is much more expensive to educate a blind child than a child blessed with vision. It is not eConomy to deny appropriations for the prevention of blindness, since a much larger sum must be spent later to educate sightless children.

While $400 a year is necessary to educate a blind child. only $67 a year is necessary to educate a child with vision. This latter figure is for education in the city elementary schools. There is certainly a big difference between $400 and $67 a year. Ii there are any who oppose this bill from an economic viewpoint, let them look at the great expense to the State in the education of blind children, whose blindness, in a high percentage of cases, could be prevented at birth were the necessary care and instruction available; and to make them available, to substitute for scant proVision adequate treatment, is the intention of this measure.

How it can be successfully or convincingly contended that a mere appropriation of a stipulated sum of money by Congress would be responsible for the increased mortality from these diseases which the appropriation . is used to prevent, is beyonu my comprehension •. and surely. Mr. President. is not seriously contended by any Senator who opposes this legislation.

When we view the child-hygiene division of the Children's Bureau here . in Washington, directed under the Department of Labor, and find men and women therein with certificates of efficiency granted to them from the best colleges, both scientific and professional, in this and other countries, we can not but feel assured that the work is carried on with a high standard, based on thorough training and superior intellectual attainments.

Any fluctuation or upward trend of the diseases in any of the States that have q112.lified for the benefits of the Sheppard-Towner law could not be charged justifiably in any way to Federal meddling with the orderly procedure of the administration of the health law in any State in the Union. The fact is there is. no meddling, but simply a friendly cooperation upon the part of the Federal Government, whose duty it is to see that the legislature has accepted cooperation by the enactment of the proper state law. There is no justification for anyone to resent the manifested interest of a thoughtful body of lawmakers in their efforts in behalf of the welfare and protection of the underprivileged class of our citizenship. To me it is without justification upon their part. ~

A million-dollar appropriation yearly for a worthy cause dedicated to humanity is a mere bagatelle in the way of a contribution by the Federal Government to the relief of our dependent citizenship. I shall have something to say in the near future dealing with the legislation looking toward the relief of the more than 400,000 crippled children who are to be found in the United States at the present time, with additional numbers being added in each succeeding year. A limited effort is being made by those who are charitably inclined for the purpose of rehabilitating and reclaiming those who are hopeless cripples. This effort is limited, it is true, for the want of proper support and financial backing, 'Qut when the situation is properly called to the attention of the citizens of our Nation, it will, I am sure. have hearty response from their representativr ..s in the Congress of the United states in a cooperative was, for the extension of relief and rehabilitation of every child found under the flag, and it is this subject, Mr. President, which I shall call to the attention of this body in the near future, and which is entitled to the same consideration and care as the question that is before us at the present time.

The revival of this legislation by its proponents is timely, justifiable, and meritorious, and it is with much pleasure that I speak a word in support of it and offer my vote for its adoption.

Mr. VANDENBERG. Mr. President, before the Senator takes his seat, may I ask his opinion upon this question? He is one of the distinguished members of the medical profession himself. Is it his judgment that there is any necessity, from a professional standpoint or otherwise, for the transfer Qf this work from the Department of Labor to the Department of Public Health?

Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I think the record shows that in the administration of the funds for the work covered by this bill, when such funds were available, the Department of Labor demonstrated its efficiency and its ability, and when we check up the wonderful organization, composed of graduates from the outstanding institutions of this and other countries, we can not help concluding that the organization made available through and by the Department of Labor is quite capable of taking care of any fund which has for its purpose the relief of the unfortunate sick in the respective States of this Union who are unable to take care of themselves.

Mr. COPELAND. Mr. President, is there not a further reply, too, to the question of the Se!llltor from Michigan? There is ,a misunderstanding about the purpose of the bill. If it were proposed to apply medically the operation of the Federal <k>vernment, if this were a proposal to have somebody in the Federal Government administer medical matters, I am sure the Senator from West Virginia would join with me in contending that that would be a proper function to turn over to the Public Health Service.

Mr. HATFIELD. Whole-heartedly. Mr. COPELAND. But this is not such a proposition. Mr. HATFIELD. Not at all. Mr. COPELAND. This is a proposition to have the medi

cal side applied and administered in the States by medical men appointed by the States for that purpose. Therefore there is no reason in the world that I can see for the transfer of the business side of this work from the Children's Bureau, where it has been well done, to the Public Health Service, where, of course, it would be well done, but where it would interfere with the public-health activities of the Public Health Service.

Mr. HATFIELD. I thoroughly agree with the Senator from New York. This fund is intended by the Congress of the United States as a cooperative fund, humanitarian in its application. cooperative with the health departments of the state governments) for the purpose oi caring for the mother who is unable to care for herself, and when it is placed in the hands of the Chief of the Department of Labor, who is not a technical man, generally speaking, but who is a humanitarian, we will have less difficulty from a technical point of view in its administration and the distribution of the appropriation than we would have were the funds placed in the hands of a department more technical.

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, it is of course extremely difficult for a layman to oppose the views of the two Members of this body who have devoted their lives to healing the sick and caring for the sick. The Senator from New York, with his distinguished medical record. and the Senator from West Virginia, with his, have both told us .of the importance of this legislation.

However, there is one thing which has not yet been explained to the satisfaction of those of us who are trying to do what we think is best for the country and for the citizens of it, present at..:d future, and that is, why the great medical association of the United States, the American Medical Association, at its annual convention. the delegates being present and having considered this matter for many years, passed the resolution which was referred to some time previously in the debate, in which they stated that-

The law ifl the product of political expediency, not in· the interest of the public welfare; that it is an imported socialistic scheme unsuited to our form of government; that it unjustly and inequitably taxes the people in some States for the benefit of the people of other States, for purposes which are lawful charges only for the people of the said other States; and does not become operative in the various States until the States themselves have passed enabling legislation: Therefore be lt

Resolved, That it is a type of undesirable legislation which should be discouraged.

That resolution was referred to on January 5, 1927, in the Senate, as appears from the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.

Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. BINGHAM. In just a moment. There has been no

satisfactory explanation as to why the great medical organizations of some . of our leading_ States, leading in the sense that they have made great advances in medicine-States like

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 949 Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New Jersey-have passed resolutions against the passage of this legislation.

Furthermore, Mr. President, there has been no adequate explanation at all as to why when two great organizations, the American Medical Association and the Sentinels of the Republic, asked for a hearing on this measure, they were given to understand that they might be heard if hearings were held and that surely no committee would deny them hearings, but they were not given an opportunity to be heard or to call attention to the latest statistics in regard to the actual working out of this bill.

Therefore I have made the motion that the bill be referred back to the committee, with instructions to the committee to hold hearings and give these organizations which have been seeking for more than a year and a half opportunity to be heard, that opportunity which they request.

Now I yield to the Senator. Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I would like to ask the·

Senator if he knows why the American Medical Association objects to this kind and class of legislation.

Mr. BINGHAM. I am asking the doctors in this body why the great medical association to which they belong objects.

Mr. HATFIELD. I have asked a representative of the American Medical Association, as I have asked representatives of the State medical associations, why they object, and up to the present hour I have not had an answer. I am a member of the American Medical Association, as I am a member of my State association, but I do not know why they object, and I can not for the life of me understand why any doctor would object to this class of legislation.

Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, I suppose the reasons for their objection are stated in the preamble of the resolution which they adopted through their house of delegates. Possibly also they are influenced by the fact that the working out of the original law has not been advantageous and has actually not resulted in a continual decline in the death rate in maternity cases and cases of infants as might have been expected. The point was more stressed before the law was enacted and since the law was enacted.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The hour of 3 o'clock having arrived, under the unanimous-consent agreement entered into yesterday the Senate will proceed to vote without further debate upon the motion proposed by the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM].

Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk called the roll, and the following Senators answered to their names: Ashurst Fess Kean Robinson, Ark. Barkley Fletcher Kendrick Robinson, Ind. Bingham Frazier King Schall Black George La Follette Sheppard Blaine Glllett McGlll Shlpstead Blease Glass McKellar Shortridge Borah Glenn McMaster Simmons Bratton Goff McNary Smith Brock Goldsborough Metcalf Stelwer Brookhart Gould Morrison Thomas, Idaho Broussard Hale Morrow Thomas, Okla. Bulkley Harris Moses Townsend Capper Harrison Norbeck Trammell Caraway Hastings Norris Tydings Connally Hatfield Nye Vandenberg Copeland Hawes Oddle Wagner Couzens Hayden Patterson Walcott Cutting Hebert Phipps Walsh, Mass. Dale Heflin Pine Waterman Davis Howell Pittman Watson Deneen Johnson Ransdell Wheeler Dlll Jones Reed Wllliamson

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Eighty-eight Senators having answered to their names, a quorum is present. The question is upon agreeing to the motion proposed by the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BINGHAM] to recommit the bill with instructions by reason of failure of the committee to hold hearings.

Mr. JONES. Upon that I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Chief Clerk

proceeded to call the rolL

Mr. BINGHAM <when his name was called). I have a general pair With the junior Senator from Virginia [Mr. GLAss]. Having been informed that he, if present, would vote as I intend to vote, I am ·at liberty to vote. I vote "yea."

Mr. BULKLEY <when his name was called). I am paired with the junior Senator from Wyoming [Mr. CAREY]. I transfer that pair to the senior Senator from Virginia [Mr. SwANsoN] and vote "nay."

Mr. WHEELER <when the name of Mr. WALSH of Montana was called) . My colleague the senior Senator from Montana [Mr. WALSH] is necessarily absent from the Senate. I wish to announce the special pair of my colleague with the Se._llator from Vermont [Mr. GREENE]. If present, the Senator from Vermont would vote "yea," and my colleague would vote " nay."

The roll call was concluded. Mr. FESS. I wish to announce that the Senator from

New Hampshire [Mr. KEYES] has a general pair with the Senator from Iowa [Mr. STEcKl.

The result was announced-yeas 14, nays 74, as follows:

Bingham -Borah Broussard Glllett

Ashurst Barkley Black Blaine Blease Bratton Brock Brookhart Bulkley Capper Caraway Connally Copeland Couzens Cutting Dale Davis Deneen Dlll

YEAS-14 Glass Hawes King Me teal!

Moses Phipps Reed Tydings

NAY8-74 Fess Fletcher Frazier George Glenn Gotr Goldsborough Gould Hale Harris Harrison Hastings Hatfield Hayden

· Hebert Hefiln Howell Johnson Jones

Kean Kendrick La Follette McG1ll McKellar McMaster McNary Morrison Morrow Norbeck Norris Nye Oddie Patterson Pine Pittman Ransdell Robinson, Ark. Robinson, Ind.

NOT VOTING-8

Walsh, Mass. Waterman

Schall Sheppard Ship stead Shortridge Simmons Smith Stelwer Thomas, Idaho Thomas, Okla. Townsend Trammell Vandenberg Wagner Walcott Watson Wheeler Williamson

Carey Keyes Steck Swanson Greene Smoot Stephens Walsh, Mont.

So Mr. BINGHAM's motion to recommit was rejected. ONE HUNDREDTH ANNIVERSARY OF DEATH OF SIMON BOLIVAR Mr. BINGHAM. Mr. President, yesterday I invited atten-

tion to the fact that to-day is the one hundredth anniversary of the death of Gen. Simon Bolivar.

Five nations, constituting the northern half of Spanish South America, owe their independence to the life, imagination, courage, and ability of Simon Bolivar. To-day all through those countries the one hundredth anniversary of his death is being observed by memorial services in the churches everywhere, as it was observed this morning in St. Matthews Church in this city.

It is always difficult for the people of one race and national heritage to pay proper sympathetic tribute to the hero of a people of different racial and national heritage. If one sees, however, how we in the United States regard George Washington, as the father of our country, a man who through the d.i.fiicult years of the American Revolution, by his courage, patience, perseverance, skill, and statesmanship succeeded in bringing the thirteen Colonies from a state of turmoil and dependence to a state of independence and successful nationhood, he can the more readily realize the attitude of these five South American countries toward Bolivar, who did for them what Washington did for us.

Bolivar was born two years after the Battle of Yorktown, in the year 1783, when the treaty of Paris was signed and England recognized our independence. He was born in Venezuela. of distinguished parentage. Like Washington, his family was one of the "first families" in the colonies; like Washington, his people were of the landed aristocracy, of wealth and distinction and education. Like Washington, he lost his father early in life; in fact, both his father

950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 and his ·mother died before he was 7 years old. He inherited great estates. · On the lands of llis fa:inily were very important silver mines. Among the possessions of the family at . that time were over 1,000 African slaves. His guardian undertook to give him the best possible education. One of the distinguished citizens of Venezuela was appointed as his tutor. ·

As soon as he reached an age when it would be proper for him to travel he went to Madrid, and there, in the capital of the mother country, spent several years in study. When his studies were completed he made a tour of Europe. Then, ·shortly before his nineteenth birthday, he returned to his native land and there married a beautiful lady, who was destined to live less than a year after their marriage.

At the age of 19 he found himself a distracted widower, of great· property, belonging to a class which was looked down upon by the people of the homeland because they were-not born on the soil of Spain. Coming of pure Spanish ancestry and of distinguished parentage, still he had the "misfortune" to be what is known as a creole, because he was born on South American soil. During his schooling in Spain this fact had been" rubbed into" him; he was looked down upon as .. a little colonist " by the boys in the capital city of the home country.

However, distracted with his sorrow, he sought alleviation in travel and went back to Europe and for a time devoted himself to the pleasures of various European capitals. One day an opportunity was afforded him to come in contact with Gen. Francisco de Miranda, whom many have called 'the father of South American independence," because it was he who first dreamed the dream of an independent continent. He had been driven out of his native land by the monarchists, had taken -up his abode in London, and there established a little coterie of creoles whom he was trying to infect with love of their native· land and a desire to make it independent. ·

Coming in contact then with Miranda, Bolivar conceived the idea of devoting his life to securing freedom, liberty, and independence for his native land and the colonies adjacent thereto. Returning to Venezuela in 1809, he came by way of the United States, where he had an opportunity to observe the progress that was being made here, the first country to adopt on a large scale a representative form of government--government by the people. He had seen in France the later years of the French Revolution; he had seen the rise of Napoleon; he saw the progress the United States had been making; and he went home filled with the idea that something must be done to secure the independence and liberty of Venezuela.

The Napoleonic machinations in Spain made possible the successful beginnings of the movement for South American independence. So long as Spain was busy with affairs at home the various committees of independence that sprang up here and there in South America operated successfully. Bolivar was a member of the first independence committee in Venezuela, and was given a commission of colonel in the army of independence. They seized Caracas; they declared their independence, but had not yet actually thrown o:tr all allegiance to the mother country, which was at that time torn in war between the adherents of Napoleon and his opponents.

Then nature, which seemed destined to throw in Bolivar's path every possible obstacle to discourage him from all activities except the following of personal pleasures, presented another handicap. A gigantic earthquake, which came at a moment when nearly all the leading people in Caracas were attending services in the great churches of that city, destroyed those churches. The heaVY roofs fell in; thousands of people were killed; and the royalists and monarchists. announced to the populace that the cataclysm was the punishment inflicted upon them for having endeavored to set up a government .independent of Spain. The royalists obtained control of the country, and Bolivar had to leave. He went over to a neighboring colony, later to become the Republic of Colombia. There he helped those who were interested in securing their independence in arriving at a successful con-

summation. Taking his life in his hands, contrary to the orders of his immediate superiors, Bolivar one night slipped across from Cartagena-that magnificent fortress built at the expense of some $50,000,000 by that great despot Philip Ib of Spain-to a small fort near the mouth of the Magdalena River, captured the loyalist forces there, embarked up the river, captured other points. and began a campaign for the independence of Colombia.

Securing the permission of his allies and the invitation of the Venezuelans he undertook a magnificent march across the northern Andes into Venezuela, and in 51 days succeeded in fighting his way to Caracas, the capital of Venezuela. He was welcomed and acclaimed by the populace with the title El Liberador, "Th.e Liberator "-by which name he has always since then been known.

Events in Europe, however,. were too much for the little colonies which had temporarily secured their independence, due to the fact that Spain was too busy at home to attempt to interfere with what was going on in the colonies. As soon as possible a great fleet was organized, manned by veterans of the Napoleonic wars, and Spain set to work to recover the' revolting colonies. The efforts -of these veterans were successful. Backed by well-drilled troops, quantities of arms and ammunition, and abundant funds, the royalists dispersed the little army of patriots in northern South America. and Bolivar had to flee for his life.

He found refuge on the banks of the Orinoco at a place on the river then known as Angostura, since then rechristened the City of Bolivar or Ciudad Bolivar. There. living in comparative security but great poverty in a small thatched hut on the banks of this mighty stream, he gathered about him a little band of patriots, ragged, hungry, without funds, without a sufficient quantity of arms and ammunition. Then he began a stupendous effort to try to win for northern South America independence of the loyalists and monarchists so that his countrymen might have freedom and liberty as had the citizens of the United States. In the meantime the forces of the royalists overran the rest of northern South America and the few scattered bands of patriots seemed destined to disappear beneath the all-powerful armies of Spain.

Nothing daunted, however, Bolivar conceived in i818 a remarkable undertaking which was supposed to be absolutely impossible of achievement. It was nothing short of an attempt to march across the great plains, overfiowed by the swollen rivers during the winter rains, and through the passes of the Andes Mountains, choked with snow, to penetrate Colombia from the rear . . Spain had well defended the seacoast at Cartagena and other points. It had been shown that the patriots could make no headway by coming up from the Caribbean Sea. There were too many forts; the Spanish army was located in too advantageous a position. No one supposed that it would be possible for an entry to be made into Colombia through the back door, so to speak, at a time of the year when the great lagoons that are to be found on the plains of eastern Colombia and western Venezuela overflow their banks, morasses are turned into large lakes, rivers over.tlow their banks, fords are lost sight of, and rivers that normally flow beneath a bank 6 or 8 feet high cover those bariks until they are 8 or 10 feet below the surface and the floods stretch for miles in every direction. No one thought it was possible for a little army to march through such difficulties across those plains under the conditions of wlnter rains and then undertake to climb the Colombian Andes and go through a pass supposed to be so difficult that the Spaniards had not even undertaken to defend it. This march of Bolivar and his little army, with a " legion " from Ireland and one from· England, veterans of the Napoleonic wars, friends of liberty and independence. has been likened to the marches of Hannibal and Napoleon through the Alps.

Anyone who has gone through the Alps and seen the short distance that lies between the fertile plains of southern France and the fertile plains of northern Italy must realize that this comparison does not do justice to Bolivar's feat. The distance, instead of being a few score of miles, was several hundred miles. One end of the journey instead of being

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 951 amid fertile fields, numerous villages, and any amount of edly reduced to a handful of ragged, poverty-stricken food and supplies, was in the plains where hamlets are patriots. His great spirit infused in them not only willingscores of miles apart, where there are no supplies to be ness but positive eagerness to suffer and die for the cause found. In the jungles of the Tropics insect life seems to be of liberty and independence. Not the least of his many the only form of animal life that prevails. powers was his ability to select successful generals and in-

By this march, and following the Battle of Boyaca, the spire them with unconquerable enthusiasm. Republic of Colombia achieved it:. independence: Using When we consider the limitations of his age, we are able · eastern Colombia as a base, and again going back to the to recognize that his foresight and vision were as superior plains, where the Battle of Carabobo occurred in northern to those of ordinary men as are the eyes of eagles and Venezuela in 1821, Venezuela was permanently freed from condors superior to those of horses and cattle. In courage the yoke of the royalists. no one was his superior. Frequently his life hung by a

One might suppose this would have been enough for a thread, but cowardice never influenced him. His tremendous man who had faced so many difficulties and canied out such march across the great plains of Venezuela and through most stupendous undertakings in the face of tremendous obsta- difficult passes of the Andes at a season of the year when cles; but Bolivar's vision took in the distant countries in the plains were covered with swollen rivers, morasses hidden center of South America where the Spanish rule still pre- beneath gigantic lagoons, mountain paths obliterated by vailed, and where the royalists had succeeded in putting

1

snow and hail, was a military undertaking equal in daring down all attempts of those seeking liberty and independence and comparable in difficulty with the most famous marches to set up independent governments. of Hannibal and Napcleon through the Alps.

It is as though Washington had had the task not only of It is extremely difficult for those who live in temperate marching up and down the Atlantic seaboard from Massa- climes, whose duties have never led them to penetrate tropichusetts to the Carolinas but of extending his march from cal jungles and climb precipitous mountains, to realize the Georgia to southern California. The region covered by Boll- stupendous human handicaps which confronted Bolivar in var's undertakings is as broad as that of the United States his campai~ in northern South America. The presence oi from Savannah to San Diego and as narrow as the United hordes of poisonous insects, the absence of good food, the States from the Canadian border north of the Great Lakes presence of torrential downpours of tropical rains, the abto the mouth of the Rio Grande at the southern tip of sence of any opportunity to procure supplies from jungles Texas. It was these great distances, separated as they were where the vegetable world reigns supreme and the animal by many of the highest peaks of the Andes, and by these world is represented chiefly by insects, these were a few of great plains, with their impassable rivers and their de- the obstacles which Bolivar had to overcome. ' vastating floods, that made this undertaking so worthy of Bolivar was in the last analysis responsible for the inde- 1

note. pendence of five Republics-Venezuela, Colombia, · Ecuador. Undaunted by these difficulties, Bolivar undertook to P~ru, and. Bo~ivia. On this o~e htJ?dredth anniversary of

go south; and after a long march through the valleys his death It gives .m~ great satisfactiOn, here in this city on of the Andes, at the Battle of Pichincha, in Ecuador, another the Potomac, so ~trmately connected with the life of our · colony was freed, and eventually became an independent 0~ George Washington~ to honor the memory of him who state. At Guayaquil he met that other great South Amer- did f~r the n~rthern natl~ns of South. America what George ican hero of the wars of independence who had been instru- Washington did for t~e thi~een ~olomes on the Atlantic reamental in freeing his native land of Argentina, the Republic boar~. Both were giants m their d~y. Their achievements of Chile, and part of Peru from the yoke of Spain. san reql:llred not only .co~age and da:mg, but patience, selfMartin and Bolivar had a conference at Guayaquil, at which demal, .al_ld ~etermmatiOn .. Both Will go down through histhey decided that it would be best for Bolivar himself to t?ry gaimng .m st.ature ~nd m the measure of world admiraundertake, with his victorious armies, the freedom of the tiOI_l as the VIctones which they were able to win, in the face very heart of the Spanish Empire, the seat of the viceroy of ~comparable obstacles, are more widely known and ap-at Lima, the principal colony of Peru. This he achieved preCiated. . . partly through a brilliant cavalry battle at the heights of Mr. President, as part of the tnbute to the memory of Junin, far above the clouds, at an elevation of about 12,000 that great hero, and for th~ benefit of our fellow citizens, feet-a campaign that was finally settled on the battlefield I. a~k that there ma:y be prm~ed as a Senate document a of Ayacucho, which has sometimes been referred to as the biblio~ap~y of the.Liberator, Simon Bolivar, which has bzen Yorktown of South America. Later he marched still farther compiled m the library of the Pan American Union, in south into what was known as Upper Peru and there order that. an. those desirous of pursuing their studies in the founded the Republic which was to take its name from story of his life may have an opportunity to do so. him-the Republic of Bolivia. • The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? The

At that time· he was easily the greatest man in the entire Chair hears none, and it is so ordered. continent of South America. His enthusiastic followers Mr. BING~. ~ a further. mark of honor to the great offered him the crown. He might have become the emperor hero of five .neighbormg Repl!bllcs, I ask .that ~he words of of South America; but he turned his back on any such the ex-President of the Umted States m thiS morning's project, declaring that what he had done was to fight for a paper may be read at the desk. government by the people, and, like Washington, refused The ~RESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, the to continue in office any longer than was absolutely neces- clerk will ~ead, as requested. sary. He lived to see these five countries establish their The Ch1ef Clerk read as follows: independence, which has never since been questioned; and (From the Washington Post of December 17, 1930) 100 years ago to-day he died, at the early age of 47. Calvin Coolidge says: "On December 17 Colombia, Venezuela,

Mr. President, Bolivar is one of the most romantic figures Peru, and Bolivia will commemorate the one hundredth anniin all recorded history. His trials and tribulati'ons hi's diS' - yersary of the death of Simon Bolivar. Nearly 20,000,000 people , 1n those four countries honor him for changing the course of appointments and defeats, would have been sufficient to have their history. discouraged any ordinary mortal. His career reminds us "In a few years his military skill and leadership drove Spain of the heroic figures of classical antiquity, demigods who from a territory two-thirds the area of the United States which

she had held from the days ot Columbus. He ranks as one of were repeatedly crushed by cruel fate, only to rise again the great and true patriots. like Phcenix from the flames and soar. triumphantly over all " Born in Venezuela, trained in Europe, he returned home to obstacles. Bolivar's life was an epic of the first magnitude. dedicate himself and his great possessions to the freedom of his The manner in which he continued for years to fight for countrymen. Having seen revolution in France and free govern-ment in the United States, he adapted them to his own country the independence of his native land fills some of the most with the result that his efforts in the north. and those of san enthralling pages in history. To do justice to his life needs Martin in the south, finally made all Spanish South America th f H V ·1 t independent. e pen o a omer • a erg1 • a Dan e, or a Milton. He " To the action of a soldier he added the vision of a statesman. fought against incredible odds. His followers were repeat- He founded governments. Recogniz.ing the un.ity of interests of

952 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17_ the Western He~here, he called the Firs~ Pan American Confer-~ The PRE~IDENT pro tempore. The resolution will be ence at ~anama m 1825. His public servlce and unselfish char- read for the information of the Senate acter entitle him to be named as one of the great figures of the Th

1 t· ·

New world." e reso u 1on <S. Res. 366) was read, as follows: Mr. JONES. Mr. President, before asking to lay aside the Resolved, That the Secretary of the Treasury 1s hereby requested

to transmit to the Senate the information showing the amount of unfinished business, I desire to say that I have conferred taxes paid to the Government by the New York stock Exchange or · with several of the Senators who are especially interested by members thereof in connection with exchange transactions for in the opposition to that bill. They are all agreeable to fix- the years 1919, 1920, and each succeeding year up to and including ing a time limit on debate-not fixing a time to vote, but a the year 1930

· time limit on debate. So I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the after 3 o'clock to-morrow no Senator shall speak more than present consideration of the resolution? once or longer than 15 minutes on the bill, nor more than Mr. SMOOT. I ask the Senator to let it go over. once or longer than five minutes on any amendment. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution is over

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? under the rule now. Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I have no objection to that Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, this is a very important reso-

unless we can get a better arrangement. lution. The exchange pays money to the Government. Mr. JONES. I think that is the best arrangement we can Every time there is a transaction over there there is some

get. sort of a tax, and I want to know just what that tax was Mr. HEFLIN. . It seems to me, in the face of the vote we for 1919, 1920, and for each succeeding year up to and in

had a moment ago against recommitting this bill, that the eluding 1930. That will show to the Senate just how these Senate is ready now to pass it. I have no objection to that transactions have gone up, have multiplied by leaps and arrangement, however. bounds, up to the present.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the I understand from outside authority that the amount has unanimous-consent agreement proposed by the Senator more than doubled in the last year, and this information from Washington? The Chair hears none, and the unani- would give the Senate an idea of what sort of business is mous-consent agreement is entered into. going on over in New York. This is information which we

Mr. JONES. Now, Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- ought to have, and the Secretary of the Treasury has it. sent that the unfinished business may be temporarily laid Mr. SMOOT. Mr. President, I spoke to officials of the aside and that we proceed with the consideration of the department this morning in relation. to the matter, and they conference report. said there was some of the information which it would be

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? 'Ihe impossible to give, but that they would let me know by Chair hears none. to-morrow morning just what could be obtained.

Mr. HEFLIN. I will let it go over until to-morrow, when APPROPRIATIONS FOR EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION-cONFERENCE I Will bring it up again.

REPORT

The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 14804) making supplemental appropriations to provide for emergency construction on certain public works during the remainder of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1931, with a view to increasing employment.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the motion proposed by the Senator from Washington [Mr. JoNEs], namely, to recede from Senate amendments Nos. 11 and 12.

Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the RECORD two telegrams, one from Jackson, Tenn., and one from Knoxville, Tenn., in reference to the unemployment situation.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The telegrams are as follows: JACKSON, TENN., December 17, 1930.

Senator KENNETH McKELLAR, Washington, D. C.:

We are aiding city charity in taking care of unemployed and needy, and need 50 Army cots and blankets. We have requested the commanding general of Fourth Corps Area through Governor Horton and direct to let us have these from the equipment held by the Jackson Company of National Guard. We can not get any action. Can you help us? Thanks.

1 Senator K. McKELLAR:

LEE WARE, Commander American Legion.

KNOXVILLE, TENN., December 17, 1930.

Most heartily approve plan to relieve unemployment as outlined by Senator LA FoLLETTE to Mayor Trent and urge prompt action by Federal Government. City is helping, but problem too great, and employment on national and State projects appears only possible means of meeting situation.

A. L. CHAVANNES, Secretary Manager Community Chest. ·

TAXES PAID BY NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE AND THE MEMBERS THEREOF

Mr. HEFLIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimoUs consent for the present consideration of the resolution which I send to the desk.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolution goes over under the rule. APPROPRIATIONS FOR EMERGENCY CONSTRUCTION-cONFERENCE

REPORT The Senate resumed the consideration of the report of

the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H. R. 14804) making supplemental appropriations to pro- · vide for emergency construction on certain public works during the remainder of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1931, with a view to increasing employment.

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. President, I do not think it necessary to take the time of the Senate to make a speech in regard to the motion. The junior Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK] and my colleague [Mr. GEORGE] have covered the matter so well that I feel there is no necessity for further statements. I hope their statements are convincing to all Senators, and I sincerely hope the motion of the Senator from Washington [Mr. JoNEs] will not be adopted.

Mr. JONES. Mr. President, I shall not discuss the motion further, except to say this, that my friend the junior Senator from Alabama suggests that we should not deny the States this money with which they could employ those who are out of work. If this were an ordinary situation I would feel that the Senate should hold out on this amendment. But this legislation is intended to meet an emergency situation, and the bill provides for the expenditure of $116,000,000 to relieve unemployment. Every Senator can appreciate the result the longer the enactment of the law is delayed, so I hope the motion to recede will be adopted.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the motion of the Senator from Washington [Mr. JoNEs].

Mr. JONES. I ask for the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Chief Clerk

proceeded to call the roll. Mr. BULKLEY <when his name was called). I have a

pair with the junior Senator from Wyoming [Mr. CAREY]. I transfer that pair to the junior Senator from Texas [Mr. CONNALLY] and VOte "nay."

Mr. ROBINSON of Indiana <when his name was called). On this question I have a pair with the junior Senator from

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SE:NATE 953 Mississippi [Mr. STEPHENs]. In his absence I withhold my vote. If permitted to vote, I should vote "yea." I understand the Senator from Mississippi would vote "nay."

Mr. WHEELER <when the name of Mr. WALSH of Montana was called) . My colleague [Mr. WALSH] is necessarily absent. If he were present, he would vote" nay."

The roll call was concluded. Mr. FESS. I desire to announce the following general

pairs: The Senator from Vermont [Mr. GREENE] with the Senator

from Montana [Mr. WALsH]; The Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. KEYEs] with the

Senator from Iowa [Mr. STECK]; and The Senator from Colorado [Mr. WATERMAN] with the

Senator from Virginia [Mr. SwANsoN]. The result was announced-yeas 39, nays 42, as follows:

Bingham Capper Davis Deneen Fess Gillett Glass Glenn Goff Goldsborough

Ashurst Barkley Black Blaine Blease Bratton Brock Brookhart Broussard Bulkley Caraway

Gould Hale Hastings Hatfield Hawes Hebert Howell Jones Kean King

Copeland Couzens Cutting Dill Fletcher Frazier George Harris Harrison Hayden Hefiin

YEAS-39 McMaster McNary Metcalf Morrow Moses Norbeck Oddie Patterson Phipps Pine

NAYS---42 Kendrick La Follette McGill McKellar Morrison Norris Nye Pittman Ransdell Robinson, Ark. Sheppard

NOT VOTING-15

Reed Schall Smoot Steiwer Thomas, Idaho Townsend Vandenberg Walcott Watson

Shipstead Simmons Smith Trammell Tydings Wagner Walsh, Mass. Wheeler Williamson

purpose of the amendment and has his mind made up as to what, in his judgment, would be wise to do. I move that the Senate recede from its amendment No. 13.

Mr. LA FOLLETTE. Mr. President, as bearing on this amendment I desire to have read at the desk an editorial appearing in this morning's New York American. I ask unanimous consent that that may be done.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the clerk will read the editorial, as requested.

The Chief Clerk read the editorial, as follows:

[From the New York American, Wednesday, December 17, 1930) SENATE COURAGEOUS

Public congratulation is due the Senate for the stand it has taken upon the emergency appropriation requested by President Hoover to expedite the building of authorized public works.

The conferees of the two Houses have made a grave blunder in not sustaining the correct and constitutional stand of the Senate upon this emergency measure.

In regard to this appropriation, which is intended to relieve unemployment, the Senate is acting correctly and the Senate is acting constitutionally.

Certainly the Senate acted correctly when it passed promptly the $110,000,000 appropriation voted by the House for this purpose.

The Senate refused to quibble about the amount carried in the House bill. It agreed to leave for future consideration whatever increases should be authorized.

Certainly the Senate acted constitutionally when it refused to allow Mr. Hoover to distribute this huge sum as he sees fit.

By insisting that Congress shall say not only how much money shall be appropriated to expedite public works but what public works are to be expedited, the Senate is discharging its share of the authority and responsibility given by the Constitution to Congress to fix the sum as well as define the purpose of every appropriaion of public money.

Never in time of peace has the Congress delegated to the President the extraordinary power which Mr. Hoover undemocratically requested and the Senate has patriotically refused to give him.

Never, except in war, should such a request be granted by the Congress or even made by the President.

The Senate should reject the report of the conferees. The Senate should insist that Congress discharge its full respon-

Borah Greene Shortridge Thomas, Okla. sibility as the appropriating body. Carey Johnson Steck Walsh, Mont. If Mr. Hoover chooses to hold up this emergency appropriation Connally Keyes Stephens Waterman f th 1 d i th h f bt · · t Dale Robinson, Ind. Swanson for the relief o e unemp oye n e ope o o am1ng grea er

personal advantage by means of a plan more satisfactory to his So the Senate refused to recede from its amendments vanity, then it will be Mr. Hoover and not the Senate "that is

numbered 11 and 12. playing politics with human misery." Mr. JONES. Mr. President, the next amendment is No. Mr. JONES. Mr. President, in my judgment the Presi-

13, dealing with the authority of the President to make dent of the United States is absolutely patriotic and sincere transfers of the appropriation from one purpose named in in submitting his request in this way. It is simply to furthe bill to another if he deems it advisable. I' suppose every ther his desire to aid humanity that these appropriations Senator has his mind made up in reference to the matter. should be brought about. While, of course, there may be It would not be considered proper under ordinary circum- some question as to the authority of Congress, and so on, it stances to put a provision like this in such a bill. I under- is all right for us to discharge our duty and what we constand, however, that it is the intention to expend this ceive to be our duty, but in doing that we do not want to money or practically all of it at the earliest possible oppor- question, in my judgment, as I do not think we are justified tunity, possibly during the next three or four months, the in questioning, the motives, the sincerity, and the patriotism months in which it is more necessary to make expenditures of the President of the United States. than any other time. It is possible that conditions might Mr. McKELLAR. Mr. President, before we vote I want to be confronted which would make it highly important to read two or three matters. The first of these is an act of transfer some of the funds from the item for which they Congress of February 25, 1919, reading as follows: are appropriated to another where the relief which would [Public, No. 274, Sixty-fifth congress-H; R. 13708 ]

be brought about would be much greater. It is a question, An act providing for the relief of such populations in Europe, of course, whether we want to give the President that au- and countries contiguous thereto, outside of Germany, German-thority in this emergency. Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey, as may be determined

Mr. NORRIS. Mr. President-- upon by the President as necessary The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. FEss in the chair). Be it enacted, etc., That for the participation by the Govern-

D th S t f W hingt ment of the United States in the furnishing of foodstuffs and oes e ena or rom as on yield to the Senator other urgent supplies, and for the transportation, distribution,

from Nebraska? and administration thereof to such populations in Europe, and Mr. JONES. I yield. countries contiguous thereto, outside of Germany, German-Austria, Mr. NORRIS. Does the Senator propose to make the Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey: Provided, however, That Arme-

same motion in reference to this amendment?. nians, Syrians, Greeks, and other Christian and Jewish populations of Asia Minor, now or formerly subjects of Turkey, may be in-

:Mr. JONES. Yes; I propose to move to recede from the eluded within the populations to receive relief under this act, as Senate amendment. may be determined upon by the President from time to time as

M NORRIS Is thi f th t necessary, and for each and every purpose connected therewith, r. · s one O - e amendmen S offered by in the discretion of the President, there is appropriated, out of any

the Senator from Michigan [Mr. CouzENs), who is absent money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, $100,000,000, at the moment? which may be used as a revolving fund until June 30, 1919, and

M JONES N which shall be audited in the same manner as other expenditures r. · 0

· of the Government : Provided, That expenditures hereunder shall Mr. ROBINSON of Arkansas. No; this is an amendment be reimbursed so far as possible by the Governments or subdivi

offered by myself. It is an amendment relating to the sions thereof or the peoples to whom relief is furnished: Provided interchangeability of the funds further, That a report of the re~elpts , expenditures, and :u1 item-

. · t . :- . · . ized statement of such receipts and expenditures made under t!:Js . Mr. JONE~. Yes. I hink .that IS alL! caie to s~y about I appropriation shall be submitted to Congress not later than the 1t. I am satisfied that every Senator knows the obJect and first day of the next regular session: And provided further, That

'

954 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17 so far as said fund shall be expended for the purchase of wheat to be donated preference shall be given to grain grown in the United States.

Approved February 25, 1919.

I now want to read the only report that has ever been made as to the expenditure of that $100,000,000. It reads as follows:

[H. Doc. 449, 66th Cong., 2d sess.] RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES UNDER THE ACT APPROVED FEBRUARY 25,

1919

Message from the President of the United States, transmitting preliminary report covering the approximate receipts and expenditures made under the act of Congress approved February 25, 1919, appropriating $100,000,000 for relief in Europe

To the Senate and House of Representatives: As required by the act of Congress, approved February 25, 1919,

I transmit herewith a preliminary report on the receipts and expenditures made under appropriation of that act.

WOODROW WILSON. THE WHITE HOUSE, December 2, 1919.

115 BROADWAY, NEW YoRK CITY, November 24, 1919.

His Excellency the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, . The White House, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I hand you herewith preliminary report covering the approximate receipts and expenditures made under the act of Congress approved February 25, 1919, appropriating $100,000,000 for relief in Europe, to be transmitted to Congress as required by that act.

Owing to reasons stated in the report, it will be necessary to make an additional and final report when all the adjustments in outstanding credits and liabilities connected with the relief operations have been made.

Yours faithfully, HERBERT HOOVER.

PRELIMINARY REPORT OF RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES UNDER THE ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED FEBRUARY 25, 1919

I herewith submit the following preliminary report on receipts and expenditures from the funds provided under the act of Congress approved February 25, 1919, entitled "An act for the relief of such populations in Europe and countries contiguous thereto, outside of Germany, German-Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Tur;key, as may be determined upon by the President as necessary."

In explanation of the report there is attached hereto: ( 1) A table showing the preliminary estimate of expenditures

from this appropriation and the countries to which the supplies purchased were sent.

(2) A table showing tonnage of each commodity furnished each country on its general food and relief program from the appropriation.

(3) A table showing tonnage of each commodity furnished each country for children's relief from the _appropriation. All the values are given 1n round figures and are tentative for reasons given hereafter, and may vary up to 5 or 10 per cent on the completion of the final statement.

The expenditures on food shipments in Table 1 are roughly divided in the following proportions:

Per cent F. o. b. cost of food and other relief commodities at Ameri-

can ports---------------------------------------------- 77.37 Trans-Atlantic freight on above ___________________________ 20. 67 Demurrage__________________ ___ __________________________ 1. 10 Handling and transshipment in Europe____________________ . 85

About 88 per cent of the relief supplies furnished were sold under contract to the various governments in the relief areas. For all such sales these governments gave their special treasury notes in a form approved by the United States Treasury, bearing 5 per cent interest, due June 30, 1921, to June 30, 1924. It was impossible to obtain reimbursement in cash because the currency in the countries to which these supplies were sent was impossible to convert into foreign exchange, except in comparatively insignificant amounts. I give herewith approximate list of the notes of each government, which we expect to turn over to the United States Treasury. 1. Poland------------------------------------------ $57,000,000 2. Czechoslovakia___________________________________ 6, 750,000 3. Arn1enia------------------------------------~---- 10,000,000 4. Russia___ ________________________________________ 5,000,000 5. Estonia---------------~-------------------------- 2,300,000 6 . Latvia________ __ _____ ____________________________ 3,000,000 7. Lithuania --------------------------------------- 700, 000 8. Finland----------------------------------------- 4, 000,000

Total ________________________________________ 88, 750,000

· The remaining 12 per cent of the supplies were donated in assistance to private organizations set up in each country under direction of the American Relief Administration for the purpose of furnishirig food on a charitable basis to undernourished children. For such supplies it was, of course, impossible to obtain

· reimbu,rsement. This service has contributed greatly to stabilizing

the situation in those countries, aside from the physical benefits to more than 3,000,000 undernourished children, to whom the war threatened serious and permanent injury. Certainly this service is one for which the name of America will always be held in deepest gratitude. ·

In addition to the children's relief, the American Relief Administration paid approximately $550,000 for freight and expenditures on old clothing contributed by the American Red Cross and the Commission for Relief in Belgium, which was transported to the liberated countries and distributed without charge. The character of this clothing is so varied and uncertain that it has been found most unwise to attempt any sale on a commercial basls, and as it goes to the poorest classes it is a proper subject for charity.

The American Relief Administration also expended · $530,000 on freight in transporting from France to Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Estonia United States Army bacon which the Governments of these States were able to purchase on credit from the liquidation board in France. This is covered by the treasury notes of those countries.

It should also be noted that a question remains unsettled with the United States Shipping Board regarding the freight charges. The President and the board have approved the policy of fixing these on a cost basis, but as yet no reduction has been made in the tentative rates of freight which were originally fixed at considerably above this cost.

The relief supplies purchased by the American Relief Admirustration were all of American origin, and none of the appropriation therefore was expended outside of the United States, except to some extent for local freight and handling charges in Europe.

I regret exceedingly that it is impossible to submit at the present time an item statement of the receipts and expenditures. Although the commodities required for relief shipments were all purchased prior to July 1, 1919, marine workers' strikes in the port of New York delayed the sailing of the last relief vessels until August 25. It was therefore necessary to continue our accounting staff in Europe until these vessels had been unloaded 30 days later. The transfer of the accounting forces and rec-. ords from various countries to the London ofilce for credit required further time, and thence from London to the United States there was also serious delay by the strikes in England, and finally the unloading of the records was long delayed in New York by the longshoremen's strike. Combination of the European and American accounts is now in process and will be audited before presentation. These delays, together with the complicated nature of the accounts, make it impossible to present an item statement of receipts and expenditures for some little time. At that time the final and complete report will be filed. The totals will not, I believe, vary materially from those given in t his report.

Respectfully submitted. HERBERT HOOVER.

This report is dated November 24, 1919, but there has never been furnished to the Congress any final report as required by the act of Congress in these words, which I have already read:

That a report of the receipts, expenditures, and an itemized statement of such receipts and expenditw·es made under this appropriation shall be submitted to Congress not later than the first day of the next regular session.

Mr. STEIWER. Mr. President--The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Ten~

nessee yield to the Senator from Oregon? Mr. McKELLAR. I will yield in just a moment. I want

to put this report in just as it is. I now ask unanimous consent, · Mr. President, to print in

the REcoRD the tables furnished by Mr. Hoover. The first table is called by him a "preliminary estimate of expenditures of American Relief Administration out of $100,000,000 fund," and it shows how he expected to expend it.

Table 2 is entitled" Congressional fund for relief-Prelim~ inary summaries of deliveries to various governments paid for from the above fund."

Table 3 is entitled "Congressional fund for relief-Pre~ liminary summary of total children's relief deliveries."

I ask that the three tables may be printed in the RECORD. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so

ordered. The tables are as follows:

TABLE I.-Preliminary estimate of expenditures of American Relief Administration out of $100,000,000 fund

Name of country to which shipped

Poland ___________________ -------------- _____ ------------ ____________ _ Czechoslovakia ___________________________ ----_______________________ _ Armenia ____________ --- ___ • __ .---••• __ ._ •• _._ •• ___ •••• _. ____ • _____ ---_

Amount

$56, 900, 000 6, 700,000

10, 000, OO(t

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE 955 TABLE !.-Preliminary estimate of expenditures of American Relief TABLE !.-Preliminary estimate of expenditures of American Relief ·

Administration out of $100,000,000 fund--Continued Administration out of $1.00,000,000 fund-Continued ... Name of country to which shipped

Estonia--------------------------------------------------------------Latvia __ _________________ ------ ____ ----- --- _---- ____ --- __ ----- ____ -- __ Lithuania _________________________ ------_----------------------------Finland ____________ ------- _____________ ---- __ ----_-------------------Russia----------------------------------------------------------------

Children's relief: Poland _________ -----_---_----------------------------------------Czechoslovakia _______________ ------------------------------------Serbia ______ ------------------------------------------------------Rumania ______ ______ ___ _______ -------- - ---_-_----_--------_------Finland_---------------------------------------------------------

Amount

$2,300,000 2, 900,000

700,000 3, 900,000 4, 600,000

88,000,000

5, 300,000 2, 900,000

900,000 500,000 500,000

Name of country to which shipped

Children's relief-Continued. Estonia ____________________ ---------- ___________ ___ ------- _______ _ Latvia ___________ -------------- _____ -_--- __ -----------------------Lithuania ____ -------------- ______ ------ ___ ----- ---- -- __ ----------Russia ________________________________ ___ ________________________ _

Various countries: Freight in transporting old clcthing by Red Cross _______________ _ Freight and expense in transporting old clothing contributed by

Commission for Relief in Belgium _____________________________ _

Grand totaL----~-----------------------------------------------

Amount

$1\00,000 350, ()()(} I

300,000 100,000

300,000

250,000

12,000, ()()()

100,000,000

T .ABLE 2.-Congressional fund for re.ief-Preliminarg summaries of delioeries to oarious gooernments paid for from lhe above und [Metric tons]

Rye, "heat Cereal W'heat barley, Rice flour flour and

u aize

Beans and Pork peas

Lard Lard substi- Milk Cocoa Sugar Soap

tutes

Mis- Total Cloth Cotton cella- ton-

neaus nage

---------1----------------------------------------1----

trt;!t=::: :=: ::: ::=:: :=: I~~ --8

~ :- ::~=~~: :~::: ?, i O, m I:, ~ --:~~- O, m '· ~ :: :::~: ::: ::;i: ~~ :~ ::~: ::::~~: ::~~~~> ~=~~: 1: ~ ~~tr~~~sr:Rus8ia~========= 16,422 2, 626 ======== ---~- -- - ________ 380 1:846 ___ _____ 421 1, o56 ___ _________ ______ ______ -------- ________ _____ ___ 22,751 Finland_________ ___________ 4, 054 3, 867 ________ 15,353 -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- 940 120 -------- -------- -------- -------- 24,334

~t~=-~=-~:-=~::==::= ~ ~ :~f~: -;:~- -;~: =;~~~: ::;:~;: =:;:~;= ::;~:: :::::: :::::: :::::::: ::::~~: ::;~;;;: --~:-~ TA.BLE 3.-Congressional fund for relief-Preliminary summary of total children's relief deliveriu

[Metric tons]

Wheat flour

Cereal flour Rice

Beans and peas

Pork Lard Lard

substitutes

Milk Cocoa Sugar Miscellaneous

Total tons

----1----1----1---------------

Poland __ --- ---------------------------------- 858

351 207

2,130 1,320 765 ---------- -- -------- 2,549 766 801 { 1180 } 21,816 11,205

3 20 Lithuania ___ ------------------- -------------_ 83 78 12 16 374 75 176 120 1,185

1,121 Esthonia __ ------ -- --------------------------- 113 116 20 3 384 80 178 120 Latvia ____ ________ __ _________ ___ __ ___________ _

Northwest Russia (liberated territory) _______ _ Finland ___ -----------------------------------Czechoslovakia ____________________ _____ _____ _

488

389 560

'iOO

~OJ

Mahrisch Ostrau ____________________________ _ ---------- ----------Greater Serbia ________________ ---------------- ___________________ _ Rumania_____________________________________ 250 ___ ______ _ In storage:

109

40 200

302

17 231 170

131

84 165

248

17 257 130

35 2

20 ---------- ----------83 22

366 26 54

8 ---------- ----- -- ---30 60 10 ----------

329

241 1,087

1,867

60 1, 736

185

49 95 { 38 } 120

20 53 120 40 205 r--,-iii-}

421 ---------- '130 110

10 ---------- --------- -240 221

151 160 406 ---- ------

I, 'Z72

867 2,562

4,235

112 2, 711 1, 432

ri~~~~=================================== ====~===== ========== ------~~~- ----~~~~~- === === ==== ========== -------27- ------~~- ========== ========== -------~- 2,343 'Zl

6,698 1,000

Rotterdam _________________________________ : _________________ -- --------- ------------------- __________ ---------- 5, 223 213 1,039 '223 llclsingfors _________________________________________ ---------- 500 500 ---------- __________ ---------- ---------- ---------- ___________________ _

Total ___________ ------------------------ 3,803 200 4,242 4,623 1, 387 76 102 14,408 2,135 3,110 2,684 36,770

1 Soap. 2 Clothing. a Cod-liver oil.

Mr. McKELLAR. I call attention to the fact that 12,445 metric tons of pork were sent to Poland. Now, I yield to my friend from Oregon. . Mr. STEIWER. The Senator from Tennessee in reading

from the act of February 25, 1919, quoted the proviso, which is as follows:

That a. report of the receipts, expenditures, and an itemized statement of such receipts and expenditures made under this appropriation shall be submitted to Congress not later than the first day of the next regular session.

Mr. McKELLAR. Yes, sir. Mr. STEIWER. I merely want to ask the Senator if he

does not tonstrue that language as meaning that the duty was imposed upon the President of the United States to furnish that report?

Mr. McKELLAR. Primarily it was; but the President imposed it upon Mr. Hoover, and Mr. Hoover comes with a preliminary report on the 24th day of November, 1919.

Mr. STEIWER. May I ask the Senator further--Mr. McKELLAR. Just one moment. I want to answer

the first question of the Senator from Oregon. Mr. Hoover

comes and submits a preliminary report on November 24, 1919, just before the Congress meets, and at the close of it he says:

·These delays--

Strikes in one country and strikes in another country, in .. ability to get his accounting office in London to act in conjunction with his accounting office in New York, and delays of various kinds, to which he refers-

These delays, together with the complicated nature of the accounts, make it impossible to present an item statement of receipts and expenditures for some little time. At that time the final and complete report will be filed.

There Mr. Hoover not only admits that he has not filed a report, but promises within some little time to file a report, which report has never been filed.

Mr. STEIWER. Mr. President, will the Senator now yield? Mr. McKELLAR. Yes; I yield. Mr. STEIWER. I simply want to ask the Senator if he

feels that the fact that the President delegated this authority to some one else would relieve the President, under the. law, of his duty to submit the report?

956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 17

Mr. McKELLAR. Technically, probably not; but actually it does relieve him, because here is Mr. Hoover promising to make the report; and everybody knows that it was Mr. Hoover to whom the $100,000,000 was turned over for the purpose of distribution in Europe.

Mr. STEIWER. Does the Senator take the position, as a general principle, when the President is required by statute to perform a duty and intrusts the duty to an agent that the President is thus relieved from his statutory responsibility to Congress?

Mr. McKELLAR. Perhaps not. If the Senator is speaking in criticism of a former President of the United States, that is another matter.

Mr. STEIWER. ·No. Mr. McKELLAR. But what we are dealing with now is

the turning over to Mr. Hoover of $110,000,000 or $116,000,-000 to do with virtually as he pleased, when the law required him to make a report, and he said he was going to file it, btit never did file it.

Mr. STEIWER. Will the Senator yield for one more question'?

Mr. McKELLAR. Of course. Mr. STEIWER. Does the Senator feel that the President

of the United States may turn a responsibility over to an agent and then when that agent has reported in November, 1919, that the President may remain in office until March 4, 1921, without making any effort to carry out the mandate of Congress in the matter of making the report which is required by law?

Mr. McKELLAR. It is very unfortunate -he did so, but evidently he did so, and it has been the subject of debate in the Congress before. If the Senator will indulge me just a few moments, I am not going to make a speech about it myself so much as I am going to quote what Republican

. Senators said about it at the time. _ Mr. STEIWER. Before the Senator quotes that language, may I say just one more word?

Mr. McKELLAR. Certainly. Mr. STEIWER. Simply that I want to absolve myself of

the charge of criticizing President Wilson in connection with this matter, as the Senator suggested a moment ago I had no such idea in my mind. I wanted to develop the thought that was in the mind of the Senator from Tennessee in order to find out if he was at this time ungraciously criticizing President Wilson's conduct with respect to this matter.

Mr. McKELLAR. No; I do not think anyone will gather from .any remarks that I am making that I am undertaking to criticize President Wilson.

Now I will read, not what I said about it, though I had views about it at the time, as the RECORD will show, but I am going to quote what one of the finest men who ever served in this body had to say when the bill appropriating $100,000,000 was under consideration. I regard, and I think the people of the country regard, the senior Senator from Idaho [Mr. BoRAH] as one of the ablest and one of the best men who ever served in this body, as one of the most careful with his facts and one of the ablest in presenting facts. For the present I am going to content myself with reading excerpts from one or two wonderful speeches made by the Senator from Idaho. There is no man in this body who has been here long enough to know the Senator from Idaho who does not know that he is not only a man of great ability but a man of the greatest honesty and sincerity of purpose and of courage in the statement of his views. I quote from a speech made by the Senator from Idaho on January 18, 1919, when the original appropriation bill of $100,000,000 was before the Senate. Said Mr. BoRAH:

~ recognize in Mr. Hoover a man of great ability. It is not my purpose by anything which I shall say to challenge his personal integrity, but his viewpoint of things is such that it makes it impossible for me to turn over a. hundred million dollars to him to expend in Europe. For the last four weeks I have been making a pretty thorough study of the relationship of the Food Administration to the vast concerns of this country which control and

dominate the food supply of this country, and I ~Y here on this floor, and I challenge successful contradiction, that three of the vast .monopolies which control food in this country have, With relation to their commodities, directed and controlled the Food Administration since its organization. I do not mean by that to say, sir, that Mr. Hoover himself has received any personal or individual benefit by reason of that. I simply mean to say that his viewpoint is such that he permits those people to, in effect, fix their own prices and to arrange their own affairs to such an extent that it is a case of an individual dealing with himself in the transactions.

I have been utterly amazed at the facts which show how these combines have influenced and controlled the situation .

• It is well known, sir, that the meat packers of this country have been one of the great, powerful units in this matter of furnishing food. Now, sir, at a time when the people of this country are hungry, when our own people are suffering, when, according to the Associated Press dispatches a few days ago, hundreds of thousands of children in New York and Chicago and other great cities are not only kept out of school for want of clothes but are actually dying for want of food; when mothers are committing suicide because they can not respond to the lips that are begging for food, it is a fact, demonstrated over the signature of the meat packers themselves, that their profits under Mr. Hoover amounted to all the way from 20 to 40 per cent for the last two years. Shall I be called upon, under my oath as a Senator here, to turn over a hundred million dollars to feed the poor of Europe, when I am notified that out of that $100,000,000 those that control the food products of this country will ask, and probably receive, from 25 to 40 per cent profit on their investments?

I am sorry the junior Senator from Oregon is not present to hear this language.

They say, "This is to be turned over to the President." Now, let us be honest and eliminate the President. We know that it is absolutely impossible for the President to know anything about the details of this expenditure. With the stupendous burdens resting upon his shoulders which are now there, with the difficulties which confront him, with the fearful task which is his, do we suppose for a moment that he will be familiar with a single detail in regard to this matter?

It is unfair to the situation and unJust to us to say that the President is responsible. He is not responsible. He will know nothing about it from the beginning to the end. We are responsible. We are the only ones who have the fearful power of drawing this money out of the pockets of the people. If I had the time, sir, I would undertake to show you that the facts are here which make you and me accomplices to the transaction which. if we vote this appropriation, will enable these vast concerns to get a very large portion of the taxes which we are voting.

That is on page 1663 of the RECORD. I turn to page 1864 of January 22, and again to the words

of the Senator from Idaho [Mr. Bo.RA.HJ: Mr. President, I want to say again, as I said the other day,

that as for Mr. Hoover individually I have no discussion whatever. I do not care anything about him. What I am objecting to, sir, is the system, the manner in Which he distributes his funds and carries on his business--the interested parties whom he permits to realize unconscionable profits.

I want to ask Senators here who are supporting this bill, Do you want the same man that administered the Food Administration here in this country to administer this fund in Europe in the same way and upon the same principles? Do you understand, sir, that these same men, or some of them, and this same policy and this same system have been transplanted. to Europe-, and are now going to feed the Europeans upon the same theory, upon the same line of conduct, that they have administered the Food Administration in this country?

And again, Mr. President, on page 1865 :· · Mr. President, the men who manipulated that embargo are

working for the Food Administration at a dollar a year and working for the packers at $10,000 a year; and yet you ask me to take $100,000,000 from the pockets of the taxpayers of this country and administer it by the same infamous machinery. Does the President of the United States know these facts? I do not know. I know them. and it is my conscience that must be s~tisfied, not that of the President. in the vote I shall cast on this blll.

And again: Do you know who gave Mr. Priebe authority to issue that order?

That is, the embargo. • The Congress of the United States, by one of those glittering

generalities, crystalized into a statute under which a man can do anything in the world that he desires to do, and Mr. Hoover desil'ed to do this. Now we are asked to give another unlimited, .undefined grant of power-a power to do as his unbridled discretion suggests; a power under which he can permit fortunes to be made again out of the taxpayers of the United States.

And I want to say that we are here to give him again unbridled power over another $116,000,000.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 957

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. President--The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Senator from

Tennessee yield to the Senator from Delaware? Mr. McKELLAR. Surely. Mr. HASTL.~GS. Does the Senator feel that there is any

danger of the packers having any 'influence in this particular instance?

Mr. McKELLAR. I state the facts. The Senator can draw his own conclusions.

Mr. HASTINGS. But I understood that the Senator was basing his argument upon an argument made by the Senator from Idaho.

Mr. McKELLAR. I am reading the argument of the Sen-ator from Idaho. .

Mr. HASTINGS. The Senator from Idaho made his objection upon the basis that certain influences were at work at that time. I am asking the Senator whether he thinks any such influence is at work at this time.

Mr. McKELLAR. I hope not, but I do not know. Does the Senator know?

Mr. HASTINGS. Why, of course I know, and everybody else knows, that there is not.

Mr. McKELLAR. Let us see. I now quote from Mr. Knox, asking a question of the

Senator from Idaho: Mr. KNox. Mr. President, I attach so much importance to the

judgment of the Senator from Idaho that I want to b~ perfectly clear about it, if he is willing to make himself a little more clear. The impression that I received from his statement was that it had been prearranged that this $100,000,000 appropriation should be asked for in order to relieve the packers.

Mr. DALE. Mr. President--Mr. McKELLAR. I yield to the Senator from Vermont.

I know the nature of the interruption, and I yield. DEATH OF SENATOR FRANK L. GREENE

Mr. DALE. Mr. President; with profound grief beyond expression I announce the death of my colleague, Hon. FRANK L. GREENE.

I send to the desk resolutions, for which I ask immediate consideration.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The resolutions will be read.

The resolutions (S. Res. 378) were read, considered by unanimous consent, and unanimously agreed to, as follows:

Resolved, That the Senate has heard with profound sorrow and deep regret the announcement of the death of the Hon. FRANK L. GREENE, late a Senator from the State of Vermont.

Resolved, That 'h committee of 20 Senators be appointed by the President pro tempore to take order for superintending the funeral of the deceased Senator.

Resolved, That the Secretary communicate these resolutions to the House of Representatives, and transmit a copy thereof to the family of the deceased.

Under the second resolution the President pro tempore appointed the Senator from Vermont [Mr. DALE], the senior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. GILLETT], the junior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. WALSH], the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. BLEASE], the Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. REED], the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. McMAsTER], the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. HATFIELD], the Senator from Missouri [Mr. PATTERSON], the Senator from Florida [Mr. FLETCHER], the Senator from Texas [Mr. SHEPPARD], the Senator from Alabama [Mr. BLACK], the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. BRocK], the Senator from Georgia [Mr. HARRIS], the Senator from illinois [Mr. DENEEN], the Senator from Ohio [Mr. FEssJ, the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. CARAWAY], the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. KENDRICK], the Senator from California [Mr. SHORTRIDGE], the Senator from Utah [Mr. KING], and the Senator from Maine [Mr. GouLDJ.

Mr. DALE. Mr. President, as a further mark of respect to the memory of the deceased Senator, I move that the Senate do now adjourn.

The motion was unanimously agreed to; and <at 4 o'clock and 38 minutes p.m.) the Senate adjourned until to-morrow, Thurst\ay, December 18, 1930, at 12 o'clock meridian.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1930

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

offered the following prayer:

Blessed Lord, our Heavenly Father, we rejoice in th~t tenderness, in that personal sympathy, and in that love which spring from Thy compassion. We draw near to Thee with renewed hopefulness; stir in us that manliness, that sturdy courage, and that faith that shall make us superior to circumstances. We pray for the extension of knowledge throughout our land and for the establishment of all our people not alone in outward strength but in the stTength of God. May all Thy promises which respect the realm of the world be fulfilled and the glory of the Lord rest upon mankind. 0 let the pure light out of the heavens shine everYWhere and all impure light return from whence it came. Clothe us with patience, gentleness, and forbearance. We pray in the name of Christ our Sa vi our. Amen.

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

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate by Mt. Craven, its principal

clerk, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment a joint resolution of the House of the following title:

H. J. Res. 440. Joint resolution authorizing the payment of salaries of the officers and employees of Congress for December, 1930, on the 20th day of that month.

The message also announced that the Senate had agreed to the amendment of the House to the bill <S. 2895) entitled "An act authorizing the bands or tribes of Indians known and designated as the Middle Oregon or Warm Springs Tribe of Indians of Oregon, or either of them, to submit their claims to the Court of Claims."

The message also announced that the Senate had passed a bill of the following title, in which the concurrence of the House is requested:

S. 5036. An act to extend the time for completing the construction of a bridge. across the Delaware River near Trenton, N.J.

The message also announced that the Senate insists upon its amendments to the bill <H. R. 14246) entitled "An act making appropriations for the Treasury and Post Office Departments for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1932, 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. PHIPPS, :M:r. SMOOT, Mr. MOSES, Mr. HARRIS, and Mr. GLASS to be the conferees on the part of the Senate.

SIMON BOLIVAR

Mr. TEMPLE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for three minutes.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania asks unanimous consent to proceed for three minutes. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. TEMPLE. Mr. Speaker and Members of the House of

Representatives, this day is the one hundredth anniversary of the death of Simon Bolivar, the South American Liberator, founder of the Republics of Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia. His life and his sacrifices for the cause of liberty are being commemorated to-day with appropriate ceremonies in the five Republics that cherish the memory of his achievements, and it is fitting that we should pause for a little while in our work to join with them in honoring this great man whose qualities were such as to win not only the admiration but the esteem of foreign nations, as well as the gratitude of his own people.

The five Republics that he founded gratefully procia.un. that it was his military genius that won their independence

I

958 CONGRESSIONAL RE.CORD-HOUSE · DECEMBER 17 and his wise statesmanship that established the institutions that have made the continued existence of these Republics possible.

Bolivar came into the world at a period when it was ripe for changes. He was born in 1783 when the thirteen British Colonies of North America had won their independence but had not yet passed through the critical period that welded them together in one nation. The French political philosophers had made plain the principles that were soon to overthrow old institutions in Europe and establish new ones, and by the time Bolivar had grown to manhood the wars of the revolutionary and Napoleonic era were at their height. Nowhere did the abuses of the old system cry out more pitifully for change than in Bolivar's native country.

Born in Venezuela, he was sent to Spain at 16 years of age to complete his education. He was an admirer of Napoleon for his early work in restoring orderly institutions after the long period of anarchy in France, which followed the Reign of Terror, but with Napoleon's coronation that admiration changed to bitter disappointment.

In 1808 the Spanish King renounced his rights to Napoleon and Napoleon placed his own brother Jerome on the throne of Spain. This led immediately to revolt in the Spanish Peninsula. When the Spanish authorities in Venezuela accepted Jerome as King the revolt in the capital city, Caracas, Bolivar's native place, was equally prompt. At first the revolt took the form of loyalty to Ferdinand, the legitimate King of .... Spain, but in two years more, on April 19, 1810, after much confusion and temporary failure, plans discussed in secret by leading men who met at the home of Bolivar, were successful and self-government was established in Venezuela, though not yet on the basis of separation from Spain and independence. It was not until July 5, 1811, that a congress of all the Provinces of Venezuela met at Caracas and published a declaration of independence. The adjoining territory of New Grenada soon followed the example of Venezuela.

~Nithin a year the capital city and many other towns were almost destroyed by an earthquake, which was at once proclaimed as a judgment of God to punish the rebellious subjects of Spain. In both the Republics which had proclaimed their independence the effect of the earthquake was political and military disaster. In New Grenada Francisco Miranda's troops, frightened by what they believed to be a visitation of the wrath of God, deserted in large numbers to the Spanish forces, and Miranda was compelled to capitulate. Bolivar, defeated in Venezuela, went to New Grenada and entered the service of that Republic.

We can not here follow the complicated story of the ensuing 18 years, the battles and campaigns, the victories and the defeats, the death of trusted fellow workers, and the jealousy and sometimes the treachery of ambitious rivals, which added to the difficulties of the long struggle. Nor can we dwell on his tragic disappointment and his death. It is enough here to say that in spite of criticism and controversy Bolivar is now recognized as the founder of five Republics and is worthy. of comparison with the great men of any nation. -

One· of his biographers quotes from a letter addressed to Bolivar by Daniel Webster and Joseph Story, in the name of the Bunker Rill Monument Association, as follows:

When we read of the enormous sacrifice of personal fortune, the calmness in difficult situations, the exercise without misuse of a power greater than imperial power, the repeated refusal of dictatorship, the simplicity of your republican habits, and the submission to the constitution and law which has so gloriously distinguished the career of your excellency, we believe that we see the image of our venerated Washington. At the same time that we admire and respect his virtues, we feel moved by the greatest sympathy to pay equal homage to the hero and liberator of the South.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Mr. GARNER. Mr. Speaker, I want to make a request, if I may. To-day is Calendar Wednesday and the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads is on call, as I understand it. In the past two sessions of Congress I am sure the gentleman from Connecticut will agree that this side has br.en as generous in suspending Calendar Wednes-

day, for the purpose of considering emergency legislation, as it could possibly be. · I want to ask unanimous consent that we suspend the business of Calendar Wednesday to-day and take up farm relief, the House bill having been reported from the Committee on Ac,oriculture.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas asks unanimous consent that Calendar Wednesday business to-day be dispensed with for the purpose of considering the agricultural bill. Is there objection?

Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, is the gentleman for or against the agricultural drought relief bill?

Mr. GARNER. Well, I do not think that needs to be answered by the gentleman from Texas, because he has already stated that he is very enthusiastically in favor of this legislation.

Mr. RAMSEYER. I am glad to hear that, but the vote did not indicate it the other day.

Mr. GARNER. If the gentleman from Iowa and others are as earnestly in favor of this legislation as they profess to be, they would surely be willing to set aside to-day and consider this piece of legislation.

Mr. RAMSEYER. I am not questioning the motives of the gentleman from Texas. Of course, he can question my motives if he desires to do so. We had a chance to pass that legislation the other day. The Committee on Agriculture is now considering that legislation, and there is no one in the House of Representatives who is more in favor of aiding the farmers and agrfculture than is the chairman of the Agricultural Committee [Mr. HAUGEN]. He stands always for the best interest~ of the people of the United States, and he is for the passage of any legislation that will aid agriculture. As far as I am concerned, I am perfectly willing to leave it to his judgment as to how and when that bill should be brDught before the House.

Mr. TILSON. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Agriculture, of which the distinguished gentleman from Iowa [1\11'. HAUGEN] is chairman, is considering this bill at this very moment; at least it was a few minutes ago. To proceed to make a gesture here of asking unanimous consent to proceed with the considerati-on of this bill before the gentleman from Iowa or any of his committee come on the floor is, to my mind, not very courteous, to say the least.

Mr. GARNER. I would like to have from the gentleman the same generosity which I have been giving him for two sessions, in order that we may cooperate on this legislation.

Mr. TILSON. Even cooperation should not override the usual courtesy of this House. When a great committee is considering a bill we should not, without even having it reported to the House, proceed to consider the bill which is being considered in committee. I think it discourteous.

Mr. GARNER. They have already reported the· bill to the House, and it is on the calendar.

Mr. TILSON. Not the Senate bill. Mr. GARNER. The House bill. Mr. TILSON. It would be discourteous to the Senate to

proceed to consider the House bill while · a Senate bill on the same subject is pending before a House committee.

Mr. GARNER. The gentleman is particularly anxious to consider the courtesies due the other body.

Mr. TILSON. There is a comity between the two Houses which should be observed, and the gentleman realizes that it would not be according to the usual parliamentary practice for us to take up and consider the House bill which is now on the calendar instead of the Senate bill, which is now pending before the Committee on Agriculture.

Mr. GARNER. Mr. Speaker, I make the unanimous-con-sent request.

The SPEAKER. Objection is heard. Mr. BANKHEAD. Who objected, Mr.. Speaker? Mr. SPROUL of illinois. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. GARNER. Let me appeal to my friend from illinois.

We have, of course, what is known as a constitutional amendment to get around; but let me appeal to my good friend to let some of these Members who have to take the responsibility in the next election make the objection and not inject himself into the matter.

. 1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 959

Mr. CHINDBLOM. Is that an issue now? Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Speaker, I object. Mr. TILSON. I am sure the gentleman realizes that there

are 50 Members on this side ready to object to any such discourtesy.

Mr. GARNER. I would not put such a delightful gentleman as the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. SPROUL] in the attitude of making this objection.

Mr. TILSON. I have no doubt that 50 of the Members who are now present would be ready to object under the circumstances.

Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. I think the world of my friend, the gentleman 'from Texas [Mr. GARNER], and I dislike to object, but I objected before. I do not think it courteous to the Committee on Agriculture to bring the matter up at this time, when, as our leader has said, none of them is present on the floor. This is one of the reasons I objected. We did have a chance to pass the bill and give the farmers the relief they are asking for, and our Democratic friends saw fit to defeat the measure when we had it up a day or two ago.

Mr. GARNER. If the objection of my friend from Tilinois is that the members of the Committee on Agriculture are not on the floor of the House, I will make a point of no quorum and have the roll called, and we will have them here. If that is the only reason the gentleman has, we will get them in the Hall.

Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. Even then I would object unless the Committee on Agriculture wanted to bring up the bill.

Mr. HASTINGS. The gentleman still insists on considering this measure under suspension of the rules and is unwilling to let the House express itself on the subject under the general rules of the House.

Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. The gentleman did not say that he objected to bringing it up under suspension of the rules.

Mr. HASTINGS. That is what we object to. CALENDAR WEDNESDAY

The SPEAKER. This is Calendar Wednesday. The Clerk will call the committees.

Mr. SANDERS of New York Cwhen the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads was called) . Mr. Speaker-

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, this being important legislation, I think all the Members of the House should be present, and I make the point of no quorum.

Mr. TILSON. The gentleman is evidently not in a hurry to consider drought-relief legislation.

Mr. PATTERSON. Yes; I am. Mr. TILSON. The gentleman is not speeding up such

consideration by a move of this sort. Mr. PATTERSON. If it will delay consideration of agri

cultural relief, I will withdraw the point of no quorum, Mr. Speaker.

ISSUING OF ADDITIONAL MAILING RECEIPTS Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call up the

bill CS. 3273) to authorize . the Postmaster General to issue additional receipts or certificates of mailing to senders of any class of mail matter and to fix the fees chargeable therefor, and ask unanimous consent that the bill be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York asks

unanimous consent that the bill be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole. Is there objection?

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, I object. The SPEAKER. This bill is on the Union Calendar. Accordingly the House automatically resolved itself into the

Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the billS. 3273, with Mr. RAMSEYER in the chair.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the provisions of the act of February

14, 1929 (39 U. S. C., p. 260), authorizing the Postmaster General to furnish receipts showing the mailing of ordinary mail of any class and to prescribe the fee for such receipts, is nereby extended to include additional receipts or certificates of mailing covering registered, insured, and collect-on-delivery mall.

With the following committee amendments: Page 1, line 4, strike out "page" and insert "sec.," and strike

out in line 7 " is" and insert " are."

Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Ma.ssachusetts, Mr. LucE.

Mr. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, i ask unanimous consent to speak for 10 minutes out of order. •

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Massachusetts asks unanimous consent to proceed for 10 minutes out of order.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, following the gentleman from Massachusetts, I want to speak for 10 minutes out of order, and I shall not object.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, what is the attitude of the leader with reference to expedition in disposing of these bills? ·

Mr. TILSON. I do not think this will delay the bill long enough to interfere with the other matter in which the gentleman is so intensely interested.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Does the gentleman from Connecticut know how many bills the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads has?

Mr. TILSON. Four bills, I am informed; but they will all have to be finished to-day unless some other provision is made for their consideration.

Mr. BANKHEAD. I hate to object, but it seems to me the gentleman from Connecticut ought to be somewhat consistent.

Mr. TILSON. I do not think it will kill any time if 'the time indicated is allowed the two gentlemen.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection. Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Chairman--The CHAffiMAN. For what purpose does the gentleman

from Michigan rise? Mr. HOOPER. Mr. Chairman, I realize the importance

of the matter that is going to be discussed by the gentleman from Massachusetts 'and I make the point of order of no quorum.

Mr. TffiSON. I hope the gentleman will not do that now. There is a fair attendance of the House now and perhaps as many as there would be shortly after the roll is called, and the Members are coming in quite rapidly. I wish the gentleman would withdraw his point of no quorum for the present.

Mr. HOOPER. I withdraw the point of no quorum, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, yesterday the chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency [Mr. McFADDEN] took the floor to discuss certain questions of finance. I wish to say that the propositions he advanced have not been considered by the Committee on Banking and Currency, of which I am a member. ·

Other Members have taken no public position thereon. The chairman spoke for himself and not for the committee. There are certain features of his remarks that ought not to go without an expression of opinion here by at least one other member of that committee.

In the first place, the chairman undertook to advise the Senate as to its course on the nomination of Eugene Meyer to the Federal Reserve Board. The Speaker of the House last spring in ruling upon a point of order as to the parliamentary situation in such a contingency decided that this must be left to the judgment and conscience of each Member of the House. lt is, however, still the parliamentary law, laid down in Jefferson's Manual, that Members of one body shall not concern themselves as to the proceedings of the other body.

But inasmuch as Eugene Meyer has been attacked on this floor answer should be made on this floor.

Eugene Meyer was chairman of the War Finance Corporation. I differed with his judgment as to whether it should be continued. His view prevailed. He performed his duties well on that occasion and he did the country an inest.Unable service. [Applause.]

960 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 Since .the war he has occupied high poSitions of trust

under this Government, performing his duties faithfully, honestly, and intelligently. The President of the United States could, in my judgment, have found no man better quali1ied to meet the present exigency. I do not advise the Senate, but I do say it was unfortunate that on the floor of this House there should have been reference to the matter requiring this answer. ,

Secondly, the chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency put himself in an unfortunate position in counseling Congress in this particular emergency. It was announced through the press some weeks ago that he had become the president of an investment trust. The word" trust" implies a responsibility to all those concerned with its _operation.

I would ask the House whether it was fair to his own investors to give that speech yesterday right in the middle of the worst crash the market has known in many months.

I also question the propriety of the chairman of the Com-· mittee on Banking and Currency engaging conspicuously in financial operations while he is chairman of that committee, using the prestige of that position to the advantage of private interests, using its prestige to secure investors, using its prestige to sell ownership in stocks-is that the right thing for a Member of this body, chairiDQ..n of a committee having in charge legislation relating to banks; with the gravest concern as to all matters of finance, a man whose word is constantly spread abroad as a counselor in respect to these things--is it right and proper under such circumstances for him to take the floor for the purpose of making such remarks as he delivered yesterday?

I would further emphasize the time he chose for making the speech. For some days it has been known that the market was in a perilous condition. Yesterday stocks fell so that millions and millions of value disappeared. Right in the midst of this boiling market the chairman takes the floor and adds further to the anxiety, the alarm, the distress of the millions of our people who have invested their savings in securities, who have intrusted to banks what provision they have made against the needs of ·illness and old age. Was it a happy time to pour fuel on the flames?

Next, I would question the propriety of ever using the opportunities of public position so that confidence in public institutions may be shaken. That speech was full of insinuation against public officials, against the Federal reserve system, against the President of the United States. lt was full of insinuation against the integrity and honesty of great financial leaders in this country, of the great banks of the country. It disturbed still more the confidence of the people in those to whom they look to save them in this hour of crisis. I ask if it was a wise and prudent thing to invite the people to doubt the integrity of the Federal reserve system? That speech was full of insinuation that those who lead the Federal reserve system have acted for some personal or financial gain.

It intimated that those who have conducted the system have been conducting it with impropriety, almost with dishonesty. Was that the right attitude to take toward this system in which both political parties in this cmm.try have taken so much pride, of which they contest credit for the authorship, and to which they desire to give support in every possible manner? Was it a wise and judicious thing to attack that system under the peculiar circumstances of the moment? Was it a wise thing to attack the banks of the country, when they are failing on every hand, when alike in the cities and in every village having a bank there Js apprehension and fear on the part of the depositors? Was it a wise thing for him, well known to be chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency, to permit the public to infer that other members of the committee and the Congress itself doubt the integrity, honesty, decency of the financial men who run the banks of the country?

I would ask further whether repetition of the arguments we have heard advanced from time to time about international finance was justified in such a crisis as this? Everybody knows that we are already involved in the finances

· of the world. Everybody knows that these huge payments

of debts have to be met somehow. Everybody knows that in this respect the welfare. of our own Treasury~ the welfare of the land as a whole, depends on the integrity, the good faith, the wisdom of the people who are engaged in handling these international relations. Is it a wise thing to impugn their honesty, impugn their uprightness, to impugn their consciences and give the public to understand by insinua- . tion after insinuation that they are doing the wrong things for the sake of their own selfish gain or for the gain of private interests?

I can not believe, Mr. Chairman, that such statements as this are prudent at this time:

There is no question that the Federal reserve system is playing with international financial operations through the Bank for International Settlements.

Playing! My God, in a time of crisis like this to charge the most responsible agency in the United States with playing with the international situation.

Sir, I renounce those utterances, I denounce those utterances! I say they are not the beliefs of the committee; I say they are not the beliefs of the- House. They were uncalled for; they were untimely; and they were wrong. [Applause.] ·

Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLYJ.

Mr. BLANTON rose. The CHAffiMAN. For what purpose does the gentleman

from Texas rise? Mr. BLANTON. I ask for recngnition in control of the

time against the bill, or, if the gentleman from New York will yield me 10 minutes, I do not care to do that.

Mr. SANDERS of New York. I shall be glad to yield 10 minutes to the gentleman.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I ask for recngnition in opposition to the bill.

The CHAIRMAN. Is any member of the committee opposed to the bill? If not, when the time comes the Chair will recognize some one in opposition to the bill.

The gentleman from New York has yielded 10 minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLY].

Mr. KELLY. Mr. Chairman, this bill is one of those on the program of the House Committee to endeavor to raise additional revenues through optional services. This meas-· ure will extend the present law so that a mailer may secure a certificate of mailing for additional classes which now are· not covered under the law. Up to July 1, 1929, it was possible to get a receipt of mailing for a parcel-post package. By the act which went into effect July 1, 1929, that was extended to include all other classes of ordinary mail matter. There is authority under the law for receipts of mailing' for ordinary classes of mail matter, but that does not include insured man,· registered mail, and collect-on-delivery mail. The Post Office Department has recommended that this privilege, this additional se1·vice, which is optional, be extended to those classes of mail. The House committee formally reported a House bill to carry it out. We now have the Senate bill before us. SUrely no one can object to this· measure if he desires at all to add to postal revenues through charg"Cs which are paid only by those mail users

-who desire to avail themsel es of additional service. If there are any questions, I shall be glad to answer them.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman refers to this bill as one to increase the revenues of the department. Do I understand that they charge a cent for this service?

Mr. KELLY. One cent is the charge. Mr. STAFFORD. Does the gentleman think, from his

close acquaintance with postal administration, that 1 cent will cnmpensate the Government for the issuance of a certificate when we are paying men high salaries to perform this work?

Mr. KELLY. The gentleman understands the system by whi.ch these certificates are issued. Large mail users come in and ask for a receipt of mailing for a large number of letters, parcel-post packages, and so forth. Those are all put on a single sheet, sometimes 20 to a sheet. That means the payment of 20 cents by the simple operation of signing. So

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 961 that it is a profitable service. The excess of the ~con:e over expenses amounts to a considerable . sum, and this will add to that. -

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KELLY. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman give the committee

the total revenue that has resulted from the fee charged for the issuance of these certificates?

Mr. KELLY. This is practically a new service .. The ~crease over last year shows 25 per cent. The mcome IS $86,000. This will probably bring it up to ·over $100,000 within the next year.

Mr. HASTINGS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KELLY. I yield. Mr. HASTINGS. Does the gentleman not think it is a

rather dangerous thing to turn over to the Postmaster General the question of fixing fees that should be· charged? Congress fixes the fees and Congress fixes the postage rates by legislation on everything else. It may be necessary to increase the fees, but I think we are embarking on a rather dangerous sea to give the Postmaster General blanket authority to fix fees. As far as I am concerned, I do not favor that kind of legislation. I think it is too much authority to give to the Postmaster General.

Mr. KELLY. I have maintained the same stand in the committee on these measU!'es with the exception of this one. This service is now in force at 1 cent, and the Post Office Department proposes to continue it. ·

Mr. HASTINGS. Why do we not in this bill fix the increase which the Postmaster General may charge?

Mr. KELLY. The Postmaster General proposes to fix 1 cent which is now in force under present law.

Mr. 'HASTINGS. Why ao we not amend this bill to make it 1 cent?

Mr. KELLY. This is a Senate bill and an amendment may mean that it must be taken up again. The fact is that the 1-cent fee will be charged just as has been charged in the past. I have that assurance from the Post Office Department.

Mr. HOCH. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KELLY. I yield. Mr. HOCH. I would like to make an observation about

the drafting of this bill. I do not refer to the merits of the bill but this bill proposes to amend a very short act, namely, the' act of February 14, 1929, by adding certain classes of mail matter. The committee proposes tli t the provisions of the act are hereby extended to increase, and so forth. I think that is a very unhappy way of legislating and a very undesirable method of legislating. Why did the committee not simply amend this act by inserting certain words? To take an act that is already upon the statute books and say that the provisions of a certain act are extended to include so and so is very unsatisfactory for those who are looking up the law to find what the law is. While I do not think in this connection it is important enough to insist upon an amendment, certainly it would have been just as simple and it would have taken less words to reenact the old act by inserting those words than to do it in this way.

Mr. KELLY. The gentleman is right. but this is a Senate bill. It comes before us as a Senate bill and will accomplish the purpose, however awkwardly it may be drafted.

Mr. HOCH. The gentleman offers that as an explanation of why it is improperly drafted?

Mr. KELLY. Yes. That is one answer. Mr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield?

·Mr. KELLY. I yield. Mr. BLANTON. I doubt whether the bill is improperly

drafted. Does it not accomplish the purpose sought? Mr. KELLY. It accomplishes exactly that purpose. Mr. BLANTON. Do we not all understand it? Mr. KELLY. I think so: Mr. BLANTON . • Then, is it not properly drafted? Mr. STAFFORD. Well, I question whether it is properly

drafted, and I will take occasion in my time to point out that fact.

LXXIV----61

Mr. CHINDBLOM. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KELLY. I yield. Mr. CIDNDBLOM. I understood the gentleman to say

that the committee is anxious to have the bill passed in its present form, to avoid further action in the Senate. Is that the situation?

Mr. KELLY. This is a Senate bill, and, of course, the best way to deal with it, if it will. accomplish its proper purpose, is to leave it as it stands.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. The bill still has to be returned to the Senate on account of a slight amendment.

Mr. KELLY. Well, it is merely a typographical amendment. I do not believe it would be sent back on that account.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. I am sure the bill could not be enrolled without having the Senate agree to even a typographical amendment.

Mr. KELLY. That may be true. My friend will admit this, at least, that this bill will extend to these other services the receipt privilege. That is all we are trying to do.

lVIr. CHINDBLOM. I have some doubt about the original policy of allowing the Postmaster General to fix the fees in any case. .

Mr. KELLY. That has already been done. The 1-cent fee has been fixed.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. But if that is not a good policy, we are extending that policy still farther by legislation of this kind.

Mr. KELLY. In the committee we have been very meticulous about that proposition, and it was only on account of the legislative situation here that we did agree to this Senate bill.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. Of course, what I have said has no reference to the present administration of the Post Office Department. I am speaking of the general policy of giving administrative officers the right to fix fees for Government services, especially in the Post Office Department.

Mr. KELLY. I agree in general with the gentleman from Dlinois.

Mr. BLANTON. We will not extend it far enough to let the Postmaster General increase the postage on first-class mail to 2% cents an ounce, as he proposes.

Mr. KELLY. No. We will not accept that recommendation, I am quite sure.

Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. BLANToN].

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 10 minutes out of order.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from llii

nois [Mr. SPROUL] is one of the most delightful gentlemen of this House. He is my personal friend. He is a most welcome visl.tor, from time to time, at Mineral Wells, a watering place in my district. We think a great deal of him down in west Texas. The gentleman does not mean to have the country misconstrue what he says on the floor, but, going into the RECORD and going out to the country all over the United States, it might be misconstrued.

Just a moment ago when his colleague, the gentleman from lllinois [Mr. CHINDBLOM] asked the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLY] if the quickest way to pass the Senate bill was not to pass the bill and send it back to the Senate with as few amendments as possible, of course, the gentleman from Pennsylvania had to acquiesce in that.

Mr. CHINDBLOM. The gentleman misunderstood me. Mr. BLANTON. That method would have qisposed of

the drought relief bill which came from the Senate. If we had passed that bill appropriating $60,000,000, which it seems the Department of Agriculture thought, at the time it prepared the Senate bill, must be appropriated in order to meet the requirements of the country, that bill now would be at the White House for the President's signature, and would not be tied up in the Committee on Agriculture, and the fanners who need the relief would have it at once.

962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 Mr. SPROUL of Dlinois. Will the gentleman yield? attempted to bring the Senate bill before this House, under Mr. BLANTON. In ·a moment I will. · Please allow me the guise of a Senate bill, but with all after the enacting

first to say what I want to say and then I will yield. · clause stricken out and the President's proposal inserted Legislation that is passed under suspension of the rules, in lieu thereof. Everything after the enacting clause was

which requires a two-thirds vote of the House, is supposed stricken out, and the House proposal was inserted as an to be only legislation concerning which practically the amendment, and we had to accept and swallow that like a · entire membership of the House is in accord, and yet every bunch of open-mouthed mocking birds in a nest, without time a desire comes to the steering committee to place a even the right to consider it. The demand was made for gag on the House and pass a piece of legislation over the us to swallow it. · I was glad to see there were enough MemHouse, concerning which a great many of the Members ar-e bers on the floor of this House who would not agree to be not in accord, they bring it in under suspension of the rules. puppets and rubber stamps for any administration's floor That is what was attempted in this case. An attempt was leader or anyone else conducting the management of this made to " gag " the Members of the House, and make us House. pass a bill that does not suit us. Mr. TILSON. Will the gentleman yield?

We know-and the people of the country ought to know- Mr. BLANTON. I yield. that when a bill is brought before the House in the orderly Mr. TILSON. The gentleman is sufficiently acquainted way, under the rules of the House, the House can amend it with the rules of this House to know that if he has the votes in any way it desires, and make it read just like a majority the bill could never be sent to conference without the House of the House wants it to read. And there must be at least having an opportunity to vote to change the bill in accordtwo hours of debate on it, and Members are permitted to ance with what the gentleman claims should be done. discuss it pro and con, and to reach a proper decision. A Mr. BLANTON. I do not have time to yield for a speech. majority of the Members may increase or lower at will the The eminent floor leader can get the floor any time he deappropriation provided for in the bill. It is thus made to sires. We all grant him the floor for as much time as he express the will of a majority of the House. We are the wants, arid without asking a question. legislators for the people, and the legislation which we pass There was an opportunity for this House to take up under should be ours, and should express our will, and we should the rules of the House in an orderly way the Senate bill, not be " gagged " and forced to do something against our which the Senate had · passed, and which the distinguished will. Senator from Oregon said came to him from the Department . We know-and the people of the country ought to know- of ·Agriculture with its approval. that when a motion is made to pass a bill under suspension And we who are. familiar with the terrible conditions existof the rules only 20 minutes' debate to the side is permitted. ing in the numerous drought-stricken areas of the United Not a line in the bill can be changed. Not an "i " can be States know that it will require at least the $60,000,000 dotted. Not a "t" can be crossed. It must be voted up or provided for in the Senate bill t'o grant the relief that is down, just exactly in the form it is presented, for no absolutely necessary, if these afilicted farmers and their wives amendments of any kind are allowed. We are compelled and little starving children are to survive. to take it or leave it.· Notwithstanding the fact that the 120,000,000 people of the United States have 435 Repre- · We could have taken up the Senate bill in an orderly way sentatives sent here by them to Congress. to legislate for and passed that bill and sent it to the White House and it them, and to vote their sentiments, all are impotent except could have been a law to-day. And the needeq relief would the few Members who, acting for the Chief Executive, have have been granted. But it is now intimated that those who prepared a measure to meet his demands, and, under the prevented the administration from putting a gag on this recognition of the Speaker, move to suspend the rules and House killed the bill. However, the country knows that this pass it, just exactly as the President wants it passed. bill is not killed but is the livest bill before this Congress,

As a general proposition, not a Member on this floor would and that it is the administration of this country that is pre.:. approve of such a method. Expediency causes it to be done venting the consideration of that bill. Right now the gentlefrom time to time. · man from Connecticut knows that he can have that bill

There are three distinct branches of this Government-- brought in within few minutes if he wanted to do so. the executive, to enforce laws; the legislative, to pass laws; Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. Will the gentleman yield now? and the courts, to construe and uphold laws. Our Constitu- Mr. BLANTON. And the gentleman from Illinois knows tion does not authorize the Chief Executive to legislate. It that it was not the Democratic side of this House which kept does not empower him to compel Congress to function in his that Senate bill from being passed.

t Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. It was, because there was only way and to blindly pass measures in his language and erms. 1 vote on your side of the House for the suspension of the Framing and passing legislation is a duty and · obligation rules. resting upon our shoulders. We can not delegate our discre-tion, judgment, and responsibility. Mr. BLANTON . . We Democrats, aided by 16 Republicans

If the motion to suspend the rules had been to pass the who stopped this "gag," were voting on a question of prinSenate bill appropriating $60,000,000 to relieve the drought- ciple. It was a question of not permitting the gentleman's stricken farmers of the United States, I do not think there party to gag this House and hog-tie it so it could not move would have been a vote against it. It was passed unani- and so we could not have any discussion of this matter. mously by the Senate. The House would have passed it Mr. SPROUL of illinois. Is the gentleman in favor of practically by a unanimous .vote. It has been contended by giving the industrial workers of the United States the same the distinguished Republican Senator who introduced and deal he has given the farmers? passed it in the Senate that the bill was drawn and sent Mr. BLANTON. Certainly I am. I voted for the $110,him by the Department of Agriculture as the one meeting 000,000 bill, and I will vote for every bill that the gentleman the needs and necessities of the people · of the country. If wants to bring in here to relieve distress in Illinois. the steering committee and the chairman of the House Com- Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. Eighty million dollars of that mittee on Agriculture had arranged to move to suspend the goes to build roads, and. they can build a mile of road with rules and pass this Senate bill it would have been passed about 15 men and 2 or 3 machines. promptly and would have gone to the White House last Mr. BLANTON. I called attention · to that, but whose Monday night, and would be a law at . this time, if the fault is it? It is the gentleman's President in the White President had given it the prompt and favorable action it House, who failed to send his estimates here for the very deserves and the situation demands. relief the gentleman is speaking of now. There has been no

But it was not the Senate bill the House was asked to estimate here from the White House or 1;he Budget asking pass. It was not the Senate bill that was brought up under us to appropriate for the industrial situation of which the suspension; We Representatives were not given an oppor- gentleman speaks. We have voted for everything the Presi .. tunity to vote for or against the Senate bill. But it was dent has sent here on that subject.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 963 Mr. SPROUL of Dlinois. The President wants $25,000,000, We have here a bill that is brought in and is to be passed

and you want to give $60,000,000. after two hours of debate, or probably not that much de-Mr. BLANTON. Yes; because the President does not bate, which gives the Postmaster General the right to fix

know the extent of the relief which should be afforded at rates and to issue certificates for mailing these three kinds this time. of mail matter. The bill reads thus:

Mr. SPROUL of Illinois. He does know. He knows that That the provisions of the act of February 14, 1929, authorizing the Red Cross is taking care of those who are huhgry and the Postmaster General to furnish receipts showing the mailing of who need clothing and fuel. ordinary mail of any class and to prescribe the fee for such receipt

Mr. BLANTON. I am not talking about the Red Cross. are hereby extended to include addit1onal receipts or certificates of We are the Representatives of the American people, and mailing covering registered, insured, and collect-on-delivery mail.

they are looking to us; they are not looking to charity Three of our great classes of mail here are left entirely through the Red Cross; they are looking to their Govern- in the discretion of tbe Postmaster Ge:o.eral to fix the rates ment of the United states. in any manner he may see fit.

I want to say this: That while the President's prosperity We are told in this connection by the amiable gentleman preaching was going on over this country a great many from Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLY] that the rates are going to people were induced to buy stocks. Some of the most stable remain at 1 .cent, but he does not want to write that into stocks were sold for $250 a share at the peak, and the people the law. However, he can not deny the fact that it is left in my district, believing the promises of prosperity and the entirely to the discretion of the Postmaster General; yet he promises of enforcing the prohibition laws, voted for a says they are going to remain at 1 cent, and the gentleman Republican President, and the Republicans carried my dis- states that the reason for leaving it entirely to the discretrict in the 1928 election. [Applause.] But they are wak- tion of the Postmaster General is to get the bill through in ing up now; when those $250 stocks have now gone down to a hurry, because it is a Senate biil. $90. There is a difference of $160 a share in those stocks Mr. O'CONNELL. Will the gentleman yield? at this time. The people are finding out now who has been Mr. PATTERSON. I yield to the gentleman from New garnering in all of the huge and tremendous profits at their York. expense. MJ.·. · O'CONNELL. The gentleman from Pennsylvania

I can not yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin. Every [Mr. KELLY] made the statement a few moments ago that person in my district is ashamed now that it went Repnb- the real purpose in changing the law, as indicated in this lican in 1928, and you will not catch them any more doing a bill, is to raise additional revenue for the Post Office ne.:. thing like that. It was the promise of your President that partment. he would enforce ·the prohibition law that got the vote of Mr. PATI'ERSON. Oh, sure. This is one of Postmaster every preacher in my district; but you can not find a General Brown's pet schemes to raise additional revenue, preacher there fi.ow who would vote for him on prohibition and I hope yon will pardon me for saying this, because I because he has not enforced the law and he has not even do not mean any offense, but I regret some Members of had his commissions make an attempt to enforce the law. the Congress bringing in such legislation and trying to

In addition to that, one of your judges up in New Jersey pick up a few dollars and at the same time give the Postyesterday had the audacity to affront the Constitution and master General unlimited discretion to pick up these few to come out. and say that the eighteenth amendment to the dollars out of the poor mail users of the country. Constitution is not legal. Mr. KELLY. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman should say courage, Mr. PATTERSON. I yield to the gentleman from Penn-backbone, and intelligence. sylvania.

Mr. BLANTON. Yes, intelligence! He ought to be im- Mr. KELLY. · The gentleman knows, of course, that Con-peached. That judge in New Jersey ought to be impeached gress has twice passed a provision giving authority to the and removed from the bench [applause], and I am expect- Postmaster General to fix this fee, and the fee has been ing my friend Mr. LAGUARDIA, who looks after such mat- fixed at 1 cent. This simply provides for an extension of ters, to bring in a resolution impeaching this judge because that service. he refuses to uphold the law of this country. [Laughter and Mr. PATI'ERSON. I want to ask the gentleman now what applause.] . benefit this will be to the mail service by extending this

This drought relief bill for afflicted farmers of the United authority to these other services, and I will give the gentle:.. States must be passed and become a law before Christmas. man some of my time to answer that. It should appropriate the full $60,000,000. It must appro- Mr. KELLY. The gentleman puts a wrong construction priate not lesS than $50,000,000 under any circumstances. on it when he states that this is a burden on mail users. The farmers of the United States and their friends are well There is no burden on anyone except those who believe that acquainted with the situation, and they are going to hold this is a service fee for which they will be amply compen-this administration and the Republican Party responsible if sated. No one has to pay this fee. _ this legislation is longer delayedt and if it is not passed be- Mr. PATI'ERSON. Then why leave it in the hands of the fore the New Year. I believe that the Republican leaders Postmaster General, especially when he is so anxious to are too astute, and have too keen a political acumen, if they raise additional revenue? are not moved. by any other impulse, to allow this Senate Mr. KELLY. I agree largely with the gentleman but---bill for drought relief to remain pigeonholed, and that Mr. PATTERSON. Then let us limit it to 1 cent. If the they will bring it before this House for action so that it may gentleman believes that is. the proper thing· to do, let us do be passed before the holidays. that.

Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 Mr. KELLY. I can assure the gentleman the fee is to be minutes to the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. STAFFORD]. 1 cent.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I ask for recognition in Mr. PATTERSON. I do not want any assurance. Why opposition to the bill. -not put that in the bill?

The CHAIRMAN. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill? Mr. KELLY. If the gentleman wants to offer an amend-Mr. STAFFORD. In its proposed form; yes. ment, he can do that at any time after we start reading the The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is bill under the 5-minute rule.

recognized for one hour in opposition to the bill. Mr. PATTERSON. I feel sure there will be some amend-Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10. minutes to the ment offered along that line. To my mind this is a nefari-

gentleman from Alabama [Mr. PATTERSON]. ous scheme to give the Postmaster General additional Mr. PA'ITERSON. Mr. Chairman and members of the authority. I do not know what his aims are, but it seems

committee, there are a lot of things I would like to discuss to me this is a scheme to reach out and take every cent of if I had unanimous consent to speak out of order, but I think money possible out of the people who use the mail. They the legislation we are considering now is very important and are asking additional fees for .directory servjce so that the I want to say a few words in reference to this bill. · department can raise any amount of money he may desire.

964 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 Why should we consider such legislation as this to raise a

·few dimes or a few pennies out of the American people who use the mail service?

Mr. KELLY. My friend is mistaken about anybody having the power to take money from any mail users. This is only an optional service.

Mr. PATTERSON. We have brought in some that are not optional. The gentleman has some on his desk to-day that are not optionaL .

Mr. KELLY. That is true, but this bill is the one we are considering now. .

Mr. PA TI'ERSQN. And this is one of the Postmaster General's schemes, and I oppose such a scheme, and I do not believe it is best for the American people to pass such legislation giving the Postmaster General unlimited discretion in the fixing of fees. Who knows the fee is going to be 1 cent? If he needs revenue as bad as this, who knows whether the fee is going to be 2 cents or 5 cents, and he has unlimited discretion.

Mr. BRIGGS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. Mr. BRIGGS. Can the gentleman from Alabama inform

the committee as to what is the necessity, aside from being a revenue measure, for this piece of legislation?

Mr. PATTERSON. No; I can not; and I can not find out from the gentleman sponsoring this legislation.

Mr. BRIGGS. What prompts it? Why should people want these additional receipts, for instance, for insured mail, registered mail, and things of that kind?

Mr. PATTERSON. I can not inform the gentleman about that. I asked the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLY] that question and he could not inform me.

Mr. KELLY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. Mr. KELLY. I explained that need, and I thought I

made it clear to the committee. This is a service that is ·desired by mail users, and 8,000,000 pieces of mail last year took this kind of certificate and $86,000 was received. The extension is desired by mail users.

Mr. PATTERSON. Who desires it? Mr. BRIGGS. I understand it is desired by some; but

why is it desired. Is it, for instance, desired by houses that want to send out an indiscriminate lot of matter to people who do not want it, do not call for it, and do not write for it; but they just want to show by receipts in order to make out cases that they delivered such matter to the Post Office Department and have a receipt for it; and then when it is not returned they will take steps to annoy the people who receive matter that they have never ordered? Is

· that the purpose of it? Mr. KELLY. Oh, no; it has nothing to do with that. This

is a certificate of mailing, which will show that the .registered, insured, or C. 0. D. mail was actually mailed in the post office. It is worth 1 cent for such a certificate.

Mr. BRIGGS. Is it the senders who want it? Mr. KELLY. There were 8,000,000 last year-Mr. BRIGGS. Why should they want it? Mr. KELLY. A great many mail users want to use it, and,

as I say, there were 8,000,000 last year--Mr. PATTERSON. Who wants the additional mail serv

ice; who are some of them? Mr. KELLY. Many concerns have traveling agents out,

and they insist that there be proof of the deposit of mail in the post office.

Mr. PATTERSON. I thought the insurance did all that. Is this a scheme for the mail users to get around the insurance provision?

Mr. KELLY. This has nothing to do with the handling of the mail or the delivery of the mail. It is simply a certificate that the mail has been deposited in the post office.

Mr. PATTERSON. It seems to me that the public would be served-if we want to carry out Postmaster Brown's pet schemes-that rather than bring in these chicken-feed measures they should be put into one broad program and let us vote on it and turn it down.

There is a great to-do about the deficit of the Post Office Department.

Mr. ARENTZ. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PATTERSON. Yes. Mr. ARENTZ. There has been a great deal of talk about

raising the revenue, about increasing the revenue. I want to say that the average fourth-class postmaster gets about $185 a year. I think along with increasing the revenue we should pass legislation giving to the fourth-class postmaster $25 or $30 a month in payment of the splendid work that they do.

Mr. PATI'ERSON. I agree with the gentleman, and let us vote down these little chicken-feed measures.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman--The CHAffiMAN. The gentleman from Wisconsin is

recognized for 50 minutes. Mr. STAFFORD. I shall not consume more than 5 or 10

minutes. I wish to continue the discussion suggested by the gentleman from Texas, as to the real need of having these receipts for mailing, and who are the persons that wish to profit by such receipts.

Mr. KELLY. The Post Office Department is in receipt of many letters commending the law that is now in force and asking that it be extended to these three classes of mail.

Mr. STAFFORD. Is there really any good accomplished by the present service, as suggested by the gentleman from Texas, to secure evidence on the part of the mail-order houses?

Mr. KELLY. It is an appreciated service; yes. Mr. STAFFORD. What is the use of a receipt? . Is it to

check the agent of the mail-order house that the mail has been deposited in the post office?

Mr. KELLY. The use is that there will be proof of the deposit of the mail in the post office.

Mr. STAFFORD. For whose benefit? That is what I want to know. If the gentleman can not answer, all right.

Mr. KELLY. In answer I will say that there are 8,000,-000-- -

Mr. STAFFORD. What is the real purpose? The gentleman is proposing to extend the provisions of these receipts to registered mail, · instn·ed mail, and collect-on-delivery mail. We all know that so far as the registered mail is concerned you get a receipt to-day. We all know that so far as the insured mail is concerned you get a receipt.

Mr. KELLY. Mr. ·chairman, will the gentleman yield'? Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. :Mr. KELLY. You do not now get a receipt for mail being

deposited. You send the card through and get a receipt as to its delivery.

Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman must not have sent any mail by registered or insured mail for a long time, because we do get a receipt when we send registered and insured mail.

Mr. KELLY. You get a slip. Mr. STAFFORD. That is a receipt, giving the number. so

as to identify the package. That is a receipt by which the sender of the mail holds the Post Office Department to an accounting in case it is lost. That is a receipt for which we do not pay anything. The gentleman says we do not get a re~eipt.

Mr. KELLY. The gentleman knows that this receipt of mailing is entirely different from the slip that is given at the time one asks for a return card.

Mr. STAFFORD. That only enlarges the interrogation doubt as to what is the purpose of this supplemental receipt. -

Mr. HOCH. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. Mr. HOCH. I understand the gentleman from Pennsyl

vania to say that we get a slip when we mail a package. Mr. KELLY. Yes. Mr. HOCH. Do we not receive that in all cases regard

less of whether we ask for a return card or not? Mr. KELLY. Yes. Mr. HOCH.- I understood the gentleman to say we only

get that in cases where we ask for a return card.

1930 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 965 Mr. KELLY. I wanted to say that these receipts of mail

ing are quite different from the slip containing the number of the registered article.

Mr. HOCH. What is the purpose of this? We get a receipt of mailing now?

Mr. KELLY. The gentleman will admit that if that is deemed sufficient to prove delivery in the office of this registered letter, of course this additional 1 cent fee will not be paid.

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes; but what is the purpose of it when we already have an acknowledged statement or slip furnished, with a serial number on it, corresponding with that on the package, which has been sent by registered or insured mail? What is the purpose . of .this additional receipt?

Mr. KELLY. It has been the policy of the service so far to give these certificates for ordinary classes of matter, and now we simply extend it to insured, registered, and collecton-delivery mail. If it is of no value, no one will use it~

Mr. STAFFORD. I am trying to find out whether the Post Office Department is occupying our time with an inane proposal or a sensible one. If we have a certificate to-day that serves the purpose, what is the use of taking up our time and providing a fee of 1 cent for something that is supplemental to the arrangement now in use?

Mr. KELLY. The Post Office Department estimates that this will raise a considerable amount from those who desire the service and are willing to pay the fee.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman state one concrete case in the matter of registered mail, where a person in regular course, without asking, receives a certificate showing the package has been mailed, that shows the necessity for this certificate?

Mr. KELLY. If this certificate is not of value, it will not be used.

Mr. STAFFORD. I want to find out from some one from the Post Office Department or the Post Office Committee the reason for this asinine propOSal.

Mr. PATrERSON . . Mr. Chairm~n, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. STAFFORD. Yes. Mr. PATTERSON. Have there been hearings on this bill?

Who appeared before the committee and asked for this service? ·

Mr. KELLY. Mr. Tilton, Third Assistsant Postmaster General, and other representatives of the department presented the case.

Mr. PATTERSON. And nobody appeared except from the Post Office Department?

Mr. KELLY. That is all. Mr. PATTERSON. Then I want to ask one other question

if the gentleman from Wisconsin will yield? How many thousand dollars do they estimate this will add?

Mr. KELLY. This service now yields $86,000 on ordinary classes of mail matter. ·

Mr. PATI'ERSON. What will it yield from this additional service?

Mr. KELLY. The department made no estimate, but it will probably be around $25,000.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, during the early consideration of this bill, attention was directed by the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. HocHJ to the irregularity from a legislative standpoint of amending an existing statute. SUpplementing his criticism along the same line, I would inquire whether in the original law there is any reference to certificates of mailing?

Mr·. KELLY. The gentleman can see from the comparative print on the last page of the report. It quotes the present law of February 14, 1929, and also the proposed amendment in this bill (S. 3273).

Mr. STAFFORD. After examining that, I direct the gentleman's attention to the fact that he will find no reference in the present law to certificates of mailing.

Mr. KELLY. If the gentleman will look at the act in the first column he will see that it refers to receipts showing the mailing of ordinary· mail

Mr. STAFFORD. · But nothing about certificates; Mr. KELLY. That is a receipt or a certificate. Mr. STAFFORD. What is the need of saying "certifi ..

cates " in your . amended bill when there is no such word in the original act.

Mr. KELLY. If the gentleman will refer to the bill itself, it refers to receipts or certificates of mailing. "Certificates" is simply a synonym for " receipts."

Mr. HOUSTON of Delaware. Oh, no. Mr. STAFFORD. The gentleman says that " certificates "

is a synonym for " receipts " and the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. HousTON] says no. I agree with the gentleman from Delaware, and I yield to him, if he wishes, to explain the difference.

Mr. HOUSTON of Delaware. A question might arise as to whether or not the certificate would not have to be certified to by some superior officer instead of a mere receipt given by the clerk of a post office.

Mr. KELLY. This measure was prepared in the Post Office Department, and I take it from the facts that of course the words " receipt " and " certificate " apply to the same card, that they are simply interchangeable words.

Mr. HOUSTON of Delaware. If it is a certificate then in a court of law it will have more weight than a mere receipt.

Mr. KELLY. That is not contemplated by the bill, I would say to the gentleman.

Mr. STAFFORD. What information I have been able to obtain as to the real purpose of the measure rather confirms my suspicions that it is for the benefit of mail-order houses to get proof that mailable matter has been delivered to some person who has not ordered it so that they can prove that they have a right to recover in a court of law in case_ the merchandise is not returned.

On last Calendar Wednesday there were similar bills designedly for the purpose of aiding mail-order houses in that particular, authorizing a fee of 20 cents to be charged. Those bills did not originate in the Post Office Department but originated in the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads. When we came to ask them what their basis for charging the 20 cents was they said," That is our idea."

Mr. PALMER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KELLY. I yield. Mr. PALMER. What is the object of this legislation and

the results to be obtained? Will it not be an additional cost to the patrons of the office, by raising the fee, and working a hardship on the patrons of the office?

Mr. KELLY. Only those mail users who desire to have a receipt of actual deposit in the post office will be affected by this measure.

Mr. PALMER. Then the object of this legislation is to -raise revenue from the common patrons of the office?

Mr. KELLY. Of course, the purpose is to raise revenue not from compulsory service but from an optional service.

Mr. PALMER. Does the gentleman not think that is bad legislation at this time?

Mr. KELLY. I think it is the best way possible to raise revenues which are needed at this time.

Mr. PALMER .. From the poor patrons? Mr. KELLY. Oh, no. This does not apply to any mail

user who mails a letter and allows it to go in the regular course. This applies to those who want a receipt · of actual deposit in the post office.

Mr. STAFFORD. That is, they want a receipt to protect their rights when the mail is registered or insured or they want a supplementary receipt for some ulterior purpose which the gentleman has not been able to explain.

Mr. KELLY. Of course, a receipt for registered mail is quite different. That is simply a statement of a registry being made through the Postal Service.

Mr. STAFFORD. A receipt whereby you hold the dep·artment to accountability in case the letter or package is lost; the only evi.denc·e that you have to present in case a package or letter has been misdelivered. ·

Mr. KELLY. But this has nothing whatever to do with any indemnity by the Government. - ·

966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 Mr. STAFFORD. What better proof has the sender than

the receipt which he gets when he mails a registered or insured package?

Mr. KELLY. On this card there will be a description of the package itself. There will be details which he will not get in the slip giving the number.

Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, now we are getting some information. Now we are going to have a description of the package.

Mr. KELLY. I thought the gentleman understood that at the beginning.

Mr. STAFFORD. Oh, no. I am unable to comprehend anything that emanates from the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

Mr. KELLY. That is the gentleman's misfortune. Mr. PATTERSON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. STAFFORD. I yield. Mr. PATI'ERSON. I would like to make this suggestion,

that every one of these C. 0. D. packages is paid for by the person who receives them. The ordinary person, who probably does not have but sufficient money to pay for it, has to pay every one of these charges. They are all passed on to him, whether the Postmaster General raises it to 1 cent or 5 cents or 10 cents.

Mr. KELLY. Of course, that is not correct. Mr. PATTERSON. Oh, yes; every one of them is passed

on to them. Mr. KELLY. Again I say that no one will pay this fee

except those that definitely request the receipt of mailing for some sufficient purpose.

Mr. PATTERSON. Every cent of the collect-on-~elivery postage is passed on to the man who takes it out of the office.

Mr. KELLY. This measure only contemplates an optional service, which will be paid for by the mail user who desires it.

Mr. STAFFORD. I believe that if we proceed farther and farther we will get more into the mire as to the real purpose of this measure, and, accordingly, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. -

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas?

There was no objection. Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10

minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. HoGG]. Mr. HOGG of Indiana. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentle

men of the committee, it appears that the relative importance of the matter involved is out of all proportion to the enthusiasm of the opposition.

What this bill provides for is that if some user of the mail, either rich or poor, desires to spend 1 cent to get an additional receipt to show that he has deposited certain matter in the United States mail he shall have the privilege of doing so.

Mr. MORTON D. HULL. Will the -gentleman yield? Mr. HOGG of Indiana. I yield. Mr. MORTON D. HULL. Why should he want to get an

additional receipt if he has already got one? Mr. HOGG of Indiana. The gentleman from illinois has

asked a fair question. I regret I am unable to answer such a simple question. But I will state that last year the Post Office Department carried about 15,000,000,000 letters, and I am unable to tell the gentleman why each of the senders used the mail to that extent. I can not tell the gentleman why last year 6,875,000 people used this service. It is the testimnny of the Post Office Department that there is a serious demand for the service authorized in this bill.

Mr. HOCH. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOGG of Indiana. I yield. Mr. HOCH. I am not unfriendly to this legislation in the

questions I have asked. I was only trying to get at what the real purpose of this receipt was in the case of registered mail. That is a receipt of mailing. If this is some needed service that people are willing to pay for I am glad to favor it, but I do not yet understand, in the case of registered mail, when everyone now receives a little slip which

is a receipt of mailing, why anyone would want to pay for an additional receipt. Is it the intention to take away from the senders of registered mail the free receipt that they now get?

Mr. HOGG of Indiana. It is not. If the gentleman from Kansas and the gentleman from illinois together took a package to the post office to have registered and there an argument arose between them as to who shall have the receipt, or suppose an argument arose between the gentleman from Alabama and the gentleman from Wisconsin as to who should have possession of the receipt which is given them, they could settle that argument by paying 1 penny and getting an additional receipt for the registered package. T.hat would relieve the necessity of the continuing of the argument between the gentleman from Alabama and the gentleman from Wisconsin, because I am sure the argument would never otherwise terminate.

I am opposed to the authority granted to the Postmaster General to fix rates. This bill will carry an amendment which will fix the rate at 1 cent for each additional receipt.

Postmaster General Walter Brown is giving capable and constructive leadership to the United States postal business of $804,940,961 annual turnover. He is extending national and international air mail service: Rural free delivery now gives daily mail to 25,471,735 people. In the delivery of 28,000,000,000 separate pieces of mail each year he is directing the largest and most efficient organization in the world. Many achievements bear witness of the comprehensive work of General Brown. Occasionally, however, I am unable to reach the conclusion announced by him on postal affairs.

To increase letter postage from 2 cents to 2% cents per ounce, as advocated by the Postmaster General, is contrary not only to the fundamental principles but also to the economic considerations of the Postal Service.

The report of the department shows that there is now an excess of revenues over expenditures on first-class mail of $70,913,541 annually. Approximately one-half-46.7 per cent--of all postal revenues come from first-class mail. The Postal Service has been built around first-class mail. The present 2-cent rate is responsible for the great volume of business and enormous profit. In number of pieces firstclass mail constitutes approximately half of all the mail. To increase the rate to 2% cents per letter will decrease the volume. Why kill the goose which lays the golden egg?

The present rate of 2 cents went into effect in 1885 and except for a brief period during the World War it has been in effect to the present time. The arguments advanced for an increase are not convincing. It is shown that since 1916 there has been an increase of 82 per cent in newspapers or the second-class rates, of 21 per cent in the third-class rate, and of 10 per cent in the parcel-post rate. It is further pointed out that 2 cents in 1885 is equal to 7 cents in i930 and that there is an actual deficiency of about $58,000,000 this year in the activities of the department.

Further reference of the cost-ascertainment report of the department shows that each class of mail, except letters or first-class mail, is carried at a loss. If it were not for the profit on first-class mail the actual deficit of the department would be more than double what it now is. It is evidence that profit arising from first-class mail is due to the volume. If, through an increase of rate, the volume of first-class mail is materially_ decreased, it will thereby compel a higher rate on other classes of mail in order to prevent an increase in the deficit.

The Government has a monopoly of first-class mail. It should never invoke that right to charge an unjust rate. Americans are accustomed to a 2-cent rate. It produces a huge surplus. The 2-cent rate is the chief asset of the Postal Service and it should not be increased.

Buying a single stamp of 2 Y2 cents on any odd number of stamps would be impossible. There would soon be a demand for a 2¥2-cent nickel to facilitate post-office business, and such denomination is, of course, not to be encouraged.

Many are of the opinion that the postal deficit is due to the cost of franked and penalty mail. Last year franked mail, which, among others, includes that of Senators and

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 967 Congressmen~ cost the department $637,000. Penalty mailthat is, departmental mail-cost $3"330,000.

These items, with the subsidies granted to the carriers of air mail, to the American merchant marine, and other nonPostal Service, am<>unt to $40,000,000. These are not included in the $58,000,000 actual deficit.

The Postal Service was established for service. It was never intended that it should be wholly self-supporting. It lS an institution of which the American people are justly proud. Its workers are most efficient. Their wage increases were not only deserved but have resulted in a greater effectiveness for each dollar paid in wages.

It can be expected that postal revenues will increase with the return of normal business. It would be a backward step to increase the rate on first-class mail. [Applause.]

Mr. SANDERS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I move that the ~ommittee do now rise.

The CHAIRMAN. The bill has not yet been read. Mr. TILSON. That is a privileged motion, Mr. Chairman. The CHAmMAN. The gentleman from New York [Mr.

SANDERS] moves that the committee do now rise. The question was taken, and the motion was agreed to. Accordingly the committee rose; and the Speaker having

resumed the chair, Mr. RAMSEYER, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, r~ ported that that committee, having had under consideration the bill (8. 3273) to authorize the Postmaster General to issue additional receipts of certificates of mailing to senders of any class of mail matter and to .fix the fees chargeable therefor, had come to no resolution thereon.

Mr. TILSON. Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that fru'ther calendar business for to-day be dispensed with and that the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads may have the next Calendar Wednesday for the completion of its business. The committee has this bill now under consideration, and three others, I am infol111ed.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Connecticut asks unanimous consent that further calendar business for today be dispensed with, and that the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads shall have the next Calendar Wednesday for the consideration of their business. Is there objection?

Mr. GARNER. Reserving the right to object, what is the next committee on call?

Mr. TILSON. The Committee on the Public Lands. The gentleman from Utah spoke to me in regard to it. He hopes to go home over the holidays and will be very glad if . his committee is not called until the second Wednesday in January.

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

There was no objection. DROUGHT RELIEF

Mr. Tll..SON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it may be in 01'der to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the so-called drought relief bill, Senate Joint Resolution 211, and that the remainder of to-day be available for general debate; that the general debate close with to-day's session, and that the debate be confined to the bill. ~

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Connecticut asks unanimous consent that it may be in order to move that the House shall resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill <S. J. Res. 211), and that general debate shall be limited to two hourS. Is there objection?

Mr. GARNER. Reserving the rigbt to object, and I do not intend to object, I would like to get some information from the gentleman from Connecticut.

As I understand froni members of the Committee on Agriculture, on this side of the Chamber, the Senate bill was ordered reported this morning with an amendment, that being the House bill modified with some language that was contained in the Senate bill. I want to -see this legislation facilitated, but it is going to be somewhat of a hand-

icap, I think. for gentlemen to intelligently debate this bill tmless they have a copy of the bill that will be reported.

So I take it that the gentleman will, as soon as possible, get a copy of the bill that will be l'eported by the Committee on Agriculture for the benefit of the Members of the House.

Mr. TILSON. I shall join with the gentleman from Texas 1n urging that this be done.

Mr. GARNER. lt being understood, as I said,- that the substance of the amendment is that it is the · House bill substituted for the Senate bill with a very small modification.

Mr. TILSON. That is my understanding. Mr. GARNER. Mr. Speaker, the matter then will betaken

up apparently, as I understand it, under the 5-minute rule, for amendment?

Mr. TILSON. I should ask that the first paragraph be read before the session ends to-day.

Mr. GARNER. And then it is the gentleman's purpose to follow it up at to-morrow's session. and consider the bill to its final passage?

Mr. TILSON~ Yes. Mr. GARNER. Under the general rules of the House of

Representatives? Mr. TILSON. Under the general rules. Mr. RAMSEYER. Do I understand general debate on the

bill will continue during the day, or is it limited to two hours?

Mr. TILSON. My request was that it be limited to to-day. Mr. RAMSEYER. I think the Speaker understood it to

be two hours. Mr. GARNER. The understJtnding was that this -entire

day was to be devoted to general debate and that beginning to-morrow the resolution would be taken up under the 5-minute rule.

Mr. TILSON. My request was that the remainder of to-day's session be availjl,ble for general debate, but that general debate be closed with to-day's session.

Mr. BANKHEAD. l was absent from the Chamber temporarily. Was any agreement made as to the control of time?

Mr. TTI..rSON. Th€re will be the usual division and control of the time.

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Connecticut desire to put any limitation on the time or that general debate will continue throughout the day?

Mr. TILSON. I ask that it shall continue no longer than the close of to-day's session. I shall be very glad to limit the time if the gentleman will agree.

Mr. GARNER. That means one thing. It must be understood by all gentlemen who are in this Chamber that if this agreement is entered into they will be entitled to some opportunity to debate this resolution. There are many Members who want to be heard upon it. If somebody should be unkind enough to say there was oo quorum present, that would mean a roll call, which would occupy about 40 minutes, Which would inean less than two hours' debate. I think it should be "gentlemanly" understood, if I may use that expression, that we will use the entire time from now until we adjourn-if need be until half past o or 6 o'clock-in general debate on this resolution.

Mr. TILSON. Would the gentleman be willing to fix the time at, say, three hours and a half?

Mr. GARNER. I would rather have it that way-three hours and a half.

Mr. TILSON. That there be not to exceed three hours and a half of general debate?

Mr. GARNER. That is all right. Now, as to the control of the time.

Mr. TILSON. One half of the time to be · controlled by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. HAUGEN] and the other half by the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. AsWELLJ.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the gentleman whether or not he has permission from the gentleman from IllinQis [Mr. SPROUL] to take this .action?

Mr. TILSON. That is not a proper parliamentary question.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will again l>Ut the request. in order that there may be no misunderstanding. The gen-

968 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 tleman from Connecticut asks unanimous consent that it - Mr. JONES of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous may be in order to move that the · House resolve itself into · consent that the committee amendment be read as an .the Committee of the Whole . House on the state of the original bill. Union for the consideration of Senate Joint Resolution 211; Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I object to that. that the debate be confined to the resolution and be lim- The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. ited to three hours and a half, to be equally divided and Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-controlled by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. HAUGEN] and sent that the amendment of the Committee on Agriculture the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. AsWELLJ. Is there be now read. objection? Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, I make the point of order

Mr. TILSON. It is understood that general debate closes that is not necessary. The Senate bill as amended by the with to-day's session and is not to exceed three hours and House commt~tee ought to be read, as the ru1es of the a half. House perm.it that.

The SPEAKER. And that general debate shall close Mr. TILSON. That is what we intend to do. to-day. Mr. STAFFORD. That is what I am asking.

Wh d th tl t t be Mr. BLANTON. It does not require unanimous consent Mr. GARNER. y oes e gen eman wan o so to do that. technical?

Mr. TILSON. This was the understanding. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read the bill as re-The SPEAKER. Is there objection? ported by the committee, with the amendment. Th b . ti The .Clerk read as follows: ere was no o Jec on. Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House Strike opt all after the resolving clause in the Senate bill and

insert the following: resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on "That the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized, for the state of the Union for the consideration of Senate the crop of 1931, to make advances or loans to farmers in the joint resolution (S. J. Res. 211) for the relief of farmers in drought and/ or storm stricken areas of the United States where

t tr. k f th U •ted he shall find that an emergency for such assistance exists, for the the drought andj or s orm s IC en areas 0 e m purchase of seed of suitable crops, fertilizer, feed for work stock States. and/ or fuel and oil for tractors, and; when necessary, to procur~

The motion was agreed to. such seed, fertilizer, feed, and fuel and oil, and/ or such other Accordingly the House resolved itself into the Committee purposes of crop production as may be prescribed by the Secretary

of Agriculture." of the Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of Senate Joint Resolution 211, with Mr. HALE Mr. TILSON. Mr. Chairman, I wish to call attention to in the chair. the fact that the last clause that was read by the Clerk is

the only addition to the so-called House resolution. You The CHAIRMAN. The House is in Committee of the understand it is a proposal to strike out all after the resolv-

Whole House on the state of the Union for the considera- ing clause of the Senate resolution and insert the House tion of Senate Joint Resolution 211, which the Clerk will resolution, with which all the Members are familiar, with report by title. - this one clause added.

The Clerk read the title of the resolution. Mr. JONES of Texas. Why does not the gentleman ask Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con- that it be considered as an original bill?

sent that the first reading of the resolution be dispensed Mr. TILSON. That is not necessary; the amendment is with. very simple.

Mr. BANKHEAD. Reserving the right to object, are Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent copies of the resolution available at the desk? that the last provision be again read.

Mr. STAFFORD. They are not. Mr. TILSON. That the provision that is not yet in print Mr. BANKHEAD. Then let us have it read. I object. be read again. The Clerk read the joint resolution, as follows: The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will read. Resolved, etc., That the Secretary ,of Agriculture is hereby The Clerk read as follows:

authorized for the crop of 1931 to make advances or loans to And when necessary to procure such seed, fertilizer, feed, and farmers in the drought and/or storm stricken areas of the United fuel and oil, and for such other purposes of crop production as States where he shall find that an emergency for such assistance may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture, and sell the exists.' for the purchase of food, seed of suitable crops, fertilizers, same to such farmers. Such advances, loans, or sales to be made feed for livestock and/or fuel and oil for tractors used for crop upon such terms and conditions and subject to such regulations production, and for such · other purposes of crop production as as the Secretary shall prescribe, including an agreement by each may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture. Such ad- farmer to use the feed and fertiUzer thus obtained by him for crop vances or loans shall be made upon such terms and conditions production. A first lien on all crops growing or to be planted and and subject to such regulations as the Secretary of Agriculture grown during the year 1931 shall, in the discretion of the Secreshall prescribe, including an agreement by each farmer to use tary of Agriculture, be deemed sufficient security for such loan, the seed and fertilizer thus obtained by him for crop production. advance, or sale. All such loans, a-dvances, and sales shall be made A first lien on all crops growing or to be planted and grown through such agencies as the Secretary of Agriculture may desigduring the year 1931 may, in the discretion of the Secretary of nate, and in such amounts as such agencies, with the approval of Agriculture, be deemed sufficient security for such loan or ad- the Secretary of Agriculture, may determine. For carrying out vance. All such advances or loans shall be made through su~h the purposes of this resolution, including all expenses and charges agencies as the Secretary of Agriculture may designate, and m incurred in so doing, there is hereby authorized to be approsuch amounts as such agencies, with the approval of the Secre- priated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise approtary of Agriculture may determine. For carrying out the pur- priated, the sum of $30,000,000. poses of this resolution, including all expenses and charges SEc. 2. Any person who shall knowingly make any material incurred in so doing, there is hereby authorized to be appro- false representation for the purpose of obtaining an advance, loan, priated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appro- or se.le, or in assisting in obtaining such advance, loan, or sale, priated, the sum of $60,000,000. under this resolution shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished

SEc. 2. Any person who shall knowingly make any materi.al by a fine of not exceeding $1,000 or by imprisonment not exceeding false representation for the purpose of obtaining an adva.nce, six months, or both. loan or sale or in assisting in obtaining such loan, advance, or t . sale' under 'this resolution shall, upon conviction thereof, be Mr. TILSON. Mr. Chairman, the report has jus come m pun'ished by a fine of not exceeding $1,000 or by imprisonment and the language is slightly different from what was read by not exceeding ·six months, or both. the Clerk. I hope the bill, as now officially reported by the

Mr. RAMSEYER. Mr. Chairman, has the bill been re- committee, may now be read. ported with the House amendment? · 'l'he CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the Clerk will read

Mr. HAUGEN. As ordered reported by the House com· the report. mittee. He has not reported the amendment. Mr. TILSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent

The CHAIRMAN .. The bill has not been read for amend- that the report may be printed in the RECORD. ment. This is the first reading of the bill. . The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. RAMSEYER. The bill has amendments, and we are Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, let me call the atten-. calling for · the amendments. · tion of the gentleman from Connecticut to the fact that the

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-.HOU.SE 969 Clerk has -already read into the RECORD two copies of this matter that we are not going to consider and in order that the REcoRn may not be encumbered I think steps should be taken to vacate the improvident reading of those bills~

Mr. TILSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks, and if so permitted, I shall strike out everything in regard to the reading of the unauthorized matter.

The cHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Connecticut asks unanimous consent to extend his remarks in the RECORD in the manner indicated. Is there objection?

Mr. BANKHEAD. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object,J do not think that is the way to reach this question.

Mr. TILSON. All right; if the gentleman has a better plan, go ahead.

Mr. BANKHEAD. I ask unanimous consent that as to the reading of the two former copies of the supposed bill, which it now develops are not correct, that that part of the proceedings be vacated so far as the Journal and RECORD are concerned and that the present, correct copy of the bill may be read and inserted in the RECORD.

Mr. TILSON. As the gentleman, of course knows, there is no record made in the Journal of what is done in committee. It will be in the REcoRD and it would not have gone in the RECORD if I had received permission to revise my remarks.

Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Chairman, reserving the right to object, this is the first time we have had the help of the distinguished floor leader and also the gentleman from Wisconsin IMr. STAFFORD] to assist the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture to frame their bill on the floor and get it properly before the committee, so I object. The RECORD ought to show the proceedings as they occurred.

The CHAIRMAN. Objection is heard. The Clerk will read the report.

Mr. STAFFORD. Mr. Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry. The CHAffiMAN. The gentleman will state it. Mr. STAFFORD. Was there objectio~ made to there

quest of the gentleman from Connecticut to revise and extend his remarks? ...

The CHAmMAN. There was objection. The Clerk read as follows: Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert~ " That the Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized, for the

crop of 1931, to make advances or loans to farmers in the drought and/ or storm stricken areas of the United States, where he shall tlnd that an emergency for such assistance exists, for the purchase of seed of suitable crops, fertilizer, feed for work stock, and/ or iuel and oil for tractors used for crop production, and when necessary to procure such seed, fertilizer. feed, and fuel and oil, and for such other purposes of crop production as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture, and sell the same to such fanners. Such advances, loans, or sales shall be made upon sueh terms and conditions and subject to such regulations -as the Secretary of Agriculture shall prescribe, including an agreement by each farmer to use the seed and fertilizer thus obtained by him for crop production. A first lien on all crops growing or to be planted and grown during the year 1931 shall, in the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture, be deemed su1ficient security for such loan, advance, or sale. All such loans, advances, and sales shall be made through such agencies as the Secretary of Agriculture may designate, and in such amounts as such agencies, with the approval of the Secretary of Agriculture, may determine. For carrying out the purposes of this resolution, including all expenses and charges incurred in so doing, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of $30,000,000.

"SEc. 2. Any person who shall knowingly make any material false representation for the purpose of obtaining an advance, loan, or sale, or in assisting in obtaining such advance, loan, or sale, under this resolution, shall, upon conviction thereof, be punished by a .fine of not exceeding $1,000 or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both."

Amend the title so as to read: "Joint resolution for the relief of farmers in the drought and/or storm stricken areas of the United States."

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Michigan such time as he may desire.

Mr. KETCHAl\1:. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the action of the House in taking up this bill so suddenly gives but a brief notice to members of the Committee on Agriculture, but I want to avail myself of the opportunity

that has been given by the chairman to offer a word of explanation of the legislation now before us.

I may say in brief that what we have. before us at this time is identically what we had before us ¢:1.y before yesterday in the form of a bill presented for a vote by the Rouse under a suspension of the rules, with the addition of one short sentence. The following language is added to the bill which was under consideration last Monday:

And for such other purposes of crop production as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Now, that is the language that was added to the bill, as reported by the Committee on Agriculture. In short, putting it in just a sentence, we bring to you a recommendation that $30,000,000 shall be authorized for the purposes set out in the bill, and these purposes were so well and thoroughly dis .. cussed the other day that I do not want to go into them again, except to say that food, which seemed to be the principal bone of contention is not included in the bill as . reported.

So, to all intents and purpos~s we have the situation before us identically as we had the other day with the exception of the added language that I have read, the essentia1 part of which is-

For such other purposes of crop production as may be prescnoed by the Secretary of Agriculture.

1 think that fairly states the _proposition before us. Mr. LANIQilORD of Georgia. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. I yield. Mr. LANKFORD of Georgia. Does the gentleman con

strue the additional language as giving the Secretary of Agriculture the .right to add food as one of the essentials?

Mr. KETCHAM. My own construction would not, of course, determine the matter, but I do not think the language was incorporated in the bill with that idea in mind; especially in view of the statement of the Secretary of Agriculture this morning. My own opinion would be that if the bill is passed as it comes from the Committee on Agriculture and goes to the Secretary of Agriculture for his construction

' and administration, that food would not be included in the interpretation that he would give to the act.

I think I may say this in behalf of all members of the committee, that we have been exceedingly anxious to have this legislation advanced to final passage and that the action that was taken the other day was taken with the idea that that was the most expeditious manner in which the legislation could be considered, and that if any differences dev~loped between the two Houses they could be readily adjusted in conference.

That action did not meet with the approval of the Honse, and did not secure a two-thirds vote. So, under the unanimous-consent proceeding, you have the bill before us to-day.

I think there is only one phase of the liituation that possibly ought to be cleared up. I think I understand that situation and I want to take the opportunity now to put a clear picture of this situation before the membership of the House.

It relates to the differences of opinion that seem to have arisen as to the origin of the recommendation of $60,000,000. I want, as best I can and from the information that I have, to make the understanding of the committee as to that matter clear to the membership of the House. This whole matter of relief first originated, according to my understanding, in a meeting of commissioners of agriculture which was held in the city of Washington some time early in the fall, in October, I think. It ought to be stated that this was not a meeting called by the Secretary of Agriculture for the purpose of considering this particular proposition, but was an annual meeting held by the commissioners of agriculture, at which time they considered problems of general interest. In view of the fact that the drought was so severe -and so widely extended it was a very natural thing that a discussion of this particular proposition should occupy considerable time; and so, naturally, the deliberations drifted in that direction, and out of that meeting came the idea of varying amounts, most of them above $60,000,000;

970 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 but, if formal resolutions were adopted by that body, I am not able now so to advise the House. So far as the ·Department of Agriculture is concerned, so far as the Federal Government is concerned, it had nothing whatsoever to do with these particular recommendations of these commissioners of agriculture who came together in an annual meeting and simply took up this matter of drought relief as one of the incidental features of their program.

Time went on, and that discussion, of course, was carried back to the various States, and then subsequently, at the request of the President of the United States, according to my understanding, the various governors of the States appointed drought commissioners, and on or about November 20 these drought commissioners came to the city of Washington and entered into a deliberation in cooperation with the Secretary of Agriculture, and, as I am advised, under his chairmanship, to give attention to this very problem. After some time spent · in a discussion of the whole question a series of resolutions were adopted. These resolutions have been printed in the RECORD, and I think you are all thoroughly familiar with them, but so far as our discussion this afternoon is concerned I think you are interested only in two features of those resolutions. First, did any statement found any-where in the resolutions adopted by this formal conference call for the express purpose of considering this prqposition which related to any specific amount of money, and the answer is that there is no mention of any sum of money whatsoever in the resolutions adopted by this formal conference. I think that matter is clear, and if there are any questions on that point I would be glad to answer them.

If there are none, the second point I want to make is this, that in the resolutions that were adopted there is no mention whatsoever of food, so that the bill as presented to you from the Committee on Agriculture we believe presents exactly the recommendations of this conference called by the Secretary of Agriculture, participated in by him, and during which time these resolutions that I have outlined to you were adopted. So the bill before you this afternoon is, as I previously stated. a restatement of the bill we had up the other day with only the one modification as I have indicated. namely:

For such other purposes of crop production.

· I think it is proper for me to state that the Secretary of Agriculture this morning, when questioned on that point, specifically stated what the attitud,e of the department would be regarding food as one of the elements to be considered in ·crop. production. He expressed himself as emphatically opposed to that particular proposition.

Mr. COLE. Did the Red Cross officials at any time appear before the gentleman's committee? ·

Mr. KETCHAM. No representative of the Red Cross appeared. It was in the mind of the committee this morning to ask the chairman of the National Red Cross to appear and present such discussion to us, but we have his statement, given to us by others, not personally, to the effect that in most cases of real need for food the matter could be handled by the Red Cross. · Mr. COLE. They gave the gentleman's committee that assurance?

Mr. KETCHAM. They gave us that assurance. 1\-Ir. COLE. Knowing what the gentleman does about the

situation, does the gentleman apprehend any danger of anybody starving if you do not incorporate food in this bill?

Mr. KETCHAM. I am very glad the gentleman has asked that question. I think one point has been missed here entirely in our consideration of the question. We all understand that there is need for food, of course, in certain ·sections of the South, but I have it upon the authority of a .goodly number of men who know the conditions down there accurately, and who I think, possibly, may participate in the debate, that the provisions of this bill are not intended to reach the particular group that is suffering, so far as food

. is concerned, and that by no possibility can they be reached by the terms of this bill. That is to say, the real stringency, so far as food is concerned, comes from those that by no manner of consideration could be brought within the limits

of the bill in the way of being granted a loan at all because they have no land. They have possibly a little bit of patch of ground and depend on it for the raising of garden vegetables, _but by no manner of construction could they qualif~ for a loan, and therefore the provisions of this bill could not reach them. They are the ones who would come within the purview of the Red Cross to secure what aid they could from that source.

Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman ~~? '

Mr. KETCHAM. Yes. Mr. PATTERSON. I do not know whether I understood

the gentleman but he spoke of those with no land. He does not mean to say, does he, that the man renting land and farming it can not borrow any of this money?

Mr. KETCHAM. What I had reference to was the people who are desperately in need of food who could not qualify under the terms of this bill and who could not secure other credit.

What I meant to say was that I do not believe this bill was intended to reach, nor can it be made to reach, the men who are really, according to representations that have been made, suffering for the want of food.

Mr. PATTERSON. That does not clear up in my mind the point. The gentleman does not mean that the land renter can not borrow this money to farm his land with?

Mr. KETCHAM. I mean that if he is in a position of a renter and has enough character and financial standing and backing, very likely the provision of the act already includes him.

Mr. PATTERSON. I am not talking about food. I am talking about his making a loan to make a crop. There are thousands of farmers in my district who are renters who will need this money.

Mr. JONES of Texas. That is covered by making a mortgage.

Mr. KETCHAM:. If he is in a position so that he can give the security that is required by the Department of Agriculture, then he can qualify, whether he is an owner or a renter.

Mr. PATTERSON. I wanted to have that cleared up, because I was afraid the gentleman left the impression that the renter could not borrow the money.

Mr. KETCHAM. I am sony if I did not make that clear. If he is able to give any sort of security, he can make the loan. I might borrow an expression used in the committee this morning, "Even a security that might be regarded as rather thin."

Mr. PATTERSON. Well, that is on his crop? Mr. KETCHAM. On his crop, but even that security

might be regarded as rather thin. However, the disposition of the Department of Agriculture would be to grant him a loan.

Mr. CRISP. Will the gentleman ~eld? Mr. KETCHAM. I will be glad to ~eld. Mr. CRISP. As far as the district which I have the honor

to represent is concerned, as well as practically all of the State of Georgia, we can not come under this bill because we have good crops, but no price for them. However, I am in favor of the bill because I want to assist other sections. My inquiry of the gentleman is this: Is it the intention of the committee in reporting the bill to prevent any funds loaned to be used to purchase food for humans?

Mr. KETCHAM. That is correct. Mr. CRISP. What provision is there in the bill and how

is it intended to prevent that being accomplished? When a man borrows $300 to make a crop for fertilizer, seed, and hay for his stock and he gets the money and his family needs clothing and something to eat, what is there to prevent him from taking that money and buying food for his family and clothes for his family rather than seed and fertilizer, and so forth?

Mr. KETCHAM. It seems to me that the gentleman from Georgia has indirectly answered his own question, and has at least completely satisfied me as to how every man from the South ought to vote on this bill; that is, to vote for it as it


is, without the mi!ntion of food, because .if the men in the South will do as the gentleman says, then it seems to· me we are safe in writing the law as it appears here, because I think every man who has given this matter any serious consideration will down in his heart say that it is a very wide departure and a very distinct step . on to dangerous ground to write into law the principle that the Government is to furnish food to the citizens of the United States under production legislation such as this.

Mr. CRISP. My friend has not answered the question. What provisions of the resolution prevent that thing being done?

Mr. KETCHAM. I think the provisions would be up to the regulations that might be written or might be worked out by the Department of Agriculture. Of course, nothing hard and fast can be written into the law governing this particular matter. It would have to be up to the good judgment of the Department of Agriculture, and after our experience of former years there is no question but what they would deal fairly with the situation.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for his presentation of that view, which! think completely answers any reservation that any man from the South may have on this bill in voting for the bill as it is.

Mr. OLIVER of Alabama. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. I yield to the gentleman. Mr. OLIVER of Alabama. The gentleman's position is

that since unquestionably the parties who may borrow the money could use it for the purchase of food and that .those lending the money know at the time the loan is made, that fact should remove all insistence of putting the word " food " into the bill?

Mr. KETCHAM. Well, I do not think I would care to go that far. I think I have made myself reasonably clear, but I am not the administrator.

Mr. OLIVER of Alabama. That is my understanding of what the gentleman said. Does the gentleman recognize the fact that in many parts of our country the policy obtains, that early in the year one applies for a loan to make a crop and executes a mortgage on all crops to be grown that year? This becomes a first lien on all crops produced that year; and ·certainly you must recognize the importance of permitting the loan contract, secured by a first mortgage, to cover food, seed, fertilizer, and whatever may be required to make the crop.

Mr. KETCHAM. If the gentleman will permit, I would answer the gentleman's suggestion in this way, that, of course, if the word " food " is included, then every man who makes application for a loan might, without any reservation, use a part of that money for the purchase of food. If the word " food " is not included, it would seem very clear to me that in certain scattered, isolated, or possibly extremely meritorious cases, if I were administering the law, I might not regard the expenditures with such a degree of care as I otherwise might. I trust that makes my attitude of mind as clear as it is necessary to state it.

Mr. COX. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. I yield. Mr. COX. Is not the gentleman saying that that admis

sion convicts the House of insincerity in legislating the language in which the bill is written?

Mr. KETCHAM. No. I would not so regard it. Mr. GLOVER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. I yield. Mr. GLOVER. I notice the bill as reported uses the lan

guage " purchasing feed for work stock," and in the Senate bill it is "purchasing feed for livestock." Which language do you carry in the present bill we are considering?·

Mr. KETCHAM. Feed for work stock. Mr. GLOVER. Then, if that is true, if a man had a

Jersey cow and wanted to get feed in order to produce milk for his children, he could not do so under this bill?

Mr. KETCHAM. That was given very careful consideration in the committee and thoroughly debated pro and con, and it was determined to leave the language as it is. It was determined to leave the language as it is for the guid-

ance of those who are given the responsibility of administering it, and I dare say they would administer it as close to the language here as they possibly could.

Mr. GLOVER. The gentleman does not mean that even the administrators of this law would have the right to prescribe a rule which would fix the punishment?

Mr. KETCHAM. No. . Mr. ANDRESEN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. Yes. Mr. ANDRESEN. In the discussion of this legislation be

fore the Committee on Agriculture the question arose as to whether or not the amendment proposed by the committee would cover summer fallowing for the crop year 1931. Does the gentleman think that summer fallowing will be covered under the provisions of the amendment?

Mr. KETCHAM. It would seem to me that the language "and for such other purposes of crop production as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture " might be interpreted to include that particular proposition.

Mr. ANDRESEN. Does not the gentleman believe that was the intention of the committee?

Mr. KETCHAM. I would not want to speak for the committee, but, as far as I am concerned, that would be my ·own feeling about it, as one member.

Mr. KVALE. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. Yes. Mr. KVALE. The gentleman has made a fairer statement

than I have heard come from anyone representing the committee's standpoint in that he said he did not believe there ·would be any effort to apply too strictly the terms of the law in case the word "food" were omitted and that in case the administrator of the law came up against a c~c:e of dire necessity he would apply the same rule. Now, in connection with the matter brought up by the gentleman from Arkansas, the distinction between work animals and livestock, in case a Jersey cow nibbled some feed from the manger of a neighboring animal, would there be any attempt to inflict penalties?

Mr. KETCHAM. Well, that is a rather difficult question to answer; in fact, I am rather inclined to think it answers itself.

Mr. KVALE. I will ·say to the gentleman from Michigan that I offer it in all seriousness, because I can conceive of cases where there are very simple accommodations for the care of stock on a farm and that there · might be great difficulty in separating work animals from livestock. ·

Mr. KETCHAM. I would say to the gentleman that if he were acting as the representative of the Government and were prosecuting somebody who had been haled into court for a violation which the gentleman suggests, how far does he think he would get with an ordinary jury upon a propo-sition of that kind. ·

Mr. KVALE. I do not think very far. Mr. LOZIER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. Yes. Mr. LOZIER. I presume that in the administration of

this act formal application would be required, in which the applicant would be required to state the purposes for which the loan is desired. If an applicant makes an application stating that he wants the loan for the purchase of seed and fertilizer and seed for work stock and he gets the loan upon those representations then, as I understand this act, if he should use or should have in mind using any of that loan for the purpose of purchasing food he would be subject to prosecution under section 2 of this act and subject to a fine of not exceeding $1,000. Is that correct?

Mr. KETCHAM. I think the act speaks for itself in that matter, and I leave it to the gentleman himself to determine about how far such a prosecution would get in that regard.

Mr. JONES of Texas. That would be making false representations for the purpose of securing it, but that does not apply to the use which may be made ofJ.t afterwards.

Mr. LANKFORD of Georgia. That applies to present and past event~ and not to future events.

Mr. KETCHAM. Yes.

972 CONGRESSIONAL ·RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 -

Mr. GREGORY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. That matter was also discussed in the Mr. KETCHAM. Yes. committee, and as a result of all the discussion, while that Mr. GREGORY. I notice this language on page 2 of the viewpoint was urged by some members of the committee, it

House resolution: was felt that this was as far as we ought to extend the exact A first lien on all crops growing or to be planted and grown dur- language of the bill; and if there are particular cases where

1ng the year 1931, shall, in the discretion of the Secretary of Agri- the .language .of. the act, under the new language that is culture, be deemed sutncient security for such loan, advance, o . included, "and for such other purposes of crop production sale. . as may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture " would

I would like to have the gentleman's interpretation of the cover the situation, all well and good; but it was felt this is .words" growing or to be planted and grQwn during the year .as far as the committee should go in the exact language 1931." My reason for asking that question is this: In the that is written in the .bill. district I have the honor to represent _a great number 'of Mr. FINLEY. A strict construction of that langl:tage then farmers are now engaged in the raising of strawberries. would not include poulty, breeding stock, or livestock, other Their plants were all destroyed last year because of the than for work purposes? drought, and if they apply for a loan during the year 1931 Mr. KETCHAM. A strict construction would not, as I to replant their gardens in strawberries there can not be a understand it. crop harvested during the year 1931. Could they apply for Mr. ARNOLD. Will the gentleman yield? a loan under this act? Mr. KETCHAM:. I yield to the gentleman from Dlinois.

Mr. KETCHAM. It would seem to me that the construe- Mr. ARNOLD. Some States do not permit a mortgage on tion which would meet that situation applies likewise to the crops before they are planted. What arrangement will be situation developed in the State of Washington, where they made with respect to people in those States who seek to have the system of summer fallowing. I believe that the secure the benefit of these advances? • .language- Mr. KETCHAM. I do not know that I am just clear as to

And for such other purposes of crop production as may be pre- what the gentleman is referring. scribed by the Secretary of Agriculture- Mr. ARNOLD. In some States there is no State law per-would cover that satisfactorily. mitting a mortgage on crops not planted. The Secretary of

Mr. GREGORY. Why would not the language in line 6 Agriculture has authority here to require a lien on the crops be better if it were changed to this: "or to be planted that are to be planted. In those States that do not recognize and/or grown during the year 1931 "? the validity of a mortgage of that kind, what arrangement

Mr. KETCHAM. Of course, there are many amendments will be made with respect to the people of those States which possibly might be suggested, but the gentleman appre- securing the benefit of the advances? ciates the necessity of getting action upon this .resolution at Mr. KETCHAM. My understanding is that the States are the earliest possible moment, and the making of these refine- not involved in this; that this is a matter between the ments to apply to certain specific conditions, I think, should Federal GOvernment and the individual who enters into the be left to the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture contract. This is a first lien upon his crop. What particuunder the general language to which I haye made reference. lar plan the Secretary of Agriculture has to care for cq.ses It seems to me that is the better procedure, because if you of that sort I do not know. Not being a lawyer, I am not should get into the field of amendments there is no telling able to tell the gentleman about that. , to what length we will spin this program out. Mr. ARNOLD. If the State law does not recognize the

Mr. GREGORY. Then I think the administrative branch validity of a lien on a crop before it is planted, how can the of the Government should understand the purpose of Con- Federal Government step in and take a lien upon the crop gress in enacting this law, because that is quite important before it is planted? -in my district, where, with reference to strawberries, there Mr. KETCHAM. I am not able to answer the gentleman can be no crop harvested during 1931. · specifically on that point, because that has not come up in

Mr. KETCHAM. I would say to the gentleman that the discussions of the committee, and I will leave the anwhile I am not to be the administrator of this act, still swer to some member of the committee who is a member of it is my own notion that this act is designed to be of the the legal fraternity. -very greatest assistance possible to all people who are in Mr. McCLINTIC of Oklahoma. Will the gentleman yield? dire need as the result of the drought, and if a crop goes Mr. KETCHAM. I beg the gentleman's pardon, but there over into another year it would seem to me that under the are quite a number of other members of the committee who language suggested here it would come within the purview want to present various phases of this question, and I do not of this act. That is as far as I can go. feel that I ought to trespass further upon the time of the

Mr. SANDERS of Texas. Will the gentleman yield? committee or upon their time. Mr. ·KETCHAM. Yes. Mr. McCLINTIC of Oklahoma. I want to ask the gentle-Mr. SANDERS of Texas. With reference to the amount man a question about which I am sure he has information.

to be appropriated, whether it is to be $25,000,000 or Mr. KETCHAM. I yield to the gentleman and then I must $60,000,000, I notice that in the report of the committee yiel<l the floor. they have added the amount necessary and that it totals . Mr. McCLINTIC of Oklahoma. This bill carries $5,000,000 $71,500,000. to take care of storm-stricken areas; does · the gentleman

There are 12 Stat~s that do not name any amount, but have in mind any particular section or any particular area are clamoring for an appropriation. Does not the gentleman where that sum of money would be applicable? think, in view of that situation, that $60,000,000 would be a Mr. KETCHAM. In reply to the gentleman's question, my very small amount to appropriate? understanding is that the bill does not carry a specific

Mr. KETCHAM. We reported our bill based upon the ·very amount for storm-stricken· areas, but that $5,000,000 was best evidence that was submitted to us for consideration, added to the original $25,000,000 and the original language and we agreed upon $30,000,000. Consequently that must amended to include storm-stricken areas, with no definite stand as the view of the committee, and it is my view of the designation of any specific amount for the storm-stricken situation. areas.

Mr. FINLEY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCLINTIC of Oklahoma. Then I want to ask the Mr~ KETCHAM. I yield to the gentleman from Kentucky. gentleman this question: There was recently a very severe Mr. FINLEY. Every farmer must carry a lot of stock cyclone in or near the central part of Oklahoma, in which a

that can not be called work stock-breeding stock or young number of citizens lost their lives, and quite a good deal of stock, calves, colts, and in some cases poultry farmers carry property was destroyed and other devastations brought nothing except poultry. Would this bill, as written, include about; would those ~citizens be eligible to receive relief be-feed for stock of that sort? ·cause of this legislation if it .is passed in its present form?

•

1930- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 973 Mr. KETCHAM. · If they. would come 'under the classifica- ·

tion of storm stricken-and the description of the gentleman would seem to indicate that-! can see no reason why they should not.

In conclusion, may I add just this word on behalf of the committee? We believe that this is a very conservatively drawn measure. We think it meets the majority opinion of the House of Representatives as expressed in the vote given the other day when, by 205 to 159-which was a majority, but not a two-thirds majority-we expressed ourselves as being favorable to the language of the House bill, which, as I said in the beginning, has only been modified by the inclusion of this one phrase, to which, I am sure, no friend of either the inclusion of food or a higher amount could possibly object. For this rea.Son it seems to me we ought to have a speedy vote and a unanimous vote, and I want to thank the members of the committee for their consideration of this question at this time and say to them that in bringing up the legislation at this time we are doing the very best we can to meet the critical situation which we realize all too well has developed in the Southland.

Mr. HASTINGS: I would like to ask the gentleman one question, if I may. What was the latest evidence that the committee had before it upon which it based its judgment in inserting $30,000,000 instead of $60,000,000?

Mr. KETCHAM. The latest statement we had was from the Secretary of Agriculture, who appeared before us this morning at 10.30.

Mr. HASTINGS. I was there, and I did not hear him discuss the question of amount.

Mr. KETCHAM, My recollection is that he specifically stated the amount.

Mr. HASTINGS. I heard his statement before the Committee on Agriculture this morning, but I did not hear him state any amount.

Mr. KETCHAM. I do not happen to have the record here, but I think not once but several times he stated specifically the amount.

Mr. HASTINGS. I am not talking about his opinion, but what evidence had the committee collected for its consideration? I mean upon what evidence did the committee base its action?

Mr. KETCHAM. Since the former hearings we have had no hearing except the statement by the Secretary of Agriculture .

Mr. TUCKER. Will the· gentleman yield? Mr. KETCHAM. I will yield once more. Mr. TUCKER. I did not catch the phrase the gentleman

referred to which has been added to the bill. Mr. KETCHAM <reading): For such other purposes of crop production as may be prescribed

by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Mr. TUCKER. Then that is left to the Secretary of Agriculture?

Mr. KETCHAM. The construction of that phrase is left to him.

Mr. TUCKER. It leaves it to him to s~y what are neces-sary and not to the House.

Mr. KETCHAM <reading): AB may be prescribed by the Secretary of Agriculture.

Mr. BURTNEss. I would like to ask the gentleman what is the committee's construction of that phrase?

Mr. KETCHAM. I do not· want to interpret that except to say that it means exactly what it says. There might not be some particular conditions {)f crop production that would not bring such condition within the other language, and the committee took care of it in this way. In effect, this is an "elastic clause."

Mr. ADKINS. If the gentleman will permit, there may be some local conditions arising in some locality with ref-

. eren-ce to summer fallowing, and the Secretary of Agricultw·e might know these conditions and say it was necessary to allow for gasoline or something of that kind, necessary in summer fallowing to put the land in condition, and not strictly crop production.

Mr. BURTNESS. Even though it was not for the crop of 1931. I would be afraid that under the language of this bill it would be construed broadly as relating simply to the crop of 1931.

Mr. KETCHAM. May I say again, as I said in the beginning, that we appreciate the attitude of the House in permitting this legislation to come up for · consideration at this time, and thus fairly and quickly meet the issue on this side of the aisle and relieve the anxiety .on the other side, and I hope this general interest will manifest itself in a well-nigh unanimous vote for the bill as reported by the committee. [Applause.]

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. JoNEs].

Mr. JONES of Texas. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, -this drought for which this legislation is presented is the worst that this country has seen for at least a half century, and probably in its history. It has come at a time when the country is going through a great depression. That combination makes it a great emergency, and, while I did not favor the first program that was adopted in 1922, there have been five such programs for which my people have helped to provide. The precedent has been fully establi$hed, and I think, under the circumstances, the legislation is justified

There has been considerable discussion by some of the speakers about what the measure should include. The average amount that has been loaned to the individual farmer under the previous measures was $25{). Under this bill the average farmer will not receive more than $300. With that money he must buy seed, feed, and fertilizer, so that what little dribbles he may be able to use for food will be little if any, so that the question of whether food shall be included is not the important question.

·The thing I am interested in is having the amount sufficient to really handle the situation. They talk about its being the same bill that came up last Monday, except the additional words which give the Secretary of Agriculture the discretion to use for such other purposes for production as he may see fit. It is the same bill, but there is a vast difference in that an opportunity will now be given for the House to express its judgment. As it was presented last Monday, it was the will of a few men who were undertaking to make the House swallow what they presented with all its limitations or have nothing. When -this House has considered the facts and determined what amount is necessary to handle this situation, in a free, untrammeled way as fittingly becomes Representatives in the American Congress, I am perfectly willing to abide by that judgment. Suspension of the rules in the passage of a measure was never intended to be used, it seems to me, as it was attempted to be used the other day. It is intended to be used toward the close of a session, when it is necessary in order to secure the passage of legislation, to have quick action, or at a time when it is practically the unanim.ous consent of the. House.

We had had two weeks and the matter had not been brought up, and I could not see that a suspension of the rules was warranted. However, that is water over the mill. I believe that this House should vote the $60,000,000, and I am going to give you the reasons why. ~s is merely an authorization. There are 22 States involved. There are 80,00U families in the State of Arkansas, according to reports from that State, that need to get under the benefits of this bill. There are 14,000 families in one section of my State and 30,000 in another. If you add up the various estimates, it will run two or three times the amount shown here.

Mr. SANDERS of Texas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentle-man yield? ·

Mr. JONES of Texas. Yes . Mr. SANDER~ of Texa~. On the question of the amount

a report was submitted to the gentleman's committee from various States and they named the minimum amount.s, and if those amounts are added up it makes $71,500,000, and there are 12 States more to be included, which have desig-

•

·974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 nated no amount. In view of those facts $60,000,000 would not be sufficient. .

Mr. JONES of Texas. I think $60,000,000 is the minimum. The $71,500,000 the gentleman refers to is given under an estimate which shows that they would need more than those various amounts, and then they were asked to state the minimum the States could get along with, and the aggregate of those minimum amounts runs to more than $60,-000,000. The various commissioners of agriculture of the various States and the drought commissioners finally agreed that $60,000,000 was the minimum figure with which they could get along. This is merely an authorization. Suppose we make it $60,000,000 and the Committee on Appropriations in its wisdom should not see fit to appropriate that amount, ·and along in February, when the matter is in full swing, the Secretary of Agriculture should see that the amount appropriated is not sufficient, all that will be necessary for him to get the additional amount would be to go before the Committee on Appro-priations and ask that it be put in the deficiency appropriation bill and the matter could be handled very expeditiously; but if we put a limitation in this bill of $30,000,000 to cover both drought and food relief, and then toward the end of the session the Secretary finds he has not enough to properly make these loans, it would be necessary to have more legislation, to be followed by an appropriation bill, with discussions and hearin.gs, which would make it impossible to carry it through probably.

Mi-. CRISP. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. Yes. · Mr. CRISP. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr.

KETCHAM], who very frankly and candidly discussed the bill, left the impression upon my mind that these drought commissioners in their meeting here did not specify · any particular sum of money that was adequate for this relief. He was arguing whether $30,000,000 or $60,000,000 should be authorized, and he said that nowhere in the resolutions is any specific amount mentioned. That created the impression in my mind that no sum of money was named. The gentleman from Texas now says that those gentlemen recommended $60,000,000 as a minimum.

Mr. JONES of Texas. That confusion may have arisen in this way. The commissioners of the various States did not mention any amount in their annu:1l meeting, but the drought-relief representatives who came here later agreed that $60,000,000 was the lowest amount with which they could get along. The Secretary of Agriculture specifically requested them, he said this morning, not to put that amount in their resolutions, but they agreed, as shown here in the report, that $60,000,000 would be the minimum that

·they could possibly hope to get by with in the making of these loans.

Mr. KETCHAM. Has not the gentleman from Texas just turned those expressions around? Was it not the group of commissioners of agriculture who agreed on $60,000,000, and was there any agreement expressed in resolutions anywhere to the effect that these representatives . appointed at the request of the President ever agreed on $60,000,000?

Mr. JONES of Texas. The drought representatives did not put it in their resolution, out of deference to the Secretary's request, but they all understood that it would be at least $60,000,000.

At any rate, their total estimates run far above that, so that $60,000,000 is a cutting down rather than an increase of those estimates.

Mr. KETCHAM. That might be true, but in their resolutions they made no mention of the amount.

Mr. JONES of Texas. The Secretary said this morning that he specifically requested them not to mention the amount in their resolutions; but I was up here when these drought representatives appeared, and I talked to several of them, and they all said $60,000,000 was the least, and that they had agreed that $60,000,000 · was the minimum that should be provided.

Mr. KETCHAM. If the gentleman had been sent up here as a commissioner from his State-

Mr. JONES of Texas. Not a commissioner, but I refer to the drought-relief representatives.

Mr. KETCHAM. Then if the gentleman had been sent here as a drought-relief representative, would he not have stated that figure as strongly as he could for the State of Texas?

Mr. JONES of Texas. They probably did; but if the gentleman will add up these various sums and the number of farmers he will find that it will take $150,000,000 or $200,-000,000. I think the representative from my State was very conservative.

Mr. KETCHAM. When they adopted their resolutions they did not say anything about the amount.

Mr. JONES of Texas. Of course they did not, at the request of the Secretary of Agriculture. · They had made their various estimates and they were more than that amount; the Secretary of Agriculture specifically requested that they leave out the amount. Naturally, out of courtesy to him, they did so. But remember, the Secretary of Agriculture did not tell them that he expected to cut down their estimates. Nor did he ever suggest to them that he expected to recommend only $30,000,000 to take care · of 24 different States.

Mr. ASWELL. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. I yield. Mr. ASWELL. The Secretary of Agriculture asked them

not to put in the amount because he said it would likely be much more than $60,000,000. I was present.

Mr. JONES of Texas. But here is a list of the various parties representing the various States, and you can take the number of farmers, which was given after a careful survey, or the different groupings of States and you will find it amounts to much more than even that amount.

Mr. RAGON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. I yield. Mr. RAGON. I think my State has been hurt more than

any of the others. The Department of Agriculture shows that there are only 2 of the 75 counties that will have as much as 30 per cent of an average feed crop. I have been over the entire State. The Red Cross for. the last 60 or 90 days has been in there working as much as they could toward furnishing feed for fall pastures and gardens. I do not believe you could take $15,000,000 and go into the State _ of Arkans.as and do what is proposed to be done under this bill.

Mr. JONES of Texas. I thank the gentleman, and I have no doubt his statements are accurate.

The Secretary of Agriculture said in his statement this morning, in response to the direct question, that if the money were appropriated and were not needed for the purpose indicated in the bill it would not be used.

It would not be fair to go into a drought-stricken area and lend to part of the farmers who were in need and not lend to others, if they complied with the same conditions. It would not be quite fair to go into one section that was in need and not go into another section that was in similar need. It would not be good business, if it required $300 to enable a farmer to secure his feed, seed, and fertilizer, to loan him only $100, which, if they had to spread it over too large an area and on too thin a basis, would be the result. It might in some instances be almost like letting him have nothing. It seems to me if we are going to adopt a program at all we should adopt an adequate program; adopt a program that will enable the Secretary of Agriculture to really handle the situation.

It is conceded by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. KETCHAM] that the commissioners themselves recommended $60,000,000 as the minimum limit. The drought representatives who came later compiled figures far above that amount. Then they eventually had $60,000,000 in their minds, because three of them came to my office after the meeting and said they had tentatively agreed among themselves that $60,000,000 was the minimum limit. They said that no specific amount ,had been put in the bill because of the request of the Secretary of Agriculture. At no time

•

•


until this morning have I evei" heard fall from his lips a single statement or a single implication except the -general statement which he gave out since this matter came to a head that indicated that he expected to cut the :recommendation to $25,000,000 or $30,000,000.

Mr. BURTNESS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. I yield. · Mr. BURTNESS. I am not intere~ted in what the Sec

retary of Agriculture may have said. Mr. JONES of Texas. Perhaps not, but--The CHAIRMAN. The time oi the gentleman from Texas

has expired. Mr. ASWELL. I yield to the gentleman from Texas five

additional minutes. Mr. BURTNESS. When these commissioners from_ the

various States talked about the $60,000,000 was it then contemplated, in using that figure, that loans for food wei"e to be included? That is, does the $60,000,000 represent their thought not only for feed and seed but also for food?

Mr. JONES of Texas. They had this in their minds, the necessities of the case, I think. without particular reference to whether food should be included. I do not think the resolution at that time had been drafted. They appointed a subcommittee to work with the department in an endeavor to arrive at a resolution, but it had not been in any particular form, and the main thing that was under discussion was the feed, seed, and fertilizer although I can not answer specifically the question to which the gentleman refers.

Mr. BURTNESS. Would it not be fair to assume that the exact amount that should be carried would depend largely upon the question as to whether loans for food are included or excluded?

Mr. JONES of Texas. I do not believe it would make a difference of any very great amount whether food was included or not, because, if it is intended only to loan a farmer about $300, from which be must buY feed, seed, and fertilizer, there would be little left for any other purpose. Whether you include food or not, there will not be much of it used for food, when he must buY his seed, feed, and fertilizer. That is as simple as A, B, C. When we are making an authorization to cover 24 .State's the provision should be adequate.

Mr. BRIGGS. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. I yield. Mr. BRIGGS. Does the gentleman not believe that a mis

leading impression is created upon the minds of the people of the country with reference to these appropriations, whereas it is specifically provided that it is a loan to be secured by the property of the farmer? This is not a gift to the farmer or the agricultural interests of the United States.

Mr. JONES of Texas. Of course, it is R.ot. As a matter of fact, it is the basic industry of America, and if it were not for the farmer, none of us could be fed

Now we are going to lend him a pittance of $300 and take a first mortgage on his whole year's work and on his whole year's production. He is required to put up a first lien. If he has loans from bankers or others, they must give way and give a first lien on the crops the farmer produces. That is not a dole. It has been referred to here as a dole. Why, bless your hearts, suppose you went to a bank and wanted to borraw $300 and you gave your note or a first mortgage on your production for a year? Even if you did use a part of it for the purchase of food, would that be a dole?

Mr. BRIGGS. It would not. And is not that a part of the practice of many farmers throughout the country, namely, that of borrowing money during the winter months for the purpose of supplying themselves with food as wen as with feed?

Mr. JONES of Texas. I want to say it is a rank absurdity to refer to it as a dole. Nobody but a New Haven farmer would so refer to it.

Mr. TUCKER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. Yes.

Mr. TUCKER~ Is not the question of whether it is a gift or a loan left by this resolution in the hands of the Secretary of .Agriculture?

Mr . .JONES of Texas. I do not think so. Mr. TUCKER. If we have any opinion on that subject

as to what this thing ought to be, a gift or a loan, why do we not say it?

Mr. JONES of Texas. Well, we do say it, and we say it in specific words in the resolution. It is that it shall be a loan. It is so stated, that it shall be a loan for production purposes. There is no question about that. Here are papers and statements from Doctor Warburton as to the method in which he will handle this matter, together with a note and mortgage which the farmers have signed in connection with loans that have been mad€ heretofore, together with a lot of questions that make him give his life's history. He signs the note and gives a first lien, lf first mortgage, on all his production, and on all the labor of himself and his family for a year for this Joan. So you can not term it anything else but a loan.

Mr. RAGON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. JONES of Texas. Yes. Mr. RAGON. In that connection, what has been the

experience of the Department of Agriculture in the collec-tion of these loans in the past? ·

Mr. JONES of Texas. They have collected all the way from 65 to 90 per cent. There are one or two later loans which do not run that high, but they have not finished the collections.

Mr. RAGON. What does the gentleman mean by that? Mr. JONES of Texas. There have been several measures

passed since 1922. The collections under some of them have been better than under others. The details of the handling of all these loans are set out in the report of the committee.

In some of the sections there have been two or . three years' drought. The conditions are desperate. They are substantial farmers and not the ne'er do wells. If given an opportunity, the most of them will, in my judgment, make their payments, and a great service will be rendered at little cost to the Government.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Texas has expired.

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. McKEowN].

Mr. McKEOWN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, we are to-day dealing with a matter of great importance. In dealing with our own people there has always been a disposition on the part of those in the House to split hairs and to be so careful that we did not lose anything. Whenever we are dealing with our own people or with a measure calling for relief in the United States there is always. a lot of opposition and attempts to curtail it and reduce it as far as possible, but when it comes to dealing with foreign people we are the most generous people in all the world. When it came to dealing with Russia we gave Russia, without any quibbling, $20,000,000 to buy corn, to buy seed, and to buY milk. Then we gave tllem $4,000,0.00 to buy medicine.

Mr. MANSFIELD. We did not even take a lien on that loan.

Mr. McKEOWN. No. That was not a loan, but it was a gift, and they were not mortgaging anything.

We now come to the question of dealing with our own situation, and the intimation has been made that all the poverty is down South. Well, all the poverty in this country is not down South. There is a lot of it down there and there is a lot of it in other parts of the country. There are a lot of men in the industrial centers of the country who are poverty stricken at this time.

Mr. DYER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McKEOWN. Yes. Mr. DYER. The gentleman refers to the cities, There is

unemployment and suffering in the cities which you do not propose to take care o.f. They do not get anything out of this appropl'iatio.n.

•

976 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 : . Mr. McKEOWN. · 'They will not get anything out of it-but going-to ask them to confine the feed to their livestock. I this is a loan-but cities~ are complaining ·about the burden will grant you that if this were not a tremendous emergency they are having to can-y. I want to say this to the ·gentle- I would gp along ·with your ·committee on your ·proposition man, that if you really want to do something, without put- about work stock, but ·here you· are asking men who have ting ·an additional burden on the taxpayers of this country, not any feed, who have not any money, who have not any then reduce the salaries of all Government employees, "in- food, to not feed anything but the horses they work in the eluding Members of Congress, in this country getting above field and let their milclt cows, upon which they must depend $3,500 by 2Y2· per cent, and take that money and tum· it into to feed theii wives and children, starve to death, and, in the great community chests . of this country; so as to take addition to that, you do not allow them any money with care of the people who have to have food. · which to buy -food.

We hear much said · about doles, doles, doles. Some say I say to you gentlemen that you should use your judgment. that England has ruined itself -through doles. If England You are the elected Representatives of the people in your had not given the dole there would have been no English districts, and if the recommendations of the Budget do not Government to-day. England is wise in her generation and meet your approval it is your bounden duty as the Reprek.nows how to preserve her government. sentative of yoti.r district to say so upon the floor of this . You can not reason with men when they are· hungry, and House by your vote. whenever you hold out hope to the American people that you No ·hann· can come to this Government, because the can pass legislation that will return prosperity to this coun- money 'is ·left entirely in the ·hands · of the Secretary of try you are holding. out a false hope, because under the Agriculture, and the Secretary of Agriculture is responsible. economic conditions of the world there will be no return of "Ite will not lend this money in e'xcess of the amount· that prosperity, in my judgment, within the next few months. ought to be ·lent, and you gentlemen know it. So why do

Now, what do you propose to do? Do you propose to make we. have this controversy? · · this sufficient to give the people of · this country an opportu- I want to say here and now that the best thing fo'r this nity to be taken care of? You are not giving any money country would be for the Congress to pass all necessary legis·away. You may lose a little on this deal, but you are not lation that we can agree upon to relieve this emergency and giving any of it away. You are lending this money an~ tak- then close our mouths and quit talking about the bad condi-ing the best security you can get. tions in . this country and give the people a: chance to go to

Mr. TARVER. Will the gentleman yield? work and work out their own destiny. We should give them Mr. McKEOWN. I yield. whatever· relief we · can and do it quickly and get through Mr. TARVER. In view of · the statement made by the with it:

speaker who just preceded the gentleman relative to the . A number of gentlemen here have talked about the food adoption of an adequate program, and in view of the dis- question . . What do you propose_ to do in this legislation? tressed condition of agriculture throughout the country, not Do you propose to go back home and say to your constituents, only in the drought and storm stricken areas but elsewhere " I voted up there to feed your jackass, but I would not vote and everywhere, does the gentleman think that any program to fe~d your. children"? Gentlemen, it is preposterous to which proposes to include only the farmers in the drought permit anyone to come here and seek to put you in that kind and storm stricken areas is an adequate one? of situation, and I do not believe you men are going· to be

Mr. McKEOWN. No; and I will say to the gentleman-- put in such a position . . You are entitled to sit in this House Mr. TARVER. Why should it not be extended to the and you are entitled to· exercise your rights as the Repre-

entire agricultural area of the country? sentatives of your people. Mr. McKEOWN. I will say to the gentleman, I stand Now, my friends, what is so wrong with the word" food"

here ready to do my part in any way I can to pass proper that you will not allow this to be done lawfully? ·What do legislation to relieve the unemployment situation to the you propose to do? · One of the things that has brought the extent that human beings do . not starve for lack of food in this country of plenty, and that their wives and children prohibition questi_on in this country so much to the fore

front · is. the hypocri.Sy that has been practiced in the name do not go naked in this country where there is so much to of prohibition, and you are now going to stamp these farm-be had and we have so much overproduction. ers as hypocrits and make them stand up here, in their

Now, why should we quibble here? What is this issue? necessity, and swear that they will not buy food with this It is not an issue between the President and the Congress; money, and yet you know that these men are not going to it is not an issue between the Secretary of Agriculture and let their wives and children starve- to death. They would the Congress; it is an issue between the Bureau of ·the Budget and the people who come here and ask for this not be worthy to be American husbands and fathers if they

-did that. · -help. It is a question of whether or not you are going to ·let the Bureau of the Budget, acting within its own rights, This whole matter is a sane proposition that does not call I grant you, but without any information, arbitrarily cdme for any scientific information. It just calls for good, hard, in here and put their judgment against the judgment of .common sense, ·and how can the Treasury of the United the best men in the States who have come here and made States be hurt if you gentlemen make ample authorization? "their report. I do not know the character ·of the men from The chief responsibility comes back to you again when the the other states that made such reports, but I will say that Committee on Appropriations brings in its recommendation. :Mr. Puterbaugh, the gentleman from my State, is one · of Then you will be called upon to vote, and I will say frankly the soundest business men and one of the safest men in our to you gentlemen that if you will give us the authorizaticn, state, and he said· to us, " I will not go to Washington and if the committee· comes back after they have looked int o the be a party to any plan to filch money out of the Treasury matter and finds that· we can get along with $25,000,000, I of t he United States except what is absolutely necessary, will be one to go along with you on the $25,000,000. [Apand $3 per acre is enough to make these crops." They have plause.J come here and made their request, and we have gone to The CHAII~.l\~. The time of_ the gentleman from Okla-work in our State and have made a survey and there are homa has expired. · ·17,000 families in our State who can not make a crop next :Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the .year unless you give them this relief. gentleman from Ill~ois [Mr. ADKINS].

Not only have we done · this, ·but Governor-elect Murray Mr. ADKINS. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the com-proposes to tax .every officeholder in Oklahoma-State, mittee, my friend from Oklahoma was very much disturbed county, and municipal-in order to furnish free seed and over feeding the jackass . and not that of t_he child. If he food to these people. will let us feed the jack and put a willing hand behind him, . Now, what is your attitude here? You say _you will not there will be no trouble about the child. ~give them food; Why, gentlemen, you . are not ·giving these About how far are we going with this thing, anyhow? My men anything, you are lending them money -and you . are · understanding is that this is about -the sixth appropriation

l930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUS.E 977 of this kind that we have made calling on Uncle Sam for help.

Originally we called , upon the Fe~eral Government to make a loan to the farmers to purchese seed in· a droughtstricken area. That went over all right. My understanding is that on that there is about 15 per cent loss to the Government. Then they said we must have feed to help us put out a crop. Well, they had that. Then they came and said we must have fertilizer, and we made a loan for fertilizer. That went along pretty good. Now, they come and say that they must have food to f~d the families. About the next thing will be a loan for money to buy the mule and pay the rent.

We will have to stop it some place. A great deal is being said about feeding the family. -I am well aware that in some parts of the country it has been the custom -for the landowner to furnish seed and fertilizer and food for the family. They produce the crop and the tenant "gets his share and the landowner gets his share.

Now, agriculture is somewhat of a hazard as well as other ,lines. We come along with the drought proposition. The tenant gets the loan and it relieves the landlord of_ that much. He has nothing against the crop but the obligation out for the seed and everybody knO)VS. that it does not take a great amount of money to buy seed for the crop.

He is not taking any hazard. The farmer will get his seed and fertilizer for. the land and then the. tenant will get his share of the crop and the owner will get his. He will see that the man gets enough to eat. Early _vegetables come on and they will have that. But you take every industrial worker in the city out of a job-he has nothing except what some one gives him. There is not a farmer worthy of the name that has not got sometlllng that he has produced that he can eat. He has milk, poultry products, and vegetables, and does not need much outside help to have enough to eat.

Take it out in my country. We have the problem of taking care of needy people. Our people are as hard up as they are everyWhere else. I have a newspaper clipping in my pocket which I will not read now, but they had a meeting of the board of supervisors last week in one of the counties in my district, and what kind of a proposition are these people up against? Fortunately they raised enough to feed them and have seed next year. But what was the situation? The board of supervisors found that of $76,000 in taxes they collected last year $51,000 of that was paid out for the maintenance of the poor, for. the poor farm, widows, and blind pensions, and left them with $26,000 to pay for the running expenses ot the county.

They had issued $45,000 of anticipation warrants for meeting the bills as they come along.

Did they call upon Uncle Sam to help feed the poor? No; they proceed to organize by town.Ships. People must come along with their money and contribute, and organizations of women in each township collect clothes and shoes to keep the families warm. That is the proposition that they .are up against. These men are paying commercial rates for interest. Nearly every farmer has some money borrowed, but he is not expecting Uncle Sani to come · and feed the ·poor iD. his neighborhood, · because he expects the different communities to take care of that themselves. I say to you that I think they are mighty charitable to me when I go back and tell them that I know that they have enough to winter their stock and to feed their livestock and to seed theil} land the next year, but that these other poor fellows have not, and I voted for $30,000,000 to buy them seed to feed their teams and gasoline for their tractors, and to buy fertilize1·s.

It looks to me as though we were running a pretty vicious circle here when we are loaning money to buy fertilizer to produce a large surplus, and then- again loaning money to take . that surplus off the market. I do not know where that is going to end, but at any rate we realize the gravity of the situation, and if I wanted to demagogue I would go back and say to my farmer friends that I had not voted for such a thing as this and would not, that they are not being relieved. However, even as hard up as they are, I am willing

LXXIV--62

to vote to relieve these people who are in dreadful straits because of the drought, and I am willing to go back and tell my farmers -that we ought to thank God that- we have enough to get through this year. -

·Mr. ARNOLD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ADKINS. Yes. .

· Mr. ARNOLD. The gentleman is aware of the fact that the southern portion of · the State of Illinois is in the drought-stricken area, and I am particularly interested in the State of Illinois, as is my friend. This bill provides th.at the Secretary of Agriculture may provide that a first lien on the crop is sufficient security, or in his discretion he may i·equire additional security. That would be the natural inference from the bill. There is no provision in law in Illinois for a lien on a crop that is not planted. Therefore, how will the people of the State of Illinois receive any benefits under the bill? A lien can not-be given on a crop in Illinois until it is planted and growing.

Mr. ADKINS. I have had a little experience with that myself. I once financed a man who could not buy a calf and pay for it. -I · went on his note, and rigged him up a farm, with the understanding that I was to get a lien on his crop. Of course, I could not put a lien upon it until the crop came up, and then I put the lien on the crop. So far as the details of the administration of the bill are concerned, in the five preceding ones that we have had administered by the Agriculture Department we have had no complaint come to our committee from any section of the country of the lack of authority to administer the law. In States where it was applicable they .had no trouble in doing it, and I do not anticipate they will in southern Illinois. . ..

Mr. ARNOLD. -In those states that heretofore have received these benefits, perhaps there was a statute authorizing a lien on crops before they were planted, but that is not true in the State of Illinois. How will our farmers in southern Illinois receive any benefits under this?

Mr. ADKINS. You can not get a lien on a crop until you get the crop in the ground and it is up.

Mr. ASWELL. Permit me to say that in the last loan . the State of lllinois borrowed a great deal of money under this same language.

The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman from Illinois has expired.

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield five additional minutes to the gentleman from lllinois.

Mr. GLOVER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. ADKINS. Yes. Mr. GLOVER. This is a Federal statute. The Govern

ment will deal direct with the farmer who makes the loan. Would a State statute have anything to do with it at all?

Mr. ADKINS. I presume it would, but I thiD.k the contingency the gentleman speaks about will not arise. · I do not think there will be "any trouble, because they would make the loan and when the crop came up they would get a mortgage or lien. _

Mr. HOCH. I do not understand that the language . of this bill requires a lien. It simply says that a first lien shall in the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture be deemed sufficient security for the loan. In Illinois the gentlelJlan says the State law does not permit a lien except on a growing crop, but I do not understand that under this bill it would be impossible for the farmer to secure a loan. It does not say that the Secretary shall not make a loan unless a lien is taken.

Mr. ADKINS. I do not think there will be any trouble about that.

Mr. ARNOLD. It occurs to me from a natural inference that the Secretary of Agriculture must require a lien on the crop: that there must be security to that extent.

Mr. HOCH. It would be only by inference, because it does not say that he shall not make the loan except where it is possible to secure a lien under the law.

Mr. ADKINS. I do not anticipate any such trouble. All these questions would have arisen in the five former -laws. So far as southern lllinois is concerned, I was amused the

978 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECE~BER ·17 other day when I read of some fellow down there who said that southern Illinois was well off, and he showed that they had so much money in the savings bank, when I knew as a matter of fact that some of the crops were burned up. On the other hand, one of the leading papers in my district-in Champaign County-had an editorial about taking the bunk out of unemployment, covering two columns. That paper went on to say that we know that we have unemployment, and that we always have that this time of the year.

We always have to raise our community chest. We have more this year than we ordinarily have. We have increased our community chest, and we are going to take care of these people. So, what is the necessity of running around and shouting about unemployment? We have got it and we are taking care of it. We know that the county can not do it. We know that the State can not do it. They never intimated that the Government ought to do it. I do not think there is any trouble about any community taking care of itself.

I was in the drought-stricken area last year myself, where they will not have a bushel of corn on a thousand acres. I had dinner with some of them. They all had something to eat. They are going to have something to eat.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. ADKINS. I can not give up all of my time unless I

can get more time. I will yield, however. Mr. ABERNETHY. Are we not buying wheat to raise the

price of wheat in the West? Is not the Government doing that?

Mr. ADKINS. No. There is not a Government agency anywhere in the country buying a bushel oi wheat"

Mr. ABERNETHY. What about the Farm Board? Mr. ADKINS. They are loaning money to farm organi

zations to do that. Now, take the man who is unemployed in my city, he has

just as much pride as the farmer. He would much rather borrow enough money to tide him over until spring until he can get a job. He does not want to be an object of charity. We say to these men in the country, "We will loan you money and take your note for it, even though it is a hazardous loan," but we say to the fellow in the city," We will let the Red Cross take care of you, or some other charitable organization take care of you."

If we are going into the business of loaning money to unemployed men, why should we make any distinction between the classes of citizens? This is a big question. The people are taking care of it and doing it sensibly, I think. There is no part of my community which ever thinks that the Federal Government should take that job off of their hands. It is a big burden, to be sure, but they are meeting it, and meeting it in a sensible, sane manner; and there is no reason why other communities should not do the same thing. [Applause.]

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Illinois has again expired. · Mr. ASWELL. I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. O'CoNNoR].

Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am not a farmer nor the son of a farmer. I do not believe I ever spent one day on a farm in my life. I never was elected to public office claiming or pretending to be a farmer~ " dirt " or otherwise.

My purpose in speaking in connection with the consideration of this bill is to voice my resentment against the selfish solicitude of this administration for the people in the rural communities, and its complete disregard of the distress in the cities.

In his message to this session of Congress, President Hoover declared that there was no need for most of the employment relief measures which had been suggested by the Wagner bills or by other similar measures, excepting only the bill under· consideration now and the bill making appropriations for the construction of Federal-aid roads and like projects.

·That is the near-sighted attitude not only of the President, but it is the attitude of this administration, and it has generally- been the attitude of the Republican Party for the last 60 years. The farmer has always been the pet child

of the Republican Party. But what proportion of oUr popu .. lation does the farmer really represent?

Under the Federal census for 1900, 60 per cent of our people lived in the rural sections of our country and 40 per cent lived in our cities. Under the census of 1930 those figures have practically been reversed, so that now 60 per cent, or over 72,000,000 of our population live in the cities and 40 per cent, or abou~ 50,000,000, in the rural sections. That does not mean that all of that 40 per cent live on farms or are actually farmers.

In the 93 cities of our country having populations of over 100,000, and many places with less than 100,000 are considered quite substantial municipalities, there are about 48,000,000 people.

Now, gentlemen, I realize the subject of the farmer, for whose welfare I have consistently voted, brings forth as much demagogic talk as probably any subject considered in Congress, except possibly it be the soldier or prohibition. I am willing to do all I legally and conscientiously can do to help the farmer, not alone of my own State of New York with its 160,000 farmers but the farmers in every part of the Nation.

It often happens here, however, that as soon as you mention " farmer " there is a rush by nearly every Member here to his aid. I wonder if politics is the urge.

There is a widespread and undeniable situation of unemployment in this Nation that constitutes a national calamity. That unemployment is chiefly, however, in the cities. Figures collected recently by labor unions and community relief bodies who are closest to the unfortunates show that late in November in 44 of the large cities of the country there were 1,92{),000 people out of work. The conditions in those cities are briefly summarized as follows: .

Pittsburgh-20,000 unemployed. with a great deal of suffering reported and various relief funds getting low.

Detroit-210,000; much suffering; Ford plant laid off 7,000 or 8,000, and other manufacturers also are laying off men.

Reading, Pa.-Unemployed ~census, taken November 24-26. showed 3,100 out of work, with 6,200 dependents. Widespread suffering is reported, together with a plea for State and Federal assistance~ ,

East St. Louis, Ill.-8,000; funds inadequate. Asheville, N. C.--4,000; only temporary relief in sight~ Des Moines, Iowa-5,000; relief sufficient at present; not

much suffering. Greenville, S. C.-10,000; much suffering; very little relief

from organized charities. <Senator BLEASE, of South Carolina, challenged the statement.>

Newark-29,000; suffering terrible; charitable institutions overtaxed.

Buffalo, N. Y.-40,000 unemployed, with an additional 20,000 working half time; anticipate relief agencies will be inadequate.

Chicago-250,000, with 50,000 reported in dire need; effort being made to raise a $5,000,000 fund; money coming in slowly.

Mobile, Ala.-15,000; need food and clothing. St. Louis-15,000; not sufficient reli~f. New York City-Conservative estimate, 800,000, with

much distress reported. Providence, R. I.-Unemployment reported as too. great to

give an estimate. Manchester, N. H.-3,000. Indianapolis-10,000. Fall RiYer-15,000. Kansas City, Mo.-2<>,000. Knoxville, Tenn.-3,500. Kansas clty, Kans.-5,000; deplorable conditions. Columbus, Ohio-Miners reported in desperate plight. Los Angeles-70,000 to 75,000 men; no data on unem-

ployed women. Louisville-11,100. Memphis-15,000. Philadelphia-Approximately 130,000. Greensboro, N. C.-3,500 to 4,000, with 85 per cent of

skilled workers in the building trades idle most of the time since last January.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 979 Baltunore-About 25,000, with an additional 15,000 work-

ing part time. Passaic, N. J.-8,000. Jacksonville, Fla.-3,000. Wilmington, Del.-3,500. Columbia, S. C.-1,800. Toledo-18,000; and 15,000 working part time. San Francisco-30,000; not much suffering. Tacoma, Wash.-5,800. Denver-20,000.

· ·springfield, Mass.-10,000. Dorchester (part of Boston) -50,000. Portland, Oreg.-20,000. Schenectady, N. Y.-4,000. Augusta, Ga.-2,000. Oklahoma City-8,000, Syracuse, N. Y.-10,000. Wheeling, W. Va.-7,500. Fort Wayne, Ind.-8,000. Th.e gentleman from Indiana [Mr. PURNELL], one of the

leaders for farm relief, said two days ago on this floor that " if every last one of the 120,000,000 people of the United States were gradually to approach the precipice of starvation, the last human being on this earth to survive would be the American farmer." That is undoubtedly true. Nature itself, without other effort, would produce enough sustenance for the farmer and his family to maintain them for a very considerable period. But when the worker in the city loses his job he has no garden, no field, or no back yard to produce his food. With the stoppage of his pay envelope he immediately faces the dread starvation. All possible resources of feeding himself and his family or clothing them or housing them is cut off.

The farmer always has a reserve which he can fall back upon, and he surely will be the last one to suffer real privation. If you are sincere and nonsectional in your desire to do something to relieve the national catastrophe of unemployment, why do you continue, for instance, to smother the bill introduced by Senator WAGNER, of New York, to relieve that situation? '

A few days ago this House passed the bill providing $110,-000,000 appropriation for " emergency construction on certain public works." That was laudable, but, ladies and gentlemen, not one dollar appropriated in that will ever be spent in any city or will one dollar of that sum ever go to the benefit of the workers of any city of the Nation. The bill was objectionable enough as sectional legislation as it passed in this House. We appropriated $3,000,000 for the Forest Service. There are no national forests in the cities. We appropriated $80,000,000 for Federal highways; there are no Federal highway systems running through our cities; We provided $1,500,000 for the National Park Service. There are no national parks in our cities. We appropriated $3,000,000 for flood control along the Mississippi River; what cities lie in that path? The bill, I repeat, was bad enough when we passed it, but Senator CouZENS, of Michigan placed an amendment on the bill which will probably remain in it. With part of that amendment I agree. I refer to the provision that employees on such works shall be paid the prevailing rate of wages for si.mjlar labor in that particular community. What did the other part of the Senator's amendment provide, however? It provided that on said works there shall be employed " only persons who have been living for at least 90 days prior to the commencement of said work in the district, city, town, or village within which said work is being done." That means that a mechanic or laborer could not go from any city to the place of such work and get a job on any of these projects. Is that any relief for the 60 per cent, or the 72,000,000 people, living in the metropolitan centers of our Nation?

Our unemployed in our cities are not asking the Federal Government for a "dole." All they ask is jobs. The great State of New York, for instance, does not ask the Federal Government to give or to loan funds for the solution of the unemployment of its people. It is proud to maintain the wei-

fare of its inhabitants at its own cost and expense. Any State that is not so self-existing might itself have serious doubts as to its rights. as a separate unit of our Union. One of the most mouthed arguments against the political autonomy or freedom of the Philippi.lles or others of our possessions has been that they could not sustain themselves financially as well as otherwise. Are there over three States in the Union who do not confess a similar disability by reason of their constant appeals for Federal aid and assistance?

Of course the blll violates all the principles of our Constitution. There is not a State in the Union, if it has a modern constitution, that could legally give or even loan one dollar to any individual, farmer, or banker. If any ~tate proposed to appropriate money as in the bill, any taxpayer could enjoin the carrying out of such an enactment. Such a subsidy or dole by the Congress can not be prevented, however, because of these decisions of our Supreme Court. Fairchild v. Hughes, Secretary of State (253 U. S. 126); Manaduworth v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, and Frothingham v. Mellon (262 U. S. 447). In these three cases argued by our distinguished Member from Pennsylvania [Mr. BECK] for the Government, the Supreme Court could find no way in which a State or a taxpayer could prevent Congress from giving or loaning to an individual or even wasting the funds of the Treasury.

While this bill is not an outright gift of the money, it is just as objectionable legally, because a loan is no different from a gift in its violation of our form of government. The average person, moreover, who needs money has enough pride left sa that if he can get a loan he will prefer that to a dole or a gift.

If, however, you are going to loan $60,000,000 or $30,000,000 to at most 40 per cent of the people of the Nation, why do you not at the same time do something to relieve distress or unemployment in the cities of the Nation? Why do you not bring in a national, nonsectional program and meet the situation equitably? The President has said that we should not do anything for two years in respect to the general problem of unemployment. He seems opposed to providing for an immediate public-buildings program that would cau.Se the construction of public buildings in many cities where unemployment is most acute. If you do rush the construction of public buildings, will the Senator from Michigan or some other Republican statesman insist that in the construction of these buildings nobody except the residents of the particular city shall be employed? To be consistent you must, but I do not believe you will. You will want to let the laborers from the rural sections come into the cities and take the jobs.

Mr. KETCHAM. Will the gentleman yield for an observation?

Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. Yes. Mr. KETCHAM. Is the gentleman aware of the fact that

the amendment to which he refers has been stricken out by the conferees?

Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. I understand from the press-which is usually more authentic than the rumors around this building-that the Couzens amendment is going to remain in the bill or there will be a fight over it on the part of the Republicans. Why, ladies and gentlemen, of the millions that private contributions are providing impartially in New York City to maintain bread lines, soup kitchens, and lodging houses to meet this emergency at least 75 per cent of it is being expended on men and women who are not residents of that city. We do not complain. We are not provincial in such matters.

We do not ask you to lend money or to give money to the people in the cities. All of the big cities like New York will take care of the situation themselves. What we do ask you is that as a Federal agency do what you can legally and with respect to State rights to meet a national emergency.

Probably the most striking expression in the President's message to this session of Congress was his statement that "ecooomic depression can not be cured by legislative enact-

980 CONGRESSIONAL RECOR~HOUSE DECEMBER 17· ment or executive pronouncement." This is an uld bromide exploded, I thought, at least a century ago with the advent of modern democratic governmen.ts. Governments .can act and executives pronounce solely pursuant to legislative enactments. Such .are the sole basis of their conduct in periods of prosperity or days of depression.

If the chief aim of any government should be to make its people happy and contented, against which economic depression is the most dreaded enemy, such a confession of helplessness as announced by the President will surely not be approved by students of government.

If the Government can do nothing to relieve the greatest blight that can fall on its people-why government?

Now, if you propose to take care <Of a small group of our inba5itants. if you .are going to cater to 40 per cent or less of the people of this Nation, you are not adequately serving your country. Your administration can not be interested in the Nation as a whole and your party can not be truly representative of the Nation as a whole.

Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. For a question; yes. Mr . .STRONG of Kansas. The gentleman charges the

Republican Party with doing too much f.or agriculture. What is the .gentleman's position on this bill?

Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. Well, if that is really intended as a question, I will state to the gentleman that I have always voted within reason to support agriculture.

.Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Is this within reason? Mr. O'CO:r-..TNOR of New York. I believe it is narrow, class

legislation. Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Is the gentleman going to vote

for it? Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. I will ask the gentleman,

using a trick often employed by himself and other " statesmen," Will he vote for extending relief, by '8. loan or otherwise, to the cities of the Nation?

Mr. STRONG -of Kansas. Not if it is for giving them a drink; I will not.

Mr. O'CONNOR -oi New York. I expected some such "stage-play ." irom the gentleman from Kansas ·who always has " booze " uppermost in his mind.

Mr. STRONG of Kansas. I would vote for it, of course. Mr. GREEN. A drink? Mr. STRONG of Kansas. No. Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. I would prescribe a drink,

if it were lacking, as a stabilizer in many, many instances, including the case of the gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. STRONG of Kansas. It :is an unstabilizer. Mr. O'CONNOR of New York. The gentleman ought to

know. "Now, ladies .and gentlemen of the committee, what we

-ask you to do, not necessarily in connection with this resolution, but to be fair to the urban sections of this country, as well as the xural communities, is that you do something for unemployment generally. We ask you to give the Congressmen opportunity to vote upon those unemployment bills which have been before this Congress during the last session and which bave been pending in this Congress for two years. We ask you not to smother them further. We ask you to pass the Wagner bills and to pass .other measures which will relieve .this unemployment situation throughout the Nation as a whole and not confine y.our solicitude to a few .States and to the farmers alone in this country.

Mr • .ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 'minutes to the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. LARsEN]. [Applause.]

Mr. LARSEN. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentleman of the committee, some of llS have so gotten into the habit ()f following these depa-rtmental heads that we frequently forget our duty and obligation to the people. Very frequently we do that, forgetting the fact that we are the elected representatives f the -people. We follow the heads of depart.; ments who are not :the .representatives ()f the people but who are only representing the executive department of the Government.

I call :attention. to this fact because in this particular instance some .of us, ..seemingly, lla.ve two gods to serve and

must soon decide which one "We will follow. 'The President of the United States called upon the governors of the various States with drought-devastated areas and requested them to appoint representatives to come to Washington for the purpose of conferring with him or his respresentatives as to relief measures, after making certain careful surveys in the localities fr<>m whi~h they came. Now, those representatives were appointed by the governors, it is true, but they immediately became, when selected, the representatives uf the President of the United States. They were his duly accredited representatives, just as much as is the Secretary of Agriculture. They made the surveys and the investigations called for by the President of the United States. No ·one says their work was not efficient or honest.

They were directed to come here, after investigating and ascertaining the facts, and not only to make the facts known to the President, but to state what in their judgment might be necessary to relieve the situation as they found it. Now, what did those representatives do? They were good and true men taken from amon-g Democrats, from among Republicans, and from the rank and file of the best people in the entire Nation. They came here, and first reporting as to what conditions were in the various States, then sum ... med up the situation and said they must have $72,000,000 to remove the distress and to -enable farmers in the droughtdevastated areas to ~ontinue farm operations. Doctor AsWELL, representing several interests, in addition to that of Representative from his own State, was a ml!mber of the organization. He met Doctor Warburton. from the office of the Secretary of Agriculture, and undertook to get them to reduce the amount. What rdid they do? After consultations and persuasion they agreed that they would reduce the amount to be recommended to the minimum which would meet the exigencies of the situation, and they therefore reduced it to $60,000,000.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, here was a representative body {)f men directly commissioned by and responsible to the President of the United States, which .said that $60,-000,000 was the minimum amount needed. Y.et, the President, after trying to make a show to the country in October. before the election, that he was in favor of helping the poor, dlstressed, unfortunate, and downtrodden farmers in the drought-stricken areas, now tries. seemingly, at least, by agreeing with other agents or representatives, to sidestep the issue and avoid responsibility.

Assuming that the Secretary of Agriculture speaks for the President, he comes back and says:

Oh, well, I have made no investigations out 1n the field, neither have I nor my agents made any investigations 1n the field, and we know nothing except 1n so far as what the records here disclose has transpired heretofore, and from this alone we feel that we would not be authorized to lend more than $25,000,000.

These are practically the w-ords of the agent before the House Committee on Agriculture. They are based on what? Not the fact that the distress does not warrant relief to the amount of $60,000,000, but that he does not feel justified in lending more than $25,000,000 after looking over the records in his 'Office.

This is why the amount, in so far as it is sponsored by representatives of the Republican Party on the House Committee on Agriculture, has been reduced from $60,000,000, the amount needed, according to report. and recommendations of thl! President~s mought committee, to $30,000,900. It may satisfy the President and the Secretary of Agriculture, but I ~an not see how -one-half of the amount needed to relieve the distressed farmers in the -drought-stricken area should be sufficient to satisfy the conscience of those elected to Tepresent the people in matters -of legislation.

Mr. BRIGGS. Will the gentleman yield for a question? Mr. LARSEN. I will be glad to yield. Mr. BRIGGS.- How did it happen that the bill introduced

in the Senate and unanimously passed by the Senate carried $60.,000,000?

Mr. LARSEN. Because the Members of the Senate did Just what this House ought to do. The Senate felt its responsibility to. relieve so far -as possible distress caused by drought, · and thus f{)llowed the recommendations of the

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 981 representatives selected by the President of the United States from the various States of the Union which were involved in the drought situation.

Mr. BRIGGS. They investigated the matter before they acted, did they not?

Mr. LARSEN. Yes; they had investigated the matter before that time, and the Members of the Senate, responsive to the wishes of the people and alert to the needy situation, recognized that these honest representatives selected by the President of the United States, and who had come here from the drought-stricken States at his request to advise him, understood the situation, were therefore willing to follow them.

Mr. BRIGGS. Was there any display of partisanship over there in the passage of the bill? Was it not adopted unanimously?

Mr. LARSEN. That is what the record shows. I was not over there? Senator McNARY, the chairman of the committee, as I understand, is wholeheartedly for the bill which carries $60,000,000, and he puts it on two grounds: First, because the representatives of the President of the United States, coming here from 24 States of the Union, asked for that amount; and again because he understood that amount was needed and that the Secretary of Agriculture had agreed to that amount.

Mr. SLOAN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LARSEN. I yield. Mr. SLOAN. Following the meeting of the governors and

the commissioners, will the gentleman state whether any of the 22 States actually interested in this matter called a session of their legislature or made any attempt in any way to shoulder their primary burden in this matter. as I understand it?

Mr. LARSEN. I am unable to answer the gentleman on that question further than to say that several States of the Union are not permitted under their constitutions to make any loans of this kind. I think I am accurate when I say that South Carolina is not, Georgia is not, and I do not believe Alabama is so permitted. There are three such States at least, and no doubt there are others.

Mr. ASWELL. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LARSEN. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana. Mr. ASWELL. I would like to say in answer to the gen-

tleman from Nebraska that the State of Louisiana has exempted all these drought sufferers from the payment of taxes for 1930.

Mr. BLANTON. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LARSEN. I want to make just one further state

ment and then I will yield. In addition to that, I would say to the gentleman from

Nebraska the constitution of my own State, Georgia, provides that if an amendment is offered to the constitution, before it can be ratified by the people, it must wait until the general election, which would, I believe, require until 1932 in this instance.

I now yield to the gentleman from Texas. . Mr. BLANTON. None of the members of this committee

was authorized to call the legislature of his State together. They were merely here, as we are now, to try to get relief, and they could not cali the legislatures of the States together.

Mr. SLOAN. May I correct the gentleman by saying that nobody assumed that these commissioners could call the legislatures in session, and even the gentleman from Texas should grasp an idea of that kind.

Mr. BLANTON. And if the governors had called the legislatures together they would have probably spent enough in so doing to grant as much relief as the farmers in such States will receive from the legislation.

Mr. SLOAN. Probably in Texas, but not elsewhere. Mr. LARSEN. I will further state to the gentleman from

Nebraska that this fact is evident: The President of the United States did not ask them to do it. I am sure the drought committee and the governors did everything that the President of the United States asked them to do. In effect, the President said to the governors: "You appoint a

committee to come here and make known to me the needs of the people and I will take care of them." When the President of the United States did that the governors complied. Some of the States with Democratic administrations sent Republican representatives. They came here at the request of the President. He did not request them to urge special sessions of the legislatures, nor did he request the governors to call special or other sessions for relief purposes. Yet he now tries to reduce the amount from $60,000,000 to $25,-000,000. [Applause.]

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. HoPEL

Mr. HOPE. Mr. Chairman and ladies and gentlemen of the committee, there has been considerable discussion this afternoon and previously on the motion to suspend the rules and on whether the Department of Agriculture had changed its position as to the amount needed; as well as various other matters, but I have not heard a great deal said as to what evidence the Committee on Agriculture had before it in determining what amount ought to be allowed for the purpose of these production loans. The matter of the amount is not the only question involved in this legislation and is perhaps not the most important, but in determining the amount necessary the committee had before it ample evidence and information.

Something has been said about the meetings that were held in Washington by State commissioners of agriculture and by the drought-relief commissioners appointed by the governors of the various States, and of the amount that the members of these two organizations thought we ought to appropriate. But very little, if anything, has been said on this floor as to the evidence given the committee by the man who perhaps knows more about this situation and who has had more experience in dealirig with similar situations than anyone else in this country. I mean Doctor Warburton, Chief of the Bureau of Extension Service in the Department of Agriculture.

Doctor Warburton appeared before the Agricultural Committee and gave us the benefit of his past experience in administering similar funds, and also the benefit of the information they have in the department, both as to the extent of the drought and the amount of money which will be needed for seed, feed, and fertilizer.

It has been intimated here that the Secretary of Agriculture arbitrarily, without having any figures at his command or making any investigation whatever, fixed the amount at $25,000,000 as the maximum which is to be made available for loans. There was nothing arbitrary about the matter at all. The Department of Agriculture has more information in its files than any of the drought commissioners have. It has more information on each State than the drought commissioner of that State has, because in every county in the United States that has any agriculture the Departmept of Agriculture has a very efficient crop-reporting system. So in the files of the department they have a record showing the production in every county in the United States. They have records showing the normal production, showing what it is this year and the extent to which it was affected by the drought. So from information gained from these :figures and from the experience the department has had in making loans in other States, Doctor Warburton came before the. committee and said in his opinion that $25,000,000 would be ample.

I want to read what Doctor Warburton said on this subject. He said:

The appropriation in 1929 for the six Southeastern States-Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Florida-is, perhaps, more nearly comparable with present conditions than any of the others because earlier appropriations were for rather limited areas, while the 1930 appropriation was for the same section as covered in 1929, al\d rather widely scattered flood · and drought areas in other sections. About $5,550,000 was loaned in the six Southeastern States in tl'le spring of 1929 and some $200,000 in Florida for truck crops in the fall of 1929. The largest amount we have ever loaned in any State from a seed-loan appropriation was a little over $2,000,000 in Georgia in 1929. Except in the States of Arkansas and Kentucky, I think I am safe in saying the conditionS are not worse--that either crop production

_ conditions or financial conditions are not worse-in any part of the

982 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17· drought- al'ea this year than they were in Georgia) South Caroll.n.a. and southeastern Alabama 1n 1929. It is largely on the basis or that experience and the- amounts we loaned in that territory in 1929, and our experience. in .other seed-Ioa.n territories in previous yeal's and tn 1930, that the estimate of $25,000,600 was arrived at~ n is our feeling that with $25,000,000· we ca.n loan over the drought area in 193'"! on about the same basts' that we loaned in these othex sect ions- in previous years, tf the loan is confined a&

is proposed tn the resolution introduced by you .. Mr. Chairman, to seeds, fertilizer, feed for work stockv fuel, and oil. Now~ if that is true, I think that the position of the

department in this matter, as far as the amount is concerned, is certainly sound~ If there are only two. states worse than Georgia and parts of South carolina. during HJ29 and $2',GOO,O.OO was the amount loaned in Georgia at that time, I think we are justified in saying that the department's estimate is at least fair.

Mr. ASWELL. Will the gentleman ·yield?

In my district alone the farmers this year took $25,000.,000 less for their wheat than in the previous year. We are basing this legislation purely on drought relief, and unless the States affected are prepared to come in here and show that the distress which exists is due to drought and to drought. alone, then I do' not think we are justified in making these authorizations or that the Department of Agriculture is authorized in making loans, because we certainly can not undertake by this legislation to relieve the distress· over the country which is due to low prices.

Mr. KETCHAM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HOPE. Yes. Mr. KETCHAM. In connection with the remark the gen

tleman made with reference to the information gathered by Doctor Warburton, may I call his attention to two sentence& on page 23 of the hearings? Question by Mr. BRIGHAM:

Mr. HOPE. I yield. Your optnion is that $25,000,000 will take care o! all the neces-t th f th P 'd t" sitous cases?'

Mr. ASWELL. Wha was e purpose 0 · e resl en & Doctor WARBURToN. Yes; on about the same basis that we have request for this drought committee for 22 States, if they do operated' 1n the previous years. not know anything about it? That is from a man who knows probably more about this

Mr. HOPE. I do not mean to say that they do- not\ know situation than any other single man in the United StateS'. anything about it because they know a great deal about it, Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? but I do not think they know as much about these condi- Mr. HOPE. Yes, tions as the Department of Agriculture kno-ws after they Mr. GREEN. r hope the gentleman doeS' not interpret have collected the information that I have referred to. The the proposed legislation to be such as to preclude in storm Department of Agriculture not only has the information areas and in frozen areas people from getting onder its prothat it has collected but it has valuable experience in the visions. We have a number of vegetable growers from the administration of other funds. . central part of Florida right on up the coast to New York,

In that connection let me say this: All these drought- where within the last few days frost has closed out · the relief commissioners are representatiVe men in their own crop. . States, no doubt, but they have had no experience in matters Mr. HOPE'. I did not intend to give that interpretation. of this kind. All of them possibly have been unduly alarmed r had in mind that we were not to understand that this over the condition which prevails. They have never been up measure means that we are going to relieve necessitous conagai:nst just such ~onditions before and do not ha-ve anything ditions over the entire country unless they are caused by toga by to estimate the amount needed. Naturally, as the· some such calamity as drought or storm. representatives of their particular localities, they wanted to Mr GREEN. or frost? get it high enough. Mr. HOPE. I presume a frost would come· under the defi-

Mr. STRONG of Kansas. Mr. Chairman, will the gentle- nition of storm, although I. do not know what interpretation man yield?' tl'le Department of Agriculture might put upon it.

Mr. HOPE. Not now; perhaps later. For instance, the Mr. GREEN. Or" for such other purposes.'" That is what report of the drought-relief commissioner from Alabama we understood. · states that they are going to need $10,000',000 in that State. Mr. LANKFORD of Georgia. Would the gentleman interYet the figures which the Department of Agriculture has on pret this bill to protect those farmers in areas who suffered the crops produced show that they had practically a normal from flood conditions two years ago and who have not recrop in Alabama in the year 1930'. The figures show that covered from that condition owing- to low prices1 for cotton Alabama had the best crop that it has had for Mr. HOPE. I. have not given any thought to that, but on years. The average yield of lint per acre in pounds in 1930 first blush I do not believe it would cover a situation of that was HJ5. In 1929,. which was not a bad year, it was 174 kind. I have not given any pm-ticular thought to that . pounds, and in the 10-year period from 1919 to 1928, the Now, let me say one thing more in connection with the average was only 146' pounds, so that they had a yield of question of the amount which has been requested by the cotton last year that was 2'5 per cent above the average yield Department of Agriculture. 1 want to call attention to the !or the preceding 10' years. statement made by Doctor Warburton before the committee.

The corn crop was not so good, but the figures show His statement is that it is. the universal experience of the that the 10-year average production was 14.2 bushels per Department of .AgricultUl'e in making these loans that aS' acre, and this year it was 10.5 and that the average total- soQn as the Government comes 'into a community and begins' yield for the five years from 1924 to 1928 was. 39,010',000 to loan money,. local credit loosens up· somewhat and more bushels, and in 1930 30',062',000, only 2.5 per cent less than funds are available. They found that to be true in the loans the average crop for the preceding five years. The hay made' in the Southeastern States last year and two yearS' crop in the 10-year period showed an average . of 0.84 ago. There is no reason to believe- that tbey' will not haveof a ton per acre, and this year it was 0.80 of a ton per the same experience this year, and no doubt that faetor was acre, practically a noimal crop. I think this justifies the also taken into consideration by Doctor Warburton in arstatement I made that in many cases these figures are ex- riving at his figl:IIe of $25.,009,0(){}. [Appiause.l aggerated. Furthermore, in a good many States rains m The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. the fall changed conditions from what they were earlier in Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yieid 15 minutes to the the year. If the State of Alabama, with practically normal gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. LucEJ. crop production,. taking the State as a whole, is demand- 'Mr. LUCE. Mr. Chairman, it is. a bit singular that the ing $10,000,00(}, then I think we can reasonably say there responsibilities of committee membership compel me to take has been a great deal of exaggeration so far as other States the floor twice in the same day. This time my warrant for are concerned. I asked a Member of this House from speaking is the fact that the Committee on the Library, of Alabama the other day how he explained the fact that they which I am a Member, has the duty of advising the House seemed to need so much whEm they had pl'actically a in matters of legislation relating to. the American Red Cross. . normal crop, and he· said that they did have good erops · This is perhaps tbe most critical juncture that the Ameribut that the prices were very low. Surely it is not the can Red Cross has faced in all of its history, and in its intent of this legislation to extend relief to the farmers of the defense and for it& support I ask your attention while I laycountry on account of low prices for crops. If we are going before you the chief issue involved,. as fal' as the future o to. do that .. we had better go out into- the wheat oountry . . the country is· con~a-ned.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 983 This is not a question of preventing suffering or relieving

distress. We are all agreed that no human being in the United States shall suffer from the pangs of hunger if we are informed of his need. I want to repeat that, lest there might be a continuance of partisan difference upon this particular point. There is no question here of the relief of human suffering. The one and only question is who shall do the work. The one and only question is whether or not it shall be done by the Department of Agriculture or by the American Red Cross. The gravity of that question immediately displays itself to everybody who gives it attention.

Hitherto, through many years, the unofficial arm of the Government for dispensing its bounty in the matter of bodily suffering has been the American Red Cross, and now for the first time comes a proposal, backed by the almost unanimous vote of those on one side of the House, a proposal that the American Red Cross shall be supplanted by the Government agency known as the Department of Agriculture. The most important thing we are to decide is not whether relief shall be given to those who are in distress.

The amount to be appropriated for relief is the lesser question. The part of the problem that will have effect through the years to come concerns itself with who shall do the work. I plead for a continuance of the confidence of the country and the confidence of this body in the American Red Cross. I want to show you the reasons why I believe it should be continued and should not be withdrawn.

In the last year for which I have figures, 1929-30, the organization spent $1,163,277 for disaster relief. In the preceding year it had spent $8,206,627 for disaster relief. That is its chief purpose. It has subsidiary purposes, such as the care of veterans in distress and the care of all kinds of minor difficulties, to which it may properly address its efforts.

Mr. GLOVER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LUCE. I yield. Mr. GLOVER. Can the gentleman at this time give us

the amount that is now available for Red Cross work? Mr. LUCE. In the due and orderly processes of my re

marks I assure the gentleman I will arrive at that figure. In the fiscal year 1929-30 the Red Cross engaged in meet

ing the results of 102 disasters in the United States and its insular possessions and 6 in foreign countries. When this great drought disaster confronted the people of the land it was the instant duty of the Red Cross to spring to action. What did it do? The Red Cross has a chapter in practically every county in the United States. Most of those chapters have branches, and in many of the counties there is more than one chapter. They have been working already in 1,016 counties suffering as a result of drought. They have furnished seed to 238 counties where Government aid was not available. To the $30,000 contributed by local organizations they have added $300,000 from their own treasury. They have taken some food into 45 counties.

Their program of that character was completed in the middle of November. Then they were confronted by a program of a different character, that which we are now considering, with the problem of bringing relief to those faced by bodily suffering.

Gentlemen say this · is a huge problem. They say the Red Cross is not equal to it. What are the facts? How big is that problem already? On Saturday morning they had received at national headquarters applications from 10 counties. Ten counties out of all those that are involved have so far been so hard pressed that they could not meet this exigency themselves, and the amount of money so far required has been only $6,010. Yet gentlemen rise and say that because, perchance, this organization may not be able to raise enough money by appealing to the people for contributions we should alter the entire program of dispensing public bounties and turn the task over to the Department of Agriculture.

I asked about the resources of the Red Cross. They pointed out that they have a disaster fund laid aside in reserve for the purpose of meeting disasters, and there are $5,000,000 now in that fund. Five million dollars now ready and only $6,010 so far asked! They told me-and no man

here will dispute the statement of the man who told me, Judge John Barton Payne-he himself told me if that $5,000,000 would not suffice they knew where to get the money. They would not go to the Public Treasury; they would not demand the slow, tortuous process of extracting money from the taxpayers, but they would go to the people of the country, who never yet have refused an appeal from the American Red Cross.

I would bring you some testimony, testimony that my friends from the South will not challenge, because it is from their own spokesmen in this matter.

This testimony was given on the 20th day of November, when the gathering took place in this city and reports from the chairmen of drought committees from 22 States were presented. First, as to Arkansas. Hear these words from its representative, Harvey C. Couch, chairman of the State committee:

When the drought became acute in Arkansas the governor called some people together to consider the situation. The first thing looked for was the Red Cross, and they were found right on the doorstep ready and willing to help.

Turn to Indiana: The Red Cross has had a worker in every county in the drought

region.

Next, Texas, from which we have heard to-day: The Red Cross has helped us · considerably, principally in wheat

seed for fall and winter pastures, and, in some instances, turnip seed for fall sowing.

Mr. McDUFFIE. May I inquire when that statement from Arkansas was received? ,

Mr. LUCE. On the 20th of November, last month. Mr. McDUFFIE. I understand it was made in June last. Mr. LUCE. I am reading what the gentleman may find

in the first issue of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of this session. From Louisiana:

The Red Cross, who sent a man to Louisiana, have cooperated with local chapters and have supplied seed for gardens and fall pastures, which have been very helpful in this drought area.

So much for the past, and now testimony as to the instant situation. From Kentucky:

There will be a great deal of actual distress and suffering among a great many unfortunates if some organization like the Red Cross does not step forth and assist in the relief work necessary.

No organization like the Department of Agriculture but· some organization like the Red Cross is to be turned to in this emergency.

This is from Montana: The State drought committee has made a careful survey and we

estimate that our destitution will reach over 2,000 farm families, . which will need to be taken care of by the local Red Cross without calling upon the National Red Cross agencfes.

This from Ohio, the testimony of Perry L. Green, commissioner of agricultw·e and chairman of the State drought-relief committee: 1

Anticipating relief beyond which could be furnished through employment, the State committee has . been cooperating with representatives of the National Red Cross and local Red Cross chapters throughout Ohio in anticipating any possible needs which would have to be supplied through the Red Cross agency. This work has been so completely carried out that all Red Cross relief work can be properly and immediately taken care of.

And now some words to the gentleman from Oklahomap who recently addressed you. I would that he were here still

Mr. HASTINGS. I answer in part for Oklahoma. Mr. LUCE. I am delighted that some gentleman from

Oklahoma may not have to postpone his pleasure in knowing about my remarks until he reads them to-morrow morning. This testimony is all the more interesting, if I may so· put it, because we have recently received a communication from Oklahoma which does not in all respects tally with what the commissioner said a month ago, when, perchance, there were no other than humanitarian considerations involved in this controversy.

Mr. GLOVER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. LUCE. Certainly. Mr. GLOVER. The gentleman a moment ago mentioned

Mr. Harvey C. Couch, whom I have the pleasure of knowing.

984 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 chairman of the committee which made this re_part. I will ask the gentleman if he does not .know that ln llis _report, made to the President, .he estimated, which 1s conservative, that 1t would ta'ke $2Zl,DOd,OOO in loans under a bill like this to relieve conditions m .Arkansas alone? ·

Mr. LUCE. I should regret it if there were no .inaccuracies in that statement, but I will accept it as acClll'Rte. However, that is not what I am talking about. Lhave not been able, apparently, to make the -gentleman understand.

Mr. ULOVER. The gentleman quoted Mr. Couch and intimated that the Red Cross shmJ.ld take ·-care of conditions in my .state.

"Mr. LUCE. "I .am not .only :intimating. I -am proving. Mr. GLOVER. No; the gentleman is not. Mr. LUCE. Well, let us see what the committee chair

man from Oklahoma said in that particu.la:r matter: We thought in the beginning that the Red Cross was not alive

to the seriousness ,of the situation, but I want to say their wide experience and training J>Ut a lot of .courage into the situation and cooled 'it down ln an .admirable manner. I think that the State committees and all of the States should .stand by the Red Cross and give them the benefit of the doubt. This matter of dispensing relief is a very difficult problem. It 1s .a .hard thing to go ahead without doing _more .harm than good.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Massachusetts has expired.

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman two more minutes~

Mr. LUCE. I shall have to compress my remarks by .giv~g you now something from Mississippi:

We are grateful to the American Red Cross "for what "they have done, and we want them to stand by us in the event.

And from West Virginia to the same effect. My p1ea .'is not .alone that you follow precedent and con

tinue in charge -of the Red Cross the responsibility ~of caring for bodily need but also that you remember there is no man in the whole world more experienced in .dispensing the bounty of mankind than the man who is advising us at this moment. Let no man here be so presumptuous as to rise and put his own view :against that of the .greatest almoner of all time, the President of the "United States. tApplause.J

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman. .I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Ok1ahoma rMr. EAsTINGsJ.

Mr. HASTINGS. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, there are only two questions involved in -this .discussion~ The first is the question .of the ..amount that the resolution should carry, and the second is whether the .resolution should include food.

In support of both uf these propositions 1 .desire to have read from the Cler'k's desk a telegram from J. 'F. Owens, chairman of the governor's committee for employment af the State of Oklahoma, dated December 16, whiCh is in part an answer to the statement just made by the -gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. LuCE1.

The CHAffiMAN. Without objection, the· Clerk will read. - The Clerk read as fallows:

OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLA., December 16, 1930. lion. W. W. HASTINGS,

House Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Governor's committee .for employmen-t, composed of representa

tive men from every "Section of State, numbering 22, unanimously indorsed resolution to the effect that amount pro_posed for farm relief by lower House of Congress wholly inadequate to meet situation. Conditions .in southwestern Oklahoma .are bad .and are getting worse. Many .farmers have absolutely nothing with which to go through winter. Representatives from southwestern section of State confident that while local expedients may carry 'farmers through next two months they must have relief not. only in way of feed for stock and seed :tor planting but that provision should l>e made for food for themselves and families. Committee recommends that this be in form of .a loan to be secured by crops and land and to include liberal terms u1' repayment. Committee 'Indorses sum provided by Senate resolution.

J. F. OWENS, Chairman Governor's Committee for ~.mplo'Jiment.

Mr. HASTINGS. Let me say that J. F. Owens is one of the most responsible .and best business m~n m the ~tate of Oklahoma, and I am sure that the House can depend npon the ac~uracy of any statement he makes.

In addition to that testimony -and in further reply to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. LucEl, I w.ish to call attention to a statement that has alTeady been inserted in the RECORD by my eolleague the gentleman from Oklahoma LMr~ McCLINTIC] irom Mr. Puterbaugh, who was the President's ·representative here -at th~ ":Conference 1ID November . 21. Quoting from th-at as to the questiun of amount, he :says:

It is the belief of those who have :studied thls matter and -who Jistened to t'eports from 'each and. -every State ln -the Washington conference .of November 2l that .$60.,000,000 1s a. su1ficient amount but that quite possibly-a smaller amount will prove inatlequa'te.

This ·statement shows that the question .of amount was very fully discussed among the Representatives who were here at the conference ·on November 20 and 21, .and it .seems to have been agreed by all that 60,000,000 would be the amount recommended;

Let us examine the .record a little further. A resolution (S . .J. Res. 411) was prepared by ·the Department of Agriculture and it was sent to the chairman <>f .the Senate Committee on Agricultw·e, Senator McNARY, and that resoluti-on was introduced in the Senate .and passed, and the amount included in the resolution was $6D,OOO,OOO.

This is shown by the debate in the Senate on the resolution when it was up for discussion.

This seems to corroborate what .Mr. Puterbaugh has said was the general understanding and belief of .all of the representatives from the drought-stricken states who were here at the conference of November 20 and 21.

There are two other questions I want to direct attention to. In the first place, I tried to argue to you yesterday that this is not a -dole. It is not a gift . .It is a 1oan. Whoever heard of the Red Cross g.oing out with a gift in one hand to ·relieve the distress of the widows, 'the· poor, the orphans, or the sick, or the unfortunate, and with a .note and a mortgage in the other hand, and demanding that the money advanced be repaid? Why, -of course you never .heard of such a thing. So this is not .a dole. This is a loan, made under peculiar circumstances, to .a ciass of people that have suffered very greatly lor the past 10 years .and who are in extreme distress, and this distress .has been accentuated by the most extensive drought that was ever known in the history of this Nation.

Now let me distinguish between the class of cases referred to in the argument of the gentleman from Massachusetts as to the amount that the Red Cross would need to relieve the sick and distressed. The .xe.Ports reau did not contemplate, and they do not cover, the amount that would be needed to assist people for the purpose of making a crop during the ~ntire crop season. There is a vast difference in the amount that would be needed in my State of Oklahoma or the entire <Country to relieve extreme distress, such as would be handled QY the Red Cross, and the amount that would be necessary to assist the farmers to make .a crop during the entire crop season.

So the :figures that were used by the gentleman from Massachusetts, recommended as ample ·for the Red Cross to relieve special distress in any community, -are entirely inadequate to furnish food, feed, seed, and fertilizer to the farmers in any drought-stricken community to enable them to make a crop.

Ninety-five per cent of the farmers in my district have to pledge their -crops to borrow money from their local bank or give a mortgage to the sup.ply merchant for .supplies which include food, feed, and seed to make their crops. If the Government takes a first lien upon their crops for feed, seed, and fertilizer, they have nothing to secure the bank or to secure the supply merchant for food for themselves and family.

.As the result I greatly fear none of the farmers in my district, if this resolution is passed unamended to exclude food, would be in a position to avail themselves of the provisions of this resolution.

Mr. ALLGOOD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HASTINGS. I will yield to the gentleman.

/

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 985 · Mr. ALGOOD. Under the conditions here would the banks loan them money on their crop?

Mr. HASTINGS. The banks could not loan money on second mortgages, because, as the gentleman knows, and ·everyone knows, the bank examiners would not favorably pass such notes. - Mr. WILLIAM: E. HULL. Will the gentleman yield for a question?

Mr. HASTINGS. I yield. Mr. WILLIAM E. HULL. If you loan a farmer money

for seed and fertilizer, how are you going to differentiate between loaning him for seed and a loan for food?

!vir. HASTINGS. I do not think they could do it. I think you ' ought to encourage him to be honest and loan him the money to cover food, feed, seed, and fertilizer without encouraging any deception as to the purpose for which the loan· is to be made except that it is to aid the farmer in making his crop.

Mr. WILLIAM E. HULL. I am going on the basis that most farmers have things they can eat. They have hogs and chickens, and it seems to me it would be better to loan them the money and keep food out of it.

Mr. HASTINGS. How are those farmers going to get the food who are without it and who are regularly carried every year by a bank or supply store?

Mr. WILLIAM E. HULL. He raises it. Mr. HASTINGS. He did not this year, and that is the

necessity for this legislation. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Okla

homa has expired. Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the

gentleman from Missouri [Mr. NELSON]. Mr. NELSON of Missouri. Mr. Chairman and members

of the committee, in the last session of Congress I expressed my personal views on all legislation of this character. I do not feel that my views have greatly changed. However, I am conscious of this fact, that as Members of Congress we represent first our districts, next our States, and then the Nation as a whole.

In order to arrive at a correct conclusion regarding legislation of this character, and to ascertain the views of the people in Missouri I, a number of days ago, wired the various authorities in my State. I want to take time to read some of these replies.

First Qf all, I shall read the reply of Dean F. B. Mumford, dean of the Missouri College of Agriculture:

CoLUMBIA, Mo., December 5, 1930. Han. W. L. NELSON,

House of Representatives: A large number of Missouri farmers in the drought area will

require Federal loans ri.ext spring in some counties in drought area due to bank failures or other circumstance. Local money is not obtainable. Many farmers in drought area can not furnish good security if such farmers borrow locally. The interest rate is very high. The number of localities or farmers needing Federal loans can not be accurately stated without a careful ·investi-gation. ·

F. B. MUMFORD, Dean of the Missouri College of Agriculture.

Next I read the telegram of R. R. Thomasson, director of agricultural extension in Missouri:

COLUMBIA, Mo., December 5, 1930. Hon. W. L. NELSON,

United States House of Representatives: Best information at hand indicates there will be considerable

demand for Federal loans for feed and fertilizer 1n Missouri drought area. Banks can not meet the situation in all cases. Security offered by farmers in many cases is not acceptable to the banks. Bank failures have reduced the amount of money available for loans even when good security is offered. In two counties ,all banks have been closed.

R. R. THOMASSON, Director of Agricultural Extension in Missouri.

The next telegram is from Sherman P. Houston, one of the outstanding farmers of Missouri, a man who has been frequently mentioned for a position in the President's Cabinet:

MALTA BEND, Mo., December 6, 1930. Han. W. L. NELSON,

Washington, D. C.: Large · number farmers in drought area unable finance next

year's farm operations. Food, feed, and seed urgently needed.

Local banks these districts unable furnish furthet: credit on security offered and intermediate credit banks require practically the same security as local banks, hence no encouragement in attempt organize local intermediate credit banks. Ten to twelve thousand farm families will be entirely dependent on outside aid from some source, otherwise many :Will drift to cities to join the army of unemployed.

SHERMAN P. HOUSTON. The next telegram I read is from L. W. Baldwin, chair

man of the Missouri State drought-relief committee: ST. Lours, Mo., December 5, 1930.

WILLIAM L. NELSON, House Office Building, Washington, D. C.:

Members of the Missouri drought-relief committee feel it important that you support bill for loans tor seed, fertilizer, and feed account drought conditions for at least $60,000,000. Committee does not feel twenty-five million will be adequate to meet needs of farmers.

L. w. BALDWIN, Chairman Missouri State Drought-Relief Committee.

Then here are telegrams from William Hirth, president of the Missouri Farmers' Association:

CoLUMBIA, Mo., December 8, 1930. Han. W. L. NELSON,

House Office Building: Undoubtedly some of our farmers will need loans on feed and

seed, but would not include fertilizer. If matter is turned over to county committees of highest responsibility, abuses of Government aid can be reduced to minimum. Think loan terms should be lenient, but that all farmers should understand that repayment is expected.

WILLIAM HIRTH. Jewell Mayes, secretary of the Missouri State Board of

Agriculture: JEFFERSON CrrY, Mo., December 6, 1930.

Congressman W. L. NELSON, House Office Building:

Answering telegram Missouri farmers most needing feed, seed, and fertilizer are not good short-time risks for banks. Many will be pinched to extreme limit next spring for needed seed, particularly because of vast acreage of meadows lost during drought.

JEWELL MAYES.

And W. F. Keyser, secretary of the Missouri State Bankers' Association:

SEDALIA, Mo., December 5, 1930. Han. WILLIAM L. NELSON,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.: In my opinion many Missouri farmers will need Federal aid

in financing next year's crops. w. F. KEYSER.

I have others, but these should be sufficient to indicate the views of some at least who are in positions to speak with authority.

Laying aside any personal feeling I might entertain relative to legislation of this character, I expect to support the bill and to do what I can to secure the amount suggested by the chairman of the drought-relief committee in my own State-$60,000,000. The Secretary of Agriculture comes from Missouri. He will be in charge of the expenditure of this fJ,lnd. He is not of my party, but we should have sufficient confidence in him to believe that he will not permit to be used more of these funds than are needed.

Just one other thought, and that is quite important in legislation of the character now under consideration. I refer to the terms on which these loans are made. I again quote from Mr. Houston, of Missouri. He says:

By every device we were able to employ, we could not induce the farmers to use this money 1n the way the department wanted it used.

Of course not. When you offer to make a loan to a Missouri farmer to put in a corn crop, and make that loan payable on the 1st day of October before he has gathered his corn, before he is ready to market it, he is not interested. The loans that were made last fall in Missouri are made payable on the 1st day of July, 1931. Every man who is familiar with agricultural conditions in Missouri knows that the farmer will have nothing to sell between now and the 1st day of next July. It is important that the agency having this matter in charge make these loans pa!l8,ble at a time when the farmer may hope to be able to pay them. I strongly urge the need of proper terms.

Mr. HARE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. NELSON of Missouri. Yes.

986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17. Mr. HARE. I am interested in the statement the gen

tleman makes there about making loans payable July 1, and also interested in the statement that he makes that they will not be able to pay them at that tim-e.

Mr. NELSON of Missouri. Not on July 1. Wheat in central Missouri is harvested during the latter part of June and the early part of July, the harvesting period varying somewhat from year ·to year.

Mr. HARE. What security is given? Mr. NELSON -of Missouri. On the crops referred to. Mr. HARE. It may be that the Department of Agricul

ture is trying to aid th€se farmers in that if they do not pay on the 1st of July they will can-cel the obligation.

Mr. NELSON 'Of Missouri. This is too serious a matter to be facetious about.

Mr. HARE. I am not facetious about it at all; but it occurs to me that if they have the judgment the gentleman says they ought to have they would know that they would have to wait until the crops are harvested before demanding payment.

Mr. NELSON of Missouri. I desire to menti<>n, and I have but a moment, another matter that is important to Missouri and doUbtless to other States. I refer to the Agricultural Credit Corporation, or mcorporated livestock loan company, .a system of loans to aid our livestock farmers. We have in Missouri two such banks at this time. One is in my home county, the other in the home town of Secretary of Agriculture Hyde.

The difficulty to-day in making these institutions of greater value to the people is that they can not get suffi.dent local dollars nooded to expand into the eight or ten dollars. I have a letter from the dean of the Missouri Agricultural College only to-day, also a letter from Chester Starr, president of the Centralia (Mo.) Credit Corporation, referred to. It is suggested that if through loans such as we are now considering the one tlollar eould be made 1l.Vailable to be expanded into eight or ten dollars, that it would take care of the situation referred to this morning in the Committee on Agriculture. My colleagues on this committee will reeall that this matter came up and it seemed to have the indorse·ment, at least tentatively, of the Secretary of Agriculture. The difficulty is that the dollar of local money is not to be had. I trust this suggestion may be looked .into. Possibly these intermediate credit banks may be made of greater value i:n this emergency.

I conclude by sayillg that as far as I am personally regarding legislation of this character, my views are unchanged, but we are now called upon to meet a great emergency~ [Applause.]

Mr. ASWELL. I .y.ield five mmutes to the gentleman from Alabama IMr. Hiu.J.

Mr. HILL of Alabama. Mr~ Chairman, the President in his annual message to Congress had this to say:

We have as a. Nation. a definite duty to see that no deserving person in our country suffers from .hunger or cold.

The distinguished gentleman from Massachusetts IMr. LuCE] said on this tloor this afternoon that we stood pledged to the proposition that n-o deserving person should suiier from the pangs .of hunger, und that distinguished gentleman, together with other gentlemen on this fioo~ suggest that the way to prevent suff€ring Qn the part of oor people in the drought areas is to let the Red Cross come in and handle the matter. I am sure that we all honor and appreciate the work of the Red cross and would do anything we could to foster and promote the work of the Red Cro~. but how much better it is ior the Government of the United States to loan these people in these drought-stricken areas the money for them to work out their own destiny than to have the Red Cross go 'into the areas and give them hand-outs. [Applause.]

Our people do not ask for charity. They do not ask for public bounty.. They make no plea for hand-outs. Through us as their representatives they stand here to-day and aP

- peal to the Government of the United States to give tb~m an opportunity to work · <>ut their own destiny. Instead of suggesting that these people be made the oQbjeet <>f hand-

outs we should be proud of the fact that they, strong, independent, and self-reliant, prefer with the sweat of their brows and th~ labor of their hands to work out their own livelihood. [Applause.]

If they are permited to do this instead of being objects of charity, then it is absolutely necessary that this House amend the pending bill so as to make the amount of money a minimum· of $60,000,000.

Other gentlemen on this floor have told the House in a general way how the figure of c$60,UOO,OOO was arrived at.

I wish to go into a little more detail as to how that figure was arrived at. 1 want to take my State of Alabama as an example. In compliance with the request Qf the President of the United States the govemor of that State set Ut> a State drought committee, and that State drought committee then proceeded to set up in each and every county in the state a local col.Ulty committee. The local county committee was composed of the following leaders and officials in the particular county~ The probate judge, the superintendent of education, the .county farm agent, the county home demonstration agent, the county child welfare worker, the county health officer, one banker, and the president of the county farm bureau, and the Red Cross chairman.

This local county committee made a survey of the needS of its particular county and then made its report to the State committee. The State committee then made its report to Washington, and it was on the reports of these different State committees, as a basis, that the minimum figure of $60,0UO,OOO was arrived at. - [Applause.]

In my State of Alabama alone the State committee found that in .39 out of 67 of the counties there are a minimum of 38,000 families that will be unable to secure any loans unless the Government furnishes these loans, and that in the remaining 28 counties there are some 12,000 families that will be absolutely unable to get any loans from any private source. This gives us in Alabama a total of .50,000 families that can secure no credit from private sources. The verY minimum amount needed for each one of these families is $200, and if you multiply $200 by 50;000 you get the figure of $10,000,UOO which Hon. Seth P. Storrs, the commissioner of agriculture of the State of Alabama, says is the very minimum that Alabama must have to take care of the present distressing conditions growing out of the drought. Mr. F. W. Gist, State and Federal statistician for the state of Alabama, makes the following statement with reference ·to feedstuffs alone:

ln the matter of feedstuffs lt has been heretofore determined that the aggregate volume of grain requirements of farms in Alabama amounts to about 73,850,000 bushels of grain. The production of grain in 1930 has amounted to about 4:6,600,0UO bushels. The shortage this year, therefore, appears to be in the neighborhood of 27,0~000 bushels of grain teeds. It is quite conservatlve to estimate that of thts .amount at least $7,000,000 of credit will be required to supply the shortage.

I wish to emphasize what has been said on this floor before, and that is that all loans made by the Government under this bill would be secured by a first lien on all crops. This would mean that the Government would have a mortgage not -only on all crops but on all of the labor and all of the toil of the farmer, his wife, and his children. The record shows that the Government will collect approximately 85 per cent of all loans within a period of 10 months, with interest thereon. Unless the people in the drought areas are financed, it will mean 5,000,000 people more added to the ever-mounting number of the unemployed.

The Government :would be more than justified in making these loans if for no other purpose than to permit these people to keep at work and not add to the frightful condition of unemployment that now exists in the country. If the Congress could give $100,000,000 to the people of Europe in 1919, if again in 1921 it could give $20,000,000 to the people of Russia, and if in 1924 this House could pass a resolution to make a gift of $10,000,000 to the people of Germany, surely it would seem that the Congress would now be willing not to give but to loan $60,000,000 to prevent suffering and destress among our own people. President Hoover has recommended and the Congress is passing legislation to provide

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 987 an expenditure on public works during the next 12 months of a total of $650,000,000. We must realize that after all most of the benefit that will be derived from this great expenditure will go to the industrial sections and to. the cities and towns of this country and not to the rural sect10ns. Certainly it would seem that if we can expend this huge sum of money to help in the main the industrial sections of the country, that we ought to be able to loan to the farmers who suffered from drought or flood or storm or freeze less than 0.1 of the amount, remembering all the while that we will get some 85 per cent of it back. Justice dictates that we do it and necessity demands that we do it. [Applause.]

The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman from Alabama has expired.

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. WILSON].

Mr. WILSON. Mr. Chairman, gentlemen, in listening to the debate one is impressed with the fact that it leads away from the actual basis of this legislation. This legislation can have only as its proper basis a grave emergency; not one which charity could handle; not one which the Red Cross could handle; but beyond that, where it is absolutely necessary for the Federal Government to give assistance, not in the way of donations, but by the extension of credit to preserve the most important industry of the Nation. The emergency was recognized, I think, by all who knew of the disastrous drought throughout the vast territory of the Middle West and South. When that emergency was recognized, steps were taken to find out what action was necessary by the Federal Government and by Congress in the way of legislation. ·

My colleague, Mr. AsWELL, of Louisiana, the ranking member of the Committee on Agricultw·e •. spent tJ:le late summer and early fall working with those in the Department of Agriculture, with those experts, including secretaries of agriculture who came from the various States affec.ted, who made surveys of those States and collected definite information, and the conclusion was that the drought, without precedent as to duration and area affected, had caused an absolute failure of crops in the greater portion of 22 states. All the local credit had been exhausted for the present year and every effort had been made to produce the crops. All the collateral had been deposited and used to secure loans for the present year 1930, with no returns. Hence there was nothing in the way of money, credit, or security with which to begin next year's crop. So by this legislation we are simply asking an extension of credit by the National Government, such as it has given in many instances to industry as well as to other nations. It is not a donation. It is asked for by independent farmers, the last people in the world who would come and ask the Government for donations to assist them. When you have passed this legislation you have extended credit, not which will relieve the present distress but something which will give them an opportunity to come forward in the future and produce a crop and save the homes of these people and their farms, upon which depends the prosperity of all the Nation. •

So we take the viewpoint that what the Government will do under this act would be to make loans· to honest, responsible farmers who are willing to give any security that is possible, not, perhaps, what you wTmld like to have, but all that is left after the disaster, a lien upon their crops for the present year.

This amount was arrived at after a careful survey of the situation and a careful and conservative estimate as to what each State would need, and, in my judgment, the $60,000,000 should be the minimum allowed.

My friend Mr. PuRNELL, of Indiana, yesterday indicated that it did not make so much difference about the amount, but the main thing in his mind, whether it be $60,000,00-0 or $30,000,000, was that it be arranged so that none of it should be used in the purchase of food. If you have a lien upon the farmer's crop so that he can purchase his supplies to make a crop, he is going to use that just as sparingly as possible. What good will it do to have feed for his stock and

seed to plant if he has to abandon his family and go elsewhere to get work to earn money with which to feed his family? As a practical business proposition it should be just as the original resolution calls for, the $60,000,000, and include "food and necessary supplies."

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. WHITTINGTON].

Mr. WHITTINGTON. Mr. Chairman, we are dealing with a calamity that is almost nation-wide and, in my judgment, we should approach the question in a nonpartisan spirit. Heretofore we have provided aid for drought relief. We have responded to appeals in previous droughts and floods by the passage of the ordinary seed and feed loans.

It was recognized that the 1930 drought was an extraordinary one, extending, as it did, from Washington to New Orleans, and occurring in the Middle West, in the Pacific Northwest, and other parts of the country. The President of the United States at once saw an unusual emergency confronting the country. He called a national conference. A national drought-relief committee was appointed. Committees were set up in 22 States of the Union. This drought now covers 24 of the 48 States. The State committees had two meetings in Washington with the national drought committee. What has been the result? What relief has been proposed? What solution has been placed before the Congress to deal with this great calamity? The net result, in all fairness, up to date, has been a few conferences; the railroads voluntarily reduced their rates on feedstuffs, but those reductions have now been eliminated. They were of but little benefit in the South, as farmers had no money with which to buy feed. The President, through his Secretary of Agriculture, has proposed for this extraordinary calamity the ordinary seed and feed loans. The Government is not fully functioning in this emergency.

I oppose paternalism. I am opposed to socialism, but those who are opposed to the inclusion of food and the increased authorization admit the soundness of appropriations heretofore made for feed, seed, and for fertilizer. They admit that the Government of the United States has been justified in making loans or donations, not only in our own country but in foreign countries, as the result of an extraordinary calamity. It is admitted that it is sound. to make donations or loans to the stricken areas of foreign countries as the result of war, but in the face of a drought that has covered 24 of the 48 States it is denied that similar relief ought to be extended to our own people.

Mr. Chairman, the destitution and the destruction that now obtain in the drought sections of this country are just as certain as if an invading army or mighty flood had swept through the land.

The argument, in opposition, made by the distinguished majority leader [Mr. TILsoN] on Friday, December 12, is typical. He admits the soundness of loans for seed and fertilizer. He admits the soundness of the donation of $20,-000,000 to the starving Russians in 1921. He admits the soundness of the appropriation of $100,000,000 in 1919 for donations and loans to the suffering of Europe except the central powers, following the World War. He justifies it by saying that the conditions which obtained were caused by war. I am more interested in the results than I am in the cause. Hunger is hunger, whether caused by drought, by hurricane, by flood, or by war.

From the district which I have the honor to represent I have received letters, resolutions, and telegrams, saying that school children are barefooted these cold winter days; that they have but a single garment on, and that aid from the outside is imperative to prevent human suffering.

I am not unmindful of the aid heretofore extended by the Red Cross and its help must be invoked this winter. The Red Cross must feed the hungry for the next two or three months. The loans for food, if authorized, will not be available before the 1st of February or probably the 1st of March. The entire $5,000,000 for disaster relief, available to the Red Cross, will be exhausted before any of these loans are made. These loans are not to supplant but to supplement the Red Cross. I respectfully maintain, Mr. Chairman, that .if the Government of the United States is justified in mak-

988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 ing loans to foreign people in times of great emergencies the same argument applies when we are asked to aid and help our own.

I call attention to this significant fact that those who oppose the extension of ·these loans for food admit that they will be substantially repaid in the future, as they have been repaid in the past, when made for feed. Under the Senate bill the loans are made on the same conditions, with the same security, and by the same agency for food as they are for feed. In other words, the tenant or small farmer who will be benefited thereby in my territory will give a lien on his crop for 1931, and it will be just as safe and just as ample to repay the loans for food as for feed. If one loan is sound the other loan is sound. To be sure, man is worth more than cattle; and a loan for human being is sounder and more justifiable, if the Government is going to provide relief. [Applause.]

The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. LucEJ made reference to a statement by Mr. Harvey C. Couch, chairman of the drought-relief committee from the State of Arkansas. I read from a telegram published in the RECORD of December 16, page 791, sent to Senator RoBINSON by Mr. Couch:

LITTLE RoCK, ARK., December 5, 1930. Bon. JosEPH T. RoBINSON,

Senate Office Building: We urgently request that Arkansas congressional delegation do

everything possible to assure appropriation of at least $60,000,000 for drought relief. Sum proposed by HAuGEN far too small to meet situation in view of number of States requiring assistance. We are confident proponents of measure carrying small appropriation do not realize disastrous effects of drought. If our committee can be of assistance in supplying data, please command us.

B. c. COUCH, Chairman State Drought-Relief Committee.

I indicated a few moments ago that I was slow to approve the extension of the policy heretofore adopted in making loans for seed to food, but I believe the exigencies of the occasion justify it.

My friend from Illinois [Mr. HULL] said a few minutes ago that the farmers ought to use their · own food and their own corn to feed their families. In the district I represent cotton and corn are the chief products. There is substantially no corn, because of the greatest -diought the Nation has ever known. There is no hay, there are no foodstuffs, and there are no feedstuffs. It is as important to feed human beings as it is to feed mules and horses.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks and to include the proceedings, recommendations, and resolutions adopted by a mass meeting of the people of Bolivar County, Miss., on December 11, 1930; to include a letter to me from E. W. Taylor, president of the Board of Supervisors of .Quitman Cornty, Miss., dated December 12, 1930; and to include a telegram to me, dated December 16, 1930, by P. L. Denton and other citizens of Quitman County, Miss. .

The CHAIRMAN: Is there objection? There was no objection. The matter referred to is as follows:

PROCEEDINGS OF MASS MEETING HELD AT ROSEDALE, BOLIVAR COUNTY, MISS., DECEMBER 11, 1930, TO DISCUSS WAYS AND MEANS FOR RELIEF FROM CONDITIONS CAUSED BY DROUGHT AND BUSINESS DEPRESSION

At a meeting of the people of Bolivar County for the purpose of investigating and reporting to Congress the unprecedented conditions resulting from business depression, low prices, and the recent drought visited upon this ·section the following proceedings were had:

The meeting was called to order by Hon. Walter Billers, sr., who stated its object.

Senator W. B. Roberts, of Rosedale, was elected chairman and C. B. Black, of Rosedale, was elected secretary.

After numerous citizens had given statements of the effect of short crop and low prices and the condition of the people of the various communities as a result therefrom. a committee consisting of Walter S1llers, jr. (chairman), T. Y. Williford, H. H. McGowen, and J. W. McLellan were appointed, with instructions to give hearing to the people from each neighborhood represented and to make report of their findings to the meeting.

The committee made the following report and recommenda-tions, to wit: -

"The undersigned committee, after hearing the statements and having questioned reliable and informed persons regarding conditions prevailing in the various communities of the county, beg leave to submit -the following report:

"The conditions which obtain throughout the country ·are appalling to a people who heretofore have been noted for their energy, thrift, and prosperity, and, while humiliating, it has become imperatively necessary for them to appeal to the National Government for aid to tide them 'through this unprecedented disaster, aggravated and made doubly serious by the low prices of cotton and cottonseed upon which these people rely as their sole source of subsistence.

" We find that famllies in these communities who in 1929 produced from 17 to 18 bales of cotton, and received from 18 to 20 cents a pound therefor, and from 10 to 12 tons of .cottonseed, from which they received $34 to $35 a ton, h~ve this year produced from 5 to 6 bales of cotton on the same land, and have received but from 10 to 12 cents a pound therefor, and from 3 to 3¥2 tons of cottonseed, from which they received from $23 to $24 per ton, with the result that only a few made enough to pay for their food; that this is illustrative of the conditions that prevail throughout the entire county, with but few execpetions. Tenants have not been able to pay rent and mule feed and have made no corn or hay to feed their stock through the winter, and, moreover, are unable to feed and clothe themselves or to pay taxes on their stock.

"We find that only in rare instances have landowners been able to pay their bankers, and as a rule bankers are not able to carry the landowners and their tenants, and the landowner as a rule is not able to carry his teriants or even pay his taxes.

"Such conditions have affected business, merchants, plant ers, bankers--all business alike. Distress such as never before existed even during the most disastrous floods stalks through our midst. It is with dismay that our people are awakening to the deplorable condition. It is tragic! Men and women are spending sleepless nights, and soon will be suffering from cold and hunger unless aid comes from the National Government--the only source from which relief can be hoped for or expected.

"In view of this approaching calamity, we recommend that copies of this report, with the accompanying resolutions, be sent to our Senators and Representatives in Congress, with the urgent request that they lay the conditions of our people before Congress with their plea for relief. .. •

WALTER BILLERs, Jr., Chairman .

.. J. W. McLELLAN, •• T. Y. Wn.LIFORD,

"B. H. McGOWEN, Committee."

RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS FOR GOVERNMENT AID FOR DROUGHT SUFFERERS

Whereas on account of the crop failure caused by the most destructive drought ever visited upon our people, and the business · depression now upon us, the income of our cotton producers has been lowered to less than one-third of the average yearly income, and there is now wid~spread destitution in the county, and it is evident that this deplorable condition will steadily grow worse during the coming winter months on account of the want of employment; and

Whereas from reports of representatives of the Red Cross it is estimated that more than 4,000 families (an average of five persons to the family, making more than 20,000 people) 1n Bolivar County are in want, and are unable to obtain for themselves food and clothing; and

Whereas the local communities having no funds to contribute are unable to care for these suffering people, and it is ascertained that the Red Cross, on account of lack of funds, is unable to handle the situation; and

Whereas unless aid is obtained from the National Government these suffering human beings will be left to the ravages of cold and hunger during the coming winter months: Now, therefore~ bert

Resolved, By the citizens of Bolivar County, Miss., in mass meeting assembled, at Rosedale, on this the 11th day of December, 1930, that our Senators and Representatives in Congress are urged to use their best efforts to secure from the National Congress an appropriation to be used in alleviating this distressed condition, and give ai and relief to these thousands of suffering people.

That _copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Senators and Representatives in Congress from Mississippi.

• DECEMBER 13, 1930. Hon. W. M. WHITTINGTON,

Washington, D. C. DEAR Sms We are writing you at the urgent request of many

of our leading citizens and are giving you facts as they exist in this county at present.

We are in the midst of the hardest fight since reconstruction days to save many of our people from starvation, exposure to weather, and general physical distress. Many people are facing dire destitution. Their crops have been consumed. We have no industries from which they can derive means of sustenance.

The tenant class makes up more than 80 per-cent of our population. These people are absolutely dependent for food, warm clothing, and medical aid from the planters. It is for this 80 per cent of our population that we so seriously need immediate Federal aid.

Unfortunately, Quitman County was overfiowed early this year by Coldwater River, daxp.aging roads and bridges and destroying llves~ck, poultry, feed, and seeds amounting to thousands ot

•

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 989 • dollars. At one time more than 60 per cent of this county was

under water. This caused a delay in planting of this year's crop. Coupled with this handicap, the farmers suffered the summer's terrible drought; then came the decline in prices. All of these conditions following each other in succession have practically paralyzed not only the planters, who want to carry on, but the banks and all other financial institutions available.

Our collateral is already pledged to the limit for production credit during 1930, and as our gross income was cut about 75 per cent of normal we are helpless at present to qualify for loans where collateral is required. What we need is some means of relief to t ide us over the next 60 days.

Many people of Quitman County are absolutely in urgent need. Many children in school are seriously undernourished and poorly clad. Some are attending without shoes and with no other clothing for their body except overalls.

Local organizations are unable to meet the situation even at present, and the needs will be many times multiplied as the winter a-dvances.

The people of the county, as a rule, are grimly accepting the conditions as calmly as could oe expected, hoping against hope that better times will come soon.

Another phase of our distress is the livestock situation. Many of the planters have been forced to turn out their mules to shift for themselves on account of having no feed, as result of the drought. A large per cent of these will not survive the winter. Those that do survive will not be in fit condition to do effective work in next year's crop. .

These conditions constitute a disaster which the Government has already recognized, and upon the basis of previous conditions no more serious than ours the Government in the past has given substantial aid. We are therefore asking you to make a strong plea in our behalf for assistance that will at least mitigate our distress as much as is humanly possible.

Our local Red Cross is already functioning, but they are handicapped seriously for lack of ftmds.

Hoping that you will give•this your immediate attention, we are, Yours very truly,

Hon. WILL M. WHITTINGTON,

E. w. TAYLOR, President, Board of Supervisors.

S. W. JONES, S. R. EVANS.

MARKS, MISS., December 16, 1930.

Member of Congress, Washington, D. C. The citizens of Quitman County, Miss., in mass meeting as

sembled, this day adopted and approved the letter of December 13, written to you by E. W. Taylor, president of the Board of Supervisors, and others, and earnestly request that you devote your time and attention to obtaining any prompt aid to relieve Quitman County from the dire situation. Many thousands are in necessitous circumstances and experiencing great physical suffering from lack of food and clothing. The condition with reference to livestock is even more acute. Time is of the utmost importance.

P. L. DENTON, s. R. EVANS, . A. A. POGUE, S. W. JONES, E. W. TAYLOR,

Committee.

1\f'JI. WHITTINGTON. Let me make this statement: The ordinary farmer and the ordinary tenant pledges his crop for money with which to buy food and feed. In my district he will be unable to obtain credit, because the banks, mer·chants, and landlords have not collected more than 35 per cent to 50 per cent of the amounts they advanced during 1930 and the net value of the cotton crop is not more than one-third. So there is no local credit available. [Applause.J

QUESTION

Two days ago the mo_tion to suspend the rules and pass the House relief bill, with no loans for food and with an authorization for only $30,000,000, failed to pass. The question before the House is whether under the general rules it will pass the Senate bill or the House bill. The issue is whether Congress will provide loans for food and whether it will authorize $60,000,000.

AMOUNT

There should be an adequate authorization. For the first time the question is being treated from a national viewpoint. Both bills provide for loans in any drought or storm stricken area anywhere in the United States. Any storms or floods before the 1931 crops are planted anywhere in the United States would come under the provision of the bill. The authorization should be ample. The amount may or may not be used. The mat ter is in the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture. Congress is providing for the greatest drought in the greatest depression the country has ever

known. It would be a mistake if insufficient funds were provided.

The chairmen of the State drought-relief committees held a meeting at Washington about October 20, 1930. The statement was made that at least $60,000,000 would be required. It is significant that the loans made in the South have been repaid. Ninety-one and four-tenths of those made in Georgia under the act of February 25, 1929, have been repaid.

CRITICISMS

The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. ADKINs] argued that landlords should provide for food for tenants. The trouble is that landlords have lost enormously, are without funds, and are unable to make advances. Cotton is bringing one ... half the cost of production. Banks and merchants are unable to extend credit.

The gentleman from Kansas [Mr. HoPE] called attention to the size of the cotton crop in Alabama during the past year. In the territory that I represent there is a short cotton crop and an unprecedentedly low price. Practically no corn or hay was raised. The farmers are without food and feed stuffs. They are unable to buy, because the proceeds of the cotton crop are almost 75 per cent less than last year.

RED CROSS

The disti:q_guished gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. LucEJ admits that there is a duty, but maintains -that the Government should not make loans for food. He asserts that the Red Cross will provide food. I do not understand that the Red Cross has either the funds or the disposition to provide food in the drought-stricken areas, except during the next two or three winter months. It will then be necessary for those whom the Red Cross aids to obtain loans with which · to make their crops. There is no greater institution among us than the American Red Cross. The local Red Cross in M~sissippi is doing its best. Assistance is promised for probably two months by the American Red Cross. This assistance will not suffice.

The American Red Cross will make all donations that are made. I am asking that the donations of the American Red Cross be supplemented. I do not propose that they be superceded.

LOANS

I emphasize that the Senat~ bill provides for loans for food. There is no charity. There will be the same security on which landlords, merchants, and bankers normally make advances. The Government is asked to provide the loans, because banks, landlords, and merchants are without funds. The drought, reinforced by the nation-wide financial depression, makes it .impossible for local agencies either to provide for all the donations that may be made during the winter, or · the loans with which to make the crops for 1931. The local Red Cross in the district that I represent is doing splendid work in all the counties. Their funds will be shortly exhausted. Every dollar contributed by the American Red Cross will be utilized within the next 69 or 90 days.

MISREPRESENTATION

It is said that if loans are provided for feed anq seed, they will be used in cases of necessity for food. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. KETCHAM] virtually admitted the necessity for food in many cases, and substantially stated that the loans would be as widely used for food as for feed.

Section 2 of both the Senate and House bill makes it a criminal offense for any person to make any false representation for the purpose of obtaining the loans. Congress should be frank. Deception, dishonesty, and misrepresentation should not be encouraged. If loans in the discretion of the Secretary of Agriculture are to be used for food, the legislation should so stipulate. There is enough hypocrisy. It should not be perpetuated in providing relief in a great emergency.

I favor the Senate bill. Democracy is being challenged and representative government is being tested by economic conditions. The unprecedented depression is made more acute in one-half of the States of the Union by the longest, most severe, and most widespread drought the country has

'.

990 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 1 'l ever experienced. The States can not solve the problem. Seventy-three of the 81 counties in Mississippi are in the drought area. Only the Nation is equal to the emergency. Will Congress provide for property rights and ignore human rights? [Applause.] . The CHAffiMAN; The time of the gentleman from Mississippi has expired.

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield three minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. ABERNETHY]. ·

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr: Chairman, ladies and gentlemen of the committee, I have voted for every farm-relief measure that has come before this House since I have been a Member, whether it was from Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Washington, Illinois, or from whatever sec.tion of the country, and in this instance this is a nation-wide proposition. Before I came to Congress this session it was my understanding that our leaders, Democrats and Republicans, had got together with the President for the purpose of relieving this emergency, and that our distinguished Democratic leader in the Senate, Senator RoBINSON, and our distinguished Democratic leader in this matter in the House [Mr. AswELL] had an understanding with Mr. Hoover and Mr. Hyde, and others, that this fund would be not less than $60,000,000.

It went through the Senate including food as well as feed for stock, and when it came to the House, for some reason, it was cut down to $25,000,000, and finally the Agricultural Committee, by a majority, put it to $30,000,000, leaving out food.

It looks to me, if you want our cooperation-and you need it to help relieve the unemployed and regardless of what brought about this awful situation whether it is ·a Republican disaster or what it is, we should all work to one end to relieve the situation. Hungry folks need food. Let us put this through for the entire $60,000,000. We need it, every cent.

This is not a charity. but is a loan to the farmer and a legitimate loan, practically all of which will be repaid. It is going to help the farmer and it is going to help the entire country. .

If you gentlemen on the Republican side of the House need some help for the h~ary in the cities, I for one am going to vote with you, because if there is anything that will keep down revolution, keep down radicalism, keep down communism, it -is to keep our people from being hungry. There is too much wealth in this country, unequally distributed though it be, not to give relief to the people who are suffering and starving all over the country. I tell you people who are trying to confine this to $30,000,000 and who are trying to confine it to feed for stock and pigs and hogs and horses and things of that kind, while you are allowing people to go hungry, you had better watch out. The first day we met here we saw something in front of this Capitol that we had never seen before, and that was a lot of reds out there.

The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman from North Carolina has expired.

Mr. STAFFORD. It did not scare the gentleman, I hope. . Mr. ABERNETHY. Scare me? Yes, sir; if present con

ditions keep up for the next five years, I would not give you 10 cents on the dollar for all your property. We had better take care of the hungry and starving people of our Nation if we expect to keep them law-abiding and preserve our institutions. The conditions- to-day all over the country need our patriotic, :conscientious endeavors to save us from seriouS disaster.

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. HILL].

Mr. HILL of Washington. Mr. Chairman, in the few minutes allotted to me I will not have time to discuss the question of the amount of money to be authorized for this relief. I regret the necessity of calling to ·your· attention a serious dis-

- crimination in this bill against the drought-stricken farmers .... of my state. '

The farmers of the State of Washington, under the terms of the bill as now written, stand to be deprived of the relief ~ be granted in either t~e Senate resolution or the House

• resolution; that is, they will not share in the relief to the extent that the farmers in the drought-stricken areas of other States will share.

This is due to the fact that we have a peculiar method of farming in the State of Washington. Due to the soil and climatic condition in that state we grow on the same piece of land only. one crop every two years. We must plow our land in the early spring in order to prepare it for a crop in the following calendar year. The land that we will crop in the spring of 1931 is already plowed. It was plowed in the spring of 1930, and we must prepare our ground in the spring of 1931 for the crop that we will produce in 1932. If this bill passes as it is now written, our farmers can not do their spring plowing in 1931. There is no provision in the bill for a loan for that purpose unless the ground so plowed is to be cropped in 1931. We will, therefore, be afforded onlY· one-half the measure of relief that will be afforded to the farmers in other drought-stricken areas. I know that the committee did not intend to discriminate against the farm-ers of my State. •

The terms of this bill are such as to fit the entire seasonal farming operations in most of the agricultural sections, but they do not embrace our plowing, for the reason that the relief proposed is confined to such farming operations as pertain to the crop of 19~1 only. As I have just stated, we have~ to plow our land the year previous to growing a crop on it, and it must be plowed in the spring. While this spring plowing is a necessary part of ou; farming operations in 1931, it will have no connection with the crop that we will grow and harvest in 1931. Hence, under this bill as now written, we can secure no financial assistance for such plowing. If full justice is to be done the farmers of the State of Washington under this bill, it must be amended to include summer fallowing in the spring of 1931 for the crop to be harvested in 1932.

I want to explain the term "summer fallowing," in order that you may know what I mean when I use that term. Summer fallowing is the plowing of land in the spring and the cultivation of it during the ensuing summer preparatory for a crop to be harvested in the following calendar year. The land that is thus plowed and cultivated lies fallow during the crop season of that year and is seeded for a crop to be harvested in the following year. The land that we are to seed for a crop in 1931 is the summer fallow of 1930. When we ask for relief for summer fallow we are not asking any more than is granted under this bill to farmers in other agricultural sections of the drought-stricken areas. The measure of the relief proposed to be give~ is to aid the drought-stricken farmers in the entire farming 'Operations for the production of one crop. That is what I am demanding for the drought-stricken farmers of my State. But they will not get it unless this bill is amended to provide for loans for summer fallowing in the season of 1931. At the proper time in the consideration of the bill such an amendment will be offered, and I appeal to your sense of justice and iairness to support the amendment in order that the farmers of my State may share in this relief on an equal basis with the farmers in other drought-stricken areas .

'The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Washington has expired.

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, how much time have I remaining?

The CHAIR~. The gentleman has six minutes remaining.

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Georgia £Mr. TARVERJ.

· Mr. TARVER. Mr. Chairman. ladies and gentlemen of the committee, the discussion on the pending bill has clearly demonstrated inability on the part of CDDgl'ess to deal adequately with the situation which confronts this country to-day both in agriculture and in industry. Whenever the question of what is necessary to be done to remedy existing conditions comes up we are met with the argument that an attempt to be really effective must necessarily go far beyond anything which has ever been undertaken in our Government and establish a. new precedent which conservatives

•

1 1930 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 991 regard with extreme concern. We are dillydallying with the agricultural problem when we attempt to limit our efforts to loaning a little money in the sections stricken by drought or storm. The lending of money will be of little help in any event; but, in the name of common sense, if money is to be loaned to a farmer on account of his need and inability to make a cro·p without it, why should the Secretary of Agriculture h~ ve to make a careful inquiry first through complicated machinery in order to ascertain whether his need came about because of drought or storm? What difference does it make, from the standpoint of equity and justice, how it came about? It may have resulted-and in millions of cases has resulted-from inadequate prices obtained for farm products; it may have resulted from the general business depression obtaining throughout the country and to-day writing its warning of worse to come on the walls in letters and figures that he who runs may read; it may have resulted from bank failures or from any one of many other causes; but, whatever its cause, the result is the same. The farmer is in need; the farmer can not make a crop without help; and legislation pretending to help him which requires first that an inquiry be made to determine whether he has been stricken by flood or drought as a condition precedent to aiding him is illogical, unreasonable, and unjust. I know that the principal reason assigned for that restriction is that we are merely following precedents established by former Congresses, but a bad precedent ought not to be followed. Besides, we are confronted with a condition to-day which is in many respects without precedent, and we can not adequately deal with it if we insist upon going no farther than we have gone with other and less serious situations. · The Representatives of urban areas have pointed to the .fact that the pending bill is intended only as a measure of agricultural relief; and that it, nor any other measure proposed by this administration, carries with it anything of hope for the industrial population of the country who live in the cities, and millions of whom to-day are suffering for the necessities of life. It is a just complaint. Those of us who live in sections that are chiefly agricultural can not be ·just to others and fail to recognize that fact. We can point out, of course, that the loans made to farmers are to be secured by mortgages on their crops, and that in no way could loans to workers in industry be similarly secured. I do not concede that to be necessarily true. Industrial workers do borrow money, and do secure their loans, and in many instances pay rates of interest that run as high as 120 per cent per annum.

In this time of stress their suffering is being taken advantage of by the loan sharks to such an extent that the Russell Sage Foundation is seriously advocating, as a measure of relief, a model bill for .the District of Columbia which it is hoped will be adopted throughout the country, legalizing loans of the money sharks at the rate of interest of 42 per cent per annum. I do not, therefore, agree that industrial workers could not borrow money from the Government, and could not secure their loans. They are borrowing from the loan sharks, and they are securing them. I do admit, of course, that for the Government to take steps for relief of this character to our industrial population would be establishing a new precedent and extending the theory of Government aid far beyond any limits which it has heretofore known. But if you will look beyond precedent, if you will look beyond the assigned reasons for this pending legislation, you will admit that it has its foundations in that feeling of the human heart that wherever dire need exists in a civilized country good conscience requires that it shall be remedied; through private channels, if possible; but remedied.

1

I am not to be understood as advocating any particular method of relief for the unemployed industrial workers of the Nation; but I do say that no government can rank as measuring up to the obligations of good government so long as there exists in its territory widespread suffering toward which it is directing no probably effective methods of relief. I can appreciate the attitude of those who throw up their

hands in holy horror at the suggestion of the "dole." I must confess that I entertain the same innate feeling of repulsion against such a suggestion. But after everything is said which can be said, there is still a feeling deep down in the hearts of our people that this country belongs to the people who made it; that, while differences in circumstances and in fortune, as well as in ability to earn and keep money, have resulted in collecting most of its assets into a few large pools, yet the rank and file of the people, who produced that wealth, can not be expected to fight for its protection in war, maintain a government for it in peace, sustain those who possess it in their ownership, and nevertheless be denied as much of it as may be necessary in order for them to keep body and soul together.

The question that we are arguing to-day is a superficial question. Whatever shape you place this bill in before you pass it, whether you make it carry sixty or thirty millions, whether it shall be loaned for food or not; these are important questions, of course; but of far greater importance is the question of whether this Congress or some future Congress shall enact legislation which will give to the farmer and laboring man of this country a fair deal, so that he may receive a reasonable part, at least, of the proceeds of his labor and never be in the attitude of being an applicant for charity to that more fortunate part of the population which sits in ease and luxury and asserts right of ownership over what he has produced. Call it socialism, if you will. It is the feeling which menaces governments to-day. It is a feeling which can only be allayed by granting justice to the producers of the Nation. You will pass bills for the protection of capital; you will continue conserving the interests of what you call big business; you will continue denying to the laboring man and farmer the consideration even of measures intended for his welfare, until one day, in some such crisis as exists to-day and is impending for the immediate futtire, the feeling of the downtrodden will break all restraints. If y'ou want to prevent the spread of communismand I hate the name of it-if you want to curb the growth of radical sentiment, then pass some of the many measures that are buried in the committee rooms of this Congress to-day and are intended for the welfare of the masses.

The people of this country who live on its farms and toil in its workshops were not born to be peons, to be held in industrial slavery. They are of the strain which laid broad and deep the foundations of this Republic, and they are in large part the ones who are called on to send their sons to battle in its defense in time of peril. As they would not permit you to enslave them by law, so they will not permit themselves to be enslaved in fact. When I see men who have spent their lives working for some great railroad or other corporation thrown aside like old shoes in times like this and allowed to starve if they do not seek and find charity, when I see men who have always been industrious producers deprived of the necessities of life while those who have received the fruits of their labor live in ease and luxury and devote their discussion of governmental questions largely to inveighing against " doles " and insisting that the starving be left to the Red Cross, and that nothing be done to disturb "the business interests" of the country, I can not but wonder if the time may not some day come in this country, as it has come in otlier parts of the world-When the masses rise like Samson, trying if their strength be

shorn, Feeling through their pulses quiver the fresh energies of morn, Brooding on the wrongs of ages, trembling in their new-roused

hate, Fiercer for the wakened devil rushing through the Patience Gate; What will be the end, 0 Dreamer? What disasters dire shall

swarm, When the thongs that bound fall broken, and the masses lift

their arm?

And that day may be nearer than some of you think. The people of this country are more intelligent, are thinking more, are understanding more to-day than ever before. It is a question as to how much longer they will permit politicians to throw sand in their eyes when dealing with legislation of vital importance to them, and whether, when they have determined to end the unjust system of this day, they

•

•

992 CONGRESSIONAL RE,CORD-HOUSE DECEMBER' 17. will bring about that end through the orderly channel& of "' strick"en " is modified by " drought and/or storm." The> political action or otherwise. I have confidence iri them to cause of tlle "strieken areas"· is limited to" drought and/or believe that the people will assume control of their Govern- storm,,, but agam it will be seen that the element of time· ment through orderly channels. But when men speak;; ot the "' drought and(or storm,. is not involved. grudgingly of using a small part-of the national wealth to Webster's Dictionary define the word " strieken '" as-relieve the starving and the distressed in a time like this.. 1. Smitten; wounded, as the stricken deer. I can appreciate the temptation which comes. to. some un- 2' •. Worn dut;- a.fl'ected by d.lsabrrttfes and weaknesses. Abrah!l.m controllable spirits to. cast aside all restraint and to demand was old and well stri'Cken in age. Gen~sis xxiv, L

what is justly theirs-a rrgbt to live out of the. wealth they It can not b~ su:ccessfully urged that many Members of have produced~ Congress did not desire this legislation to grant relief to any

Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman section not suffering from a drought or storm of 1930·. Tne from Georgia [Mr. LANKFoRD]. ' will of Congress as unequivocally expressed in the law is · Mr. LANKFORD of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, ladies. and binding and not the will of a few or even a majority which gentlemen of the committE:~ I a:m very much concerned is not written into the Jaw. about this proposed emeYgency, seed, feed, and fertilizer Many, even a majority of the House, want only $25,00(),000 legislation. My people in Georgia need this assistance more authorized by this bill. Their will counts for nothing in the than ever before. It is true that this is generally considered construction of th~ bill if when it is signed a different to be a drought relief bill, but it now seems reasonably cer- amount is authorized. Some want the authorization of tam that when the bili reaches the President it will provide loans to buy food. The· language finally writ ten into the for relief " to farmei"s in the drought and/ or storm· stricken bill will settle this question unless it is ambiguous and inareas of the United States," thus including my district and definite. all that part of the Southeastern States which is still Up to this time no one on the floor of either the House severely suffering from the awful storms of the fall of 19-23 or the Senate has contended that any "drought and/or

Let me say just here that there is absolutely no limit or storm stricken " area should be excluded because the provision in the bill as to when the drought or storm must drought or storm occurred prior to 1930. There have been have occurred. If the stricken condition of the area exist efforts to make the bill apply to all financially depressed at the time of the passage of the bill and was caused by' a areas. These hav~ met defeat and it has been urged that • drought and/or storm " of the past, the farmers of sueh the bill should only authorize help to the specific " drought area are entitled to the relief afforded by this measure, pFo- and/or storm stricken areas." When this bill was being vided, of course, the Secretary of Agriculture "shall fin~ discussed before the House Committee on Agriculture I used' that an emergency for sucl'l assistance exists." 'l'his provt- the following languag~: sion of the act inYolves present, past, and future time. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I wish •to bring before the com-

The ·~drought and/ or flood'" must have occurred at any mittee just. one additionar: idea. ll hope that the: blll repol!ted time in the past, the stncken condition must exist at the out by the committee will be so worded as to take eare of those

sections, ot the country which are su.f!ering from. drought and present, the emergency shall exist in the future, to wit, when flood conditions. which occurred' not only thts year. but as much the loan shall be made, and the help is for th~ crop' of as two- years ago. 1931. I was using the w.ord " flood " as a synonym of· rainstorm

Being very much concerned about the constructinn of this ru: storm. After I used the language just quoted Mr. FuLMER.,

provision of this bill, I have discussed it with Members of ru South Carolina, a member of the committee, voiced his the Congress at both ends of the Capitol, and I find that approval of the suggestion that storm-stricken areas should everyone who has carefullY analyzed th-e bill is fully con- be included, regardless of whether the storm occurred in vinced that every "'drought and/or storm stricken area in 1930 or during. ptior years. the United states" is to be protected regardless of when the During this colloquy Mr. AswELL, of Louisiana, the rank... drought and/ or storm " occurred. A few Members at first ing Democrat of the House Committee on· Agriculture, blush said the bill probably was intended to cover only emer- called attention tcr his bill, House Joint Resolution 403, and gencies which arose during the present year of 1930. Even said it " provides far relief in the drought and storm stricken these few~ though, later admitted I was right in my con- areas,' and further ~xplained that it made no difference struction. They could not do otherwise when they were re- when the drought or storm occurred the storm-stricken minded that the bill contained absolutely no limitation as area. would' be protected if his. bill was enacted. to when the ' drought and/or storm" must have crecurred. ms bill will not be enacted, but it seems now· that the I repeat: Assistance is for 1!131 crop-, stricken conditions language in question as written in his bill will be included must exist. now. emergency must be present at time of loan, in the present bill when it becomes law. but "drought andjor flood," which caused stricken eondi- Therefore this colloquy between Doctor AsWELL, Mr. Fm.-tio~ may have occurred on any indefinite date in the past. MER, and myself was before the House Committee on Agri-

It will be seen that the words "drought and/or storm culture may become very pertinent if any question should stricken area of the United States" is not a time limitation arise as to what the committee intended. but is a limitation of the area in which loans are to be The committee by its silence approved what we said and authmized under this bill. The phrase is not descriptive of now we find the vel'y language discussed and construed by time but is descriptive of place. The bill does not even us is to be included in this bill at the instance and upon t~ provide that the individual farmer must have su1ferecf as request of the House Committee on Agriculture. -the result of the "drought and/ or storm." The bill only I have only to-day, again, discussed this matter with provides that the individual farmer must now reside in the Doctor AsWELL and Mr. FuLMER and they both reiterate and "drought and/or storm stricken area.," and there must also confirm the opinions expressed by them in the colloquy with ·be present at this time an emergency for help in so far as me before the House Committee on Agriculture. the crop of 1931 of the individual farmer is concerned. A somewhat si.nular colloquy occurred on the 9th of this

In other words, an individual may not have been a farmer month on the floor of the Senate between Senator BLEASE

in the particular section when the drought or storm came and Senator McNARY, except that Senator BLEASE was comand yet he is eligible for a loan if all other requirements plaining because tlle report on the bill by Senator Me ... are met and he is a farmer in the "drought and/or storm NARY did not mention South Carolina, and senator McNARY

stricken area " at this time. explained that the bill as passed would be conclusive rather The phrase now under consideration is just as completely than the report of the chairman of the Senate Committee

and definitely descriptive of the section of the cmmtry to on Agriculture and Forestry. be benefited by this bill as would be the designation of On the same day' Senator SMITH, of South Carolina, on

-same by States counties, or even by well-defined boundaries. the floor of the Senate, called special attention to his conThe word "stricken' refers to a condition regardless of struction of the language :r am now discussing. The situa

·when it arose Of cow-se, in the instant bill the adjective tion·he discussed in his State is. identical with the. situatio.u

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 993 1n my State, and Senator SMITH's construction of this part of the bill as then and there given in the Senate is identical with my construction now urged.

Although the Senator said he would insist the bill should be administered as then construed by him and now construed by me, no Senator took issue with him, but allowed his legal construction of this part of the bill to go unchallenged.

I respectfully contend that the language in question is not ambiguous and not susceptible of more than one construction; but that even if it was, and we were to examine the -debates to this good hour, we would be convinced that Congress means to protect the "drought and/or storm stricken areas of the United States" and none other. Certainly if the language excludes all areas not mentioned, it includes all areas which are specifically named. It seems to me that by every possible construction my section of the country is included if the storm-stricken condition of 1928 is still prestmt. Then, again, it must be remembered that this is relief legislation, and as such is entitled to liberal construction in behalf of those whom we are endeavoring to help.

It seems that there were no severe storms during this vear 1930, and that if this language is not construed to cover any storms of · previous years then it is meaningless and 11.mounts to naught. Such a· construction, I respectfully contend; is unwarranted and would be contrary to the purposes of the act.

Now, if my people are includefl as a legal right, are there also good moral reasons for their inclusion and is their :financial distress such as to bring them within the purview of the law?

I admit that if a section at any past time fully recovered from a storm or drought, then it would not now be entitled to relief, it matters not how serious may be its present condition occasioned by other causes.

If a section, though, is still storm stricken, it matters not how many intervening causes may have prevented a recovery, · it is nevertheless entitled to all the benefits given a fitorm -stricken area.

For instance, an old man may have a stroke of paralysis and other causes, such as old age, ill health, bad climatic conditions, and so on, may prevent his recovery, yet he would still be a paralytic, but if he should recover fully and then fall and become a cripple he would be stricken, . but not by paralysis.

Many areas of our country are stricken at present, but this bill only covers those areas which are" drought and/or storm stricken " and have never recovered from their original storm or drought stricken condition. I regret very much my district comes within this list of sections of our Nation. I rather my section was very prosperous.

My people made reasonably good crops this year, but because of low prices they were unable to recover from the stricken condition of 1928. Then, again, in order to show good faith with their Government, they repaid above 90 per cent of the money they had borrowed under the emergency seed, feed, and fertilizer acts of 1928 and 1929.

Then, again, the general financial depression, the stampede of bank failures and general bad economic conditions put additional burdens on them. As the result of all these things my people are probably in worse financial condition than they were two years ago.

They have never recovered from their storm-stricken condition of 1928 and to-day are truly "storm stricken" in every sense of these words. More banks are closing in my section than ever before. Much available cash is being sent elsewhere or put into postal savings. My people are in sore distress and I plead that they be given the assistance to which they are legally entitled under this bill.

The present money stringency or panic is causing much money, otherwise available to the farmers through the banks, to be put into postal savings. Thus my farmers will be deprived of the help of the money put into postal savings unless the Government comes to their rescue.

No section of the Nation made a better showing in the .. way of payment of emergency loans than mine during the

LXXIV-63

last two years. Evecy moral consideration should be given them.

Then, again, let me say that much of the money loaned my people will be used in growing tobacco, and it may be interesting to know that statistics show that every time the tobacco producers of the United States last year got $28 gross for their crop the United States received as internal revenue $43 net out of the tax on the manufactured products of tobacco.

The tobacco tax received by the Government last year is nearly as large as the entire amount authorized for use by the Federal Farm Board under the recent marketing act.

If this emergency bill should only authorize loans for all purposes to the amount of $45,000,000, this amount would be only 0.1 of what the Government received last year from tobacco taxes. Tobacco taxes run to much over a million dollars per day.

My people are only asking for a loan of a small per cent of what was received in cash from the products of my people last year. Another cogent moral reason why these loans should be made to niy district is because my people made such good repayments. Many people in as good and better financial condition than my people did not pay their loans but secured ·extensions. Most of my people paid theirs, believing that if they kept faith with their Government, they could reasonably expect help again under the same circumstances.

If they can not now at least reborrow the money they paid at so great a sacrifice they will, in effect, be penalized by their country because of their honesty.

I can not believe such will be the case if this bill includes help for "storm-stricken areas" when it is signed by the President.

Mr. Chairman, for several years before we sought emergency seed, feed, and fertilizer legislation for the South, I voted for relief to the drought-stricken areas of the Dakotas and other western States. We had never had a condition in the. South calling for such help and yet I supported this kind of legislation because I believed it to be right. I have very little faith in the patriotism of a man who only favors legislation that helps his section and who opposes just and fair legislation because his district is not directly benefited thereby.

I have introduced a bill to make available a sufficient fund to be used in behalf of fa:~,mers whenever and wherever the Secretary of Agriculture determines that an emergency exists because of drought, storm, or other great catastrophe. I believe this bill should pass. These emergencies come · often without warning and ofttimes when Congress is not in session.

Also I certainly would favor and support legislation providing for help to any and all citizens of our country who as a group are stricken by some great calamity. At this time of unemployment I would gladly support a measure to loan money to the laboring men of the big cities and throughout the country if an arrangement could be worked out to give the Government a lien on the products of their toil and make the loan reasonably safe and yet leave, at all times, enough wages or salary to support the family of the laborer.

Even if the Government lost some money by this process, no one with a heart could complain. The money lost by this kind of an arrangement or by these emergency farm loans, sinks into insignificance when we take into consideration the tremendous good that is done to a worthy group of our people.

The Department of Agriculture is to · be commended for the excellent service which it has rendered to the American farmer and yet, to my mind, no greater service has ever been rendered by the Department of Agriculture or any other department of this Government than the emergency seed, feed, and fertilizer service. Especia~ is this true when we consider the great good that is done and the small amount of money spent or loaned that never comes back and can be classed as permanently gone. It must be remembered that this money is only loaned and much is

994 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 repaid and can not be classed as spent and permanently or interest on loan made under the provisions of this joint resoludeducted from the funds of the Goverdnment. Why should tion shall be held by said commission as a revolving fund, which not Congress be ready to loan money to our farmers . and may be loaned on applications for the purposes and upon the terms

and conditions herein provided, and all money received there-laborers? This same Congress has been very liberal with the after as payments of interest and principal on all loans made unpeoples of other nations under similar circumstances. der the provisions of this joint resolution shall be covered into

I may say, in passing, I have not always. favored our the Treasury as miscellaneous receipts. being so liberal with other peoples. I believe Congress has Mr. Chairman, I shall not at this time attempt a full dis· gone to the extreme in some instances. In fact I have cussion of this liberality to other peoples. Neither shall I bitterly opposed much of the aid Congress has voted peoples make a long list of comparisons of the treatment of our of other countries. I do not wish to go into an extended people with that of peoples of other nations. A mere glance discussion of these foreign-relief measures at this time. at these extracts just read by anyone at all familiar with

The thing that puzzles me is why some of the ardent the present bill will show some remarkable differences besupporters of these relief plans to help peoples of other na- tween what was so graciously and liberally bestowed upon tions are now the most bitter opponents of this relief legis- other peoples and what it seems is now to be grudgingly and lation in behalf of the farmers of America. I would be very sparingly parceled out to only a few of the American farmglad for any of those who favored these foreign-relief meas- ers on harsh terms and for short periods of time. ures, and now oppose the relief bills for our own people, to I plead for a liberal emergency loan act for our farmers. take the floor and explain, what to my mind, is, on their Let us pass an act giving the Department of Agriculture the part, a very inconsistent and unpatriotic attitude. Very few power and funds to render a real service to our people who people realize just how generous with other peoples has been are so distressed at this time. the attitude of some Members of Congress who are now The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman· from Geor .. opposing these emergency, feed, seed, arid fertilizer loans. gia has expired.

Let us see what we have done for peoples living beyond Mr. ASWELL. Mr. Chairman, I yield three minutes to the confines of continental United States. the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. GLOVERJ.

Mr. Chairman, in order to keep the record straight, I w~h Mr. GLOVER. Mr. Chairman, ladies, and gentlemen, we to read from several acts heretofore passed by Congress. have before us to-day the Haugen bill from the House and

First, I will read from the loan act authorizing relief to the McNary bill from _the Senate. Before I came to Con-the populations of Europe, passed in 1920: gress I read a great deal about the McNary-Haugen bill.

That for the participation of the Government of the United At that time those two great minds were together. We find States in the furnishing of foodstuffs to populations in Europe them to-day as far apart as the poles. I am rather inclined and countries contiguous thereto suffering for the want of food, to think that the McNary part of the partnership has the United States Grain Corporation is hereby· authorized, with shown better judgment in his bill. I have my mind made the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to sell or dispose of flour now in its possession, not to exceed 5,000,000 barrels, for up to support this bill regardless of the amount it carries, cash or on credit at such prices and on such terms or conditions · but whenever we undertake to do justice to people we ought as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the act and to to do full justice. I am in favor of the amount that is relieve populations in the countries of Europe or countries con-tiguous thereto suffering for the want of food. provided in the Senate bill-$60,000,000-the same as is

provided by our distinguished friend from Louisiana [DocI will now read from the act authorizing a loan to tor AsWELL] in his bill. There is another provision in the

Russia, which was approved December 22, 1921: . bill that ought to be amended. I do not believe any man That the President is hereby authorized, through such agency on the floor of this House can justly defend this bill against

or agencies as he may designate, to purchase in the United States · · · ·t th + ·n t ·t h b and transport and distribute corn, seed grain, and preserved milk a proVISIOn m 1 a" Wl no perml a man W o arrows for the relief of the distressed and starving people of Russia and money on a mortgage to use that money as he will. Why for spring planting in areas where seed grains have been ex- limit a man and say that if he borrows the money on a ha.usted. The President is hereby authorized to expend or cause first mortgage on his crop he shall not buy food with it for to be expended, out of the funds of the United States Grain his wife and children? -Corporation, a sum not exceeding $20,000,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary for the purpose of carrying out the pro- I think $30,000,000 is entirely too little. One speaker here visions of this act. referred to my State of Arkansas to-day. Our banks in

I will now read from . a loan act to relieve the distress in the State of Arkansas last year loaned $76,000,000 to the Austria, which was approved the same day the Russian act agricultural people of that State. Eighty-six of those banks became.law: have failed this year on account of the drought in that

State. In my State lands that usually produce from 50 to That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to extend, for a period not to exceed 25 years, the time of payment 65 bushels of corn per acre the record shows made actually of the principal and interest of the debt incurred by Austria for only 4 bushels per acre or a little over. That will give you the purchase of flour from the United States Grain Corporation, a picture of the condition down there. When you take a and to release Austrian assets pledged for the payment of such first lien from a farm on his crop you have destroyed his loan, in whole or in part, as may in the judgment of the Secretary of the Treasury be necessary for the accomplishment of the every hope of getting any relief anywhere else. No one will purposes of this resolution. take a second mortgage. He can not get a loan from his

I will next read from the loan act for relief of the people friend or from his bank if he has already given a first lien of Porto Rico, which was approved on the 21st of December, on his crop. That provision ought not to be in the bill. 1928: The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman from

Arkansas has expired. For the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this resolution Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I Yl'eld 15 minutes to the

the commission shall have power to make loans to any individual coffee planter, coconut planter, fruit grower, or other agriculturist gentleman from Virginia [Mr. GARBER]. in the island of Porto Rico, in such amounts and upon such terms Mr. GARBER of Virginia. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen and conditions as the commission shall by regulation prescribe, tt t h th t I d t find including an agreement by the borrowers to use the loan for the of the commi ee, I regre very muc a o no my-purposes specified by .the commission; except that no such loan self entirely in accord with a majority of my own commitshall be made for a period of more than 10 years or in an amount tee. I always like to be regular, but I have come to the in excess of $25,000 to any one individual. The rate of interest conclusion that it is more important to be right than it is upon each such loan beginning with the fourth year shall be 5 per th t t ~""· t [A 1 ] A cent per annum, but the commission may, in its discretion, defer to be regular if e wo seem o COLu.LlC • PP ause. the payment of interest upon any such loan for such a period of good deal has been said here by way of criticism of the time as the commission shall deem necessary. All such loans shall Department of Agriculture and other people who have be made by the commission itself or through such agencies as the h f th 1 eli t• f icultural legislation commission shall designate. For carrying out the purposes of this C arge O e genera rec mg o agr · section there is hereby authorized to be appropriated the sum of I have no sympathy at all with this type of criticism, $6,ooo,ooo. because I think when human distress is present, when re-

Again, I read from the same act, as follows: lief of human need is pressing us, it is no time to indulge All money received during a period of five years from the date in loose criticism or to assume that any one person is more •

of the approval of this joint resolution as repayment of any loan interested in bringing about that relief than another. It is

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE 995

not a matter of politics; it is a matter, first, of public policy, and second, of bringing relief to human distress.

I do not favor the inclusion of food in this bill for two 1·easons that I suggest rather than try to discuss. There is no logic whereby we can justify the expenditure of this money for food in rural sections without doing the same thing for the cities. There is rio reason whereby we can feed a hungry man on the farm and at the same time deny food to the hungry man in New York City. I think we enter the general field bordering on charity and the dole when we go into this angle of relief. I believe the line of demarcation between legitimate financing and charity ought to be clearly made when it comes to the functioning of the Federal Government.

I do not think the proper province of the Government is to be found in the field of charity and the public dole. That is distinctly the field for the Red Cross and in no sense the field of the Federal Government. Therefore if we are going to undertake to write into an agricultural bill, the purpose of which is to bring relief to agriculture, ways and means of taking care of the hungry and the needy, outside of a commercial loan, then we must broaden the whole scope of our bill and undertake to relieve by direct legislation unemployment and hunger and need wherever we find it. I believe that provision should go out of the bill.

Mr. ALLGOOD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Mr. GARBER of Virginia. Yes; for a question, but not a

comment. Mr. ALLGOOD. Is it not a fact that the poor in the

cities are being taken care of by benefit games, great ball games, where they raise hundreds of thousands of dollars, by the Salvation Army and community chests and the Red Cross and various charitable institutions that the country people have not any access to at all?

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. There is something in what the gentleman says; but, on the other hand, let me point out that there are in every rural community your churches, societies, and organizations of every kind which, as far as they are able locally, ought to undertake the relief of human suffering.

"" Mr. CHINDBLOM. And, on the contrary, is it not also the fact that the farmer generally has some means of obtaining food? In fact, the production of food is his business, while the man in the city has to buy every single ounce of food that he consumes.

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. I was coming to that in a moment; thank you. In the second place, I do not favor the inclusion of food for the reason that if we do include it, the people in the rural sections who are most in need of this particular type of relief can not qualify for the loans, because they can not offer the necessary security. Why do I say that? Go into a rural section anywhere and you will find that the owner of the farm or the tenant on the farm, generally speaking, carries over a certain reserve of food from year to year, with which he can very largely take care of himself and his family.

But, in the mountainous sections, · living in small cabins surrounded by ·a garden and a little patch of land, you will find hundreds and thousands of people who can not qualify as farmers. They can not negotiate · a loan with the Government such as is contemplated here, because it is impossible for them to offer the required security. There is a large class of most needy people in the rural sections that will not be reached at all through this proposed legislation. I think the class that can be reached, the class that can qualify for a loan for crop production, will largely be able to provide food for themselves. Therefore I think this entire matter of supplying food should be delegated to the Red Cross. ·

I want to pass to the second angle of this matter. I do not believe that $25,000,000 or $30,000,000 is adequate to do the legitimate work that is contemplated in this Jegislation. A great deal has been said about the fact that the Departmen of Agriculture ought to be in a position to better estimate the amount needed than the average drought-relief committee. What I say is in no sense by way of criticism.

I think the men in the Department of Agriculture are absolutely honest when they say they believe that $30,000,000 will do the job. I do not believe it will. Why? If you could go with me into my own State you would understand why. There is no desire to bring before you a lurid picture. I know it is easy to reach a point of hysteria when it comes to a matter of this sort where human need and distress are concerned. I have no desire to indulge in that, but if you would go to the State of Virginia you would not find a square mile but what will show the unmistakable marks of distress and suffering as a result of this drought.

It was my privilege in September to go down through the Shenandoah Valley, that portion of the State of Virginia which we ordinarily like to believe flows with milk and honey. I drove for 80 miles with the Secretary of Agriculture. He said to me: "This is awful. I have not been in any section where the crops appear so entirely destroyed." As far .as the human eye could see there was nothing but the seared, brown fields, one after the other.

There were hundieds of acres of corn that would yield practically nothing. All over that section we found that condition. The loss was estimated in an intelligent manner. We employed the very best assistants for that work that could be obtained, the officers of the counties and of the various agricultural organizations were used. We went over the State county by county. It was estimated we had a loss of at least $100,000,000 in our State. Of course, it is not contemplated in this bill to make up that loss. With a loss of at least $100,000,000, you may place your estimate on seed and fertilizer requirements at $15,000,000, and that will be a low estimate. We believe the local banks can take care of at least two-thirds of that, but at least one-third of that estimate can not be financed by the banks. That means that in our State alone, conservatively, we will probably need for legitimate borrowing purposes, for seed, fertilizer, feed for work stock, and so forth, not less than $5,000,000.

Let me call attention to the fact that there is a wide discrepancy indeed between the estimate of the Department of Agriculture and the estimate made by the different agencies conducting the careful local surveys. If you will follow their report you will find that the estimate in 7 of the 24 States is for $83,000,000. If you take into consideration the other 17 States, where they did not set up a definite figure, making all the allowance you care to for local sympathy, if you desire, I believe it will require at least $60,000,000, or possibly $75,000,000, adequately to take care of the legitimate needs for the production of the 1931 crops.

I do not like the idea of considering this entire matter in the sense of charity. If we eliminate the food element, certainly the rest of it will stand on its own feet as a legitimate loan. I call attention to the fact that our experience with this type of loans shows that from 75 to 80 per cent of them are repaid. When you consider this particular legislation as an ordinary appropriation for an ordinary expenditure, I do not think that is fair. It is largely a matter of bookkeeping. It should be carried on the books as a loan and should not be regarded an expenditure reflected in the deficit. When 75 per cent of this comes back, not as an expenditure, but is repaid as a loan, then it seems to me the Federal Government ought to consider this entire proposition a matter of properly and adequately finimcing the great basic industry in an hour of acute distress. ·

There is just one thing more that I would like to touch upon. Let me call attention to this: It seems to me that it is the time when our own administration, that has sponsored the cause of agriculture all along, should take a very liberal attitude toward the farmer at this moment. It should be pointed out that this is an authorization to be followed by an appropriation, but there is no requirement to expend the entire amount. Only so much as is actually needed will be spent. Some one says," When you appropriate a ·given sum it is sure to be used." Suppose we authorize $10,000,000 more than we actually use, what harm has been done? It is our opportunity to demonstrate our real interest in and friendship for agriculture. It will be much better to have $10,000,000 or $15,000,000 more than we need than to have

996 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 that much less than we need. It will still be in the Treasury if it is not used.

If you will refer to the appropriation of 1924 of $1,000,000 for Mexico, you will find that less than 50 per cent of that amount was actually loaned. All through these acts appropriating money for emergency loans you will notice that a substantial margin was never actually loaned, even after the authorization and appropriation had been written into law.

Mr. STAFFORD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. GARBER of Virginia. I yield. Mr. STAFFORD. Can the gentleman give any informa

tion as to the time when this money is expected to be dispensed, as to the period of the year, whether it is going. to be dispensed immediately or run throughout the ent1re summer?

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. It depends on the season; it is for crop production during the year 1931, and the amount will be spent during the year as demands are made for it for planting purposes.

Mr. STAFFORD. There is nothing in the testimony to show when the entire amount will be exhausted.

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. It is for the year 1931, for the production of the 1931 crop.

Mr. STAFFORD. Of course, it will be advanced before the fiscal year 1931 comes into existence.

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. I might say in that connection, and to emphasize what I said a moment ago, that I do not think we should consider it on the basis of having a deficit. I think we should consider this in a different light from the ordinary appropriation for a particular expenditure.

Mr. STAFFORD. If this money is not to be spent immediately, Congress will be in session for the next two months, so that an increase could be asked for as it was needed.

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. It will not all be spent imme-diately.

Mr. SPROUL of Kansas. Will the gentleman yield? ~1:r. GARBER O'f Virginia. Yes. Mr. SPROUL of Kansas. Does the gentleman indorse the

present Federal Farm Board in its policy of price stabili-~oo? .

Mr. GARBER of Virginia. I think that is a matter which is not pertinent to the discussion at the present time.

Mr. SPROUL of Kansas. I wanted to predicate a question upon that. If so, does the gentleman think it would be wise to have these loans made upon the agreement that the farmers would plant fewer acres of crops than in the past. ·

The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman from Virginia has expired.

Mr. HAUGEN. Mr. Chairman, I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. SUMMERS].

Mr. SUMMERS of Washington. Mr. Chairman, fortunately the great State of Washington was not hit in all sections by the devastating drought, but a number of our counties were, so that our farmers only produced during 1930 about one-fifth of a crop in those counties, so we are directly interested to that extent in this loan proposition. we are not asking for charity, but with one-fifth of a crop in 1930 it is impossible for our farmers to seed the lands they have already prepared, and to plow, harrow, and other-wise prepare their summer-fallow lands. .

While this bill, according to the reports of the comm1ttee and the testimony of the Secretary of Agriculture and all others, embraces the State of Washington, unless it is amended it will only provide for Washington 25 or 50 per cent of the extent that it will provide for other States. That is because of our summer-fallowing procedure, which is necessary because of the small amount of rainfall. Take the States of Arkansas, Louisiana, or Virginia, where they normally have from 40 to 50 inches of rainfall during the year. Under any loan granted, their procedure will be to plow, to barrow, to seed, and to harvest, but it is necessary for us to plow and harrow repeatedly during the 18 months before the harvesting is done. The land we now have ready to seed was long since plowed, harrowed, and prepared for seed, but unless we are to end all farming operations, totally

and absolutely, with the harvest of 1931, it is necessary to do our spring plowing in March of 1931, looking to the next crop. So we ask nothing in addition to what is granted to all other States-that is, funds for plowing, harrowing, seeding, and harvesting. The same thing is true in one as in the other; but to cover that procedure in our State it will be necessary for me to offer, with the permission of the committee, an amendment which will cover summer-fallowing in 1931. That means an operation which starts in February or March, a month or two from now. I shall offer this amendment:

Provided, That loans from this fund shall be available for summer-fallowing in 1931.

I believe that any loanS granted to the farmers of my State will be amply secured by the mortgage given on the crop that is seeded and that the Federal Treasury will not lose by making those loans.

It is important that this legislation be enacted at the earliest date possible, because we seed in the latter part of the winter. We have a short winter, and in order to insure the best crop it is necessary to seed very early. So the sooner we make funds available to those farmers the better security the Federal Government will have on the loans. This is a matter we can not overemphasize, the matter of appropriating this money and making it available just as soon as possible. .

I ' want to compliment the Agricultural Committee for pushing this matter along as they have up to this time and as I know they will up to its final conclusion.

Our farmers are not asking that a provision for food be carried in the bill for themselves and families. We will manage that in some way in the State of Washington.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Washington has expired. All time has expired, and the Clerk will read.

Mr. TILSON. Mr. Chairman, there are only two sections of the bill and inasmuch as general debate has been formally closed, is it necessary to read the bill?

Mr. HAUGEN. It was the understanding that the first section of the bill would be read to-day and that no amend~ ments would be offered and that the committee would rise immediately after the reading of the first section.

The Clerk read the first section of the Senate joint resolution.

Mr. GARNER. The Clerk has read the first section of the bill.

Mr. STAFFORD. He has not read the committee amendments.

Mr. GARNER. He does not have to read them. He has read the first section and amendments can be offered tomorrow morning.

Mr. HAUGEN. Ivir. Chairman, I move that the committee do now rise.

The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the committee rose; and the Speaker having

resumed the chair, Mr. HALE, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that the committee, having had under consideration the joint resolution <S. J. Res. 211) for the relief of farmers in the drought and/or st<;~rm stricken areas of the United States, had come to no resolution thereon.

THE PRESIDENT

Mr. MAGRADY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks by printing an article appearing in the Washington Post of Tuesday.

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

There was no objection. The article is as follows:

[From the Washington Post, Tuesday, December 16, 1930] THE PRESIDENT

The President of the United States is our biggest citizen. Re is the voice of the majorit y of the people. Sitting in the White House, he represents the 130,000,000 men and women of this, the greatest country in th,e world. When he speaks we have to listen.

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--HOUSE 997

He voices our sentiments, because we elected him to the world's greatest office to speak for us.

we elected him because the majority of the voters of this cou;ntry believed that he was the man of all men, who have made~tory, entitled to the praise which has been universally given. h1m.

we know one thing about President Hoover; that he IS an American citizen who has the weal of his country at heart; that anything he proposes is for the Nation's best interests; that he is a humanitarian . . His record will prove it. It is .unnecessary to go back to the terrible days of the World War to discove! Hoover ~he man. He was only an engineer then, but he proved hrm~el1 a citizen of the world in the care he bestowed upon the starving people ~~~u~ .

He provided them with the food necessary for their salvation. Now it is up to the engineer of Belgium as the President of t~e United Staies to provide im empire with prov~nder. Mr. Hoover- IS doing this and is going to stay on the job until the task_ is accomplished. Judging from the past we must know that he 1s the best man to lay out the plan and to see it through.

In times like the present it is well that we have a man at the head of the Government who, through experience, human .nature, and kindness, is truly the father of his people. The political assaults on him fail in effect, for Herbert Hoover is _t?o big_ to be swerved from his ideals by cheap persons seeking poll.tiC~l gam ..

President Hoover has devised the best means of rellevmg the Sltuation at the jobless, and his energy and force of charact~r are going to carry his plan through. Nothing can stop him .. He IS the President of the United States and what he advocates IS so ~learcut that the entire Nation should be behind him. President Hoover is the hope of the United States. Our hats are off to President Hoover.

EDWARD McLEAN.

Bishop Cannon calls himself a moral leader and a leader of morals, and in his letter received to-day be urges that the partial disfranchisement of the American cities " will be most helpful in eliminating a factor which is unfriendly to prohibition and· law enforcement/' Yet when Representative TINKHAM, of Massachusetts, urged the enforcement of the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution, Bishop Cannon denounced him in unmeasured terms and called him " an enemy of the Southland." In this case Bishop Cannon was against law enforcement, because if the fourteenth amendment were enforced the Southland would lose about 35 Congressmen, 35 electoral votes, and 70' delegates to the national convention.

The Southland to which Bishop Cannon appeals and which men of his type lashed into civil war ha& disfranchised by one means or another over 10,000,000 of Amer ican citizens wlio are granted the right to vote under the Constitution. The fourteenth amendment provided that if these colored people were not allowed to vote in the Southern States these States should lose corresponding representation in Congress. Under present conditions the Southern States would therefore lose 35 Congressmen, 35 electoral votes, and 70 delegates to the national conventions, if the fourteenth amendment were enforced.

Since these unearned and illegal votes are dry votes, Bishop Cannon fights fiercely to retain them as against·

REAPPORTIONMENT Representative TINKHAM's efforts to right the wrong. Mr. CLANCY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to If the fourteenth amendment were enforced all these pow-.

extend my remarks in the RECORD on the subject of reappor- ers would go mainly to the North. Bishop Cannon now goes tionment. further in his effort to add insult to injury and breed another

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the civil war by demanding that Congress immediately further gentleman from Michigan? disfranchise the North of another 30 Congressmen, 30 elec-

There was no objection. toral votes, and 60 votes in the national conventions. Mr. CLANCY. Mr~ Speaker, Bishop James Cannon,. jr., The mere statement of this plot is enough to bring the-

president of the Board of Temperance and Social Servic~,. condemnation it deserves. the Methodist Episcopal Church South, has renewed his When the reapportionment measure was up in 192'9 Bishop campaign to deprive northern and far-western cities of 30 Cannon's friends were bold enough to bring the alien amendCongressmen, 3.0 electoral votes, and 60 delegates to the ment bill to a vote in the House, where it was attached as Republican and Democratic National Conventions held every a rider to the reapportionment measure. Thereupon the four years. To-day I received a letter signed by him and Representatives of the Wronged States, which include a great other members of the above ·board urging support of the majority of the American people, also attached· as a rider so-called Stalker alien amendment bill. the Tinkham amendment to enforce the fourteenth amend-

Bishop Cannon when leaving New_ York City upon an ment. Bishop Cannon's friends thereupon retreated from ocean voyage last summer issued a public stateme~t t~t their position and agreed to the compromise: to strike out Congress must immediately proceed upon convemng m both riders. December to pass the proposed constitutional amendment, If Bishop Cannon's friends endeavor to repeat their sally· and pointed out that it would give Virginia one more Con- ' of last year in the House they will undoubtedly get another gressman and, therefore, one more electoral vote and two dose of the Tinkham amendment, and the net result will be more delegates to the national nominating conventions. to create more sectional hatred, which seems to be the purGiving Virginia these powers would, of course, correspond- pose of Bishop Cannon. ingly deprive Detroit or some other city of the same amount He has devoted his life to setting neighbor against neigh-· -o1 power, and the total number of 30 Congressmen and bor and ci:ti.zen against citizen, and in his declining days he electoral votes and 60 delegates would be taken from the has enough vitality left to continue hls implacable war cities and given to the Southern and Western States. Not- against the Republic and still has enough breath left to conwithstanding this command from the good bishop Congress tinue his crusade to discredit Christianity. has refused to consider during this month of December his Bishop Cannon and his friends have been able to cheat infamous proposal, which is a bid for sectional dissentions, Detroit during the past 10 years out of 4- Congressmen, 4 which may very well lead to civil war. electoral votes, and 8 delegates to the national conventions

The dreadful Civil War of 1861-1865 was primarily caused to which they ha.ve been entitled under the Constitution by men like Bishop Cannon, who separated from the north- since the census of 192.(). Detroit and all the northern cities ern churches in 1842 and 1844 and laid down the dogma of will fight to the limit of their powers against any further their theology that human slavery in the United States is disfranchisement. a divine institution, with God demanding it and requiring The letter of Bishop Cannon is as follows: its preservation, putting the theocracy of the South behind BoARD oF TEMPERANcE AND SoCIAL SERvicE, slavery, which had been already abolished by all Christian METHoDIST EPrscoPAL CHuRCH SoU'I:H, nations of Europe. They made civil war inevitable, · and ' washington, D. c., December 16", 1930. that terrible catastrophe burst upon the United States about DEAR Sm: At a. meeting of the executive committee. of the Board <)0 1 t r - or Temperance and Social Service of the Methodist · Episcopal ~ years a e · . . Church south,. held in Washington on December 10, 1930, it was

Now, this brand of theologian has declared that prohibi- ' ordered that a resolution adopted by the full board at fts annual tion is a divine institution. The national president of the 1 meeting at Lake Junaluska, N. c., July 2-4, 1930, with reference Anti-Saloon League. Rev. F. S. McBride, declared at the to alien repres~tation be sent to th~ Mem.bex:s of Congress. We

· · f th 1. • Det ·t 1 t J are hereby sending to you the resolution appe.nded below. national convention o e .league m rm as anuary Yours very truly that the Anti-Saloon League is born of God and that God is ' leading it and that He will see that its opponents are put out of the way. This is practically the same sort of proclama-tion which placed the divine stamp upon human slavery in this country.

JAMES CANNON, Jr ... E". L. CRAWFORD, A. c. MILLAR, LETIN SMITH, S. C. HATCHER,

Executive Committee.

998 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 Resolved, In view of the fact that under the new apportionment

several States will suffer the loss of numbers of Members of Congress, which losses are principally in dry States, and since the States with the large wet, alien-dominated cities now have approximately 30 Congressmen--30 electoral votes and 60 delegates to the national nominating conventions-who represent not American citizens but seven and one-half million of unnaturalized aliens, we heartily approve the Stalker resolution providing for an amendment to the Constitution of the United States which will eliminate entirely all the unnaturalized aliens in the enumeration of the population to determine congressional or electra! representation, thus placing control of the Government of the country in its own citizens. We believe that such action will be most helpful in eliminating a factor which is unfriendly to prohibition and Ia w enforcement.

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE FISH Mr. HALL of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous

consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD by inserting a statement made by the gentleman from New York [Mr. FisH].

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi? · There was no objection.

Mr. HALL of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the RECORD, I include a statement of Representative HAMILTON FISH, Jr., in reply to recent New York Herald Tribune editorials:

The controversy between Representative RoBERT S. HALL, of Mississippi, and the New York Herald Tribune editorial staff has accomplished what I suspect Mr. HALL desired, which was to bring the New York Herald Tribune out into the open as a foe to the investigation of the activities of the communists by a special committee of the House of Representatives for selfish and personal reasons.

The committee appointed by the House has only one purpose and that is to secure the facts in regard to communist activities and to report those facts back to the Congress, with recommendations. The committee has visited most of the large industrial cities in the United States and has made a thorough investigation and is now preparing to submit the report to the Congress, and I know of no more important work that has been performed by a special committee of the House for ma.ny years, and the report which will be presented to Congress about January 6, 1931, will speak for itself.

It is of little consequence to me, as a member of the committee, whether the work of the committee has found favor or disfavor in the eyes of .the New York Herald-Tribune, or any other newspaper, Republican or Democratic, in view of the_ fact that it has the support and cooperation of the American Legwn, and all other veterans' organizations, the American Federation of Labor, the New York State Chamber of Commerce, and practically all fraternal and religious groups in the country.

After what Representative HALL pointed out in his statement, I am not at all surprised at the carping and hostile attitude of the editorial staff of the New York Herald-Tribune ever since the investigation started.

The New York Herald• Tribune speaks of "the failure of the Fish committee to alarm the Nation over the red menace," and that Congress "should halt the Fish alarms and excursions forthwith." Let me emphasize that it is not the duty or purpose of the House committee to act as an alarm clock, but to present the facts, which it intends to do in spite of the stupidity, propaganda, and erroneous statements of the New York Herald Tribune.

The next logical step for the New York Herald Tribune would be to join hands with Prof. Harry Elmer Barnes or with the Dally Worker or, better still, with the communists and denounce the committee for inciting the United States to declare war on Soviet Russia, and such a statement would not be much more absurd than many of their editorials.

The committee proposes to tell the truth in regard to communists' activities and to hew to the line and let the chips fall where they may. It is, furthermore, the duty of the committee to expose the selfish motives of such newspapers as the New York Herald Tribune that are read by hundreds of thousands of people, and I consider that Representative HALL has rendered a distinct public service which will be appreciated not only by his constituents but by the American people.

The failure of the New York Herald . Tribune to answer Representative HALL's pertinent question as to how much stock Mr. Ogden Reid (president and director of the New York Tribune, Inc.) and his family owned in the International Paper & Power Co., which imported into the United States vast quantities of soviet pulpwood during 1930, alleged to be produced by convict and forced labor, to compete with free American labor in this period of depression, and thereby caused further unemployment in the pulpwood industry on the Pacific Coast and among the farmers of the Northeast, amounts to confession and avoidance.

The mere fact that Mr. Reid may have recently resigned as a director of the International Paper & Power Co. is of no consequence. The fact remains undenied that he is still a large stockholder in this company, which is importing what I believe

to be convict-made pulpwood from Russia, to the ruin of pulpwood producers in Oregon and Washington and in northern New England, in the midst of a serious depression in that industry.

The International Paper & Power Co. is the same company that was taken to task by the Federal Trade Commission only a few years ago for loaning and offering to loan money to American newspapers in order to make favorable long-time contracts and thereby gain control of numerous newspapers for the purpose of spreading propaganda in behalf of the power interests. If th1s is so; I am not surprised that it would import soviet pulpwood by the hundreds of thousands of cords, at the expense of free American and Canadian labor.

It might be interesting to the public to know that, according to Poor's Register of Directors, Mr. Ogden Reid is a director of the Mergenthaler Linotype Co., which has been transacting considerable business with Soviet Russia and has a rep.,asentative over there at the present time. The public might arso like to know how much stock Mr. Reid and his family own in this company.

I have no desire to do Mr. Reid an injustice, but it.seems a little more than a coincidence that he and his family should be heavy stockholders in two big concerns doing large amounts of business with Soviet Russia, and through his newspaper laying down a bitter editorial barrage against an investigating committee, from · the date of its creation, appointed and directed by the House of Representatives, to secure the facts in regard to communist propaganda and activities. I assume, however, that the editorial staff of the New York Herald Tribune is not aware of the fact that neither the Department of Justice nor any department of the Government has any power, authority, or funds from Congress to investigate the revolutionary activities of the communists, and that is the main reason for the appointment of the House committee.

This is not a personal matter with me, but in view of the numerous and hostile editorials against the committee, of which I happen to be chairman, before it has submitted its report, I believe that in fairness to the committee that the public is entitled to know whether or not :Mr. Reid is a big stockholder in the International Paper & Power Co. and in the Mergenthaler ~inotype Co., and judge the issue on the basis of the facts. I ask for nothing but a square deal for the committee, and that its work be judged by its report and recommendations, and if I have done any injustice to Mr. Reid or to the New York Herald Tribune, I shall be prompt to apologize.

ADJUSTED-SERVICE CERTIFICATES Mr. FISH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

extend my remarks in the REcoRD by inserting a resolution passed by an American Legion post of the District of Columbia.

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

There was no objection. The resolutions are as follows: Resolved, That the Vincent B. Costello Post, No. 15, of the

American Legion, in regular meeting assembled this 16th day of December, 1930, go on record in favor of the immediate enactment of the legislation provided by the pending bill in Congress intro-

. duced by Representative FisH, of New York, as H. R. 15062, "A bill to amend the World War adjusted-compensation act, as amended,'' providing for payment in cash of 25 per cent of the face value of adjusted-compensation certificates; and be it further

Resolved, That the post's . representative "on the department executive committee be directed to present this resolution to the department executive committee and urge its passage by all the posts of the department of the District of Columbia, and that the resolution also be forwarded to national headquarters by the department commander; be it further ·

Resolved, That copies of this resolution. be forwarded to the appropriate committee in Congress and to other veterans' organizations in the District of Columbia; and be it further

Resolved, That the post commander call a special meeting of all the post commanders in the District of Columbia without delay, and invite Representative FisH, of New York, to· appear before them and explain the bill to them with a view to having all the posts in the District of Columbia go on record favoring the passage of the b111 above referred to.

In view of the fact that the Congress will adjourn on March 4, under the provisions of the Constitution, it is evident that all veterans who are in favor of the enactment of H. R. 15062, providing for the payment of 25 per cent of the face value of adjusted-service certificates, should immediately write to their Representatives in Congress, and urge the passage of resolutions by their respective posts in the various veterans' organizations.

In my opinion, there is no more chance of the passage of any bill providing for the immediate payment of the entire face value of the adjusted-service certificates by the present Congress than there is for the repeal of the eighteenth

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 999 amendment. Even if it was considered advisable to pay the I send to the Clerk's desk a resolution and move its entire face value of the certificates it is doubtful whether it adoption. would be possible to sell a bond issue of $3,000,000,000 to the The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Vermont offers a American people for this purpose. . resolution which the Clerk will report.

Although I have not taken any position as to the payment The Clerk read as follows: of the entire face value of the adjusted-service certificates, House Resolution 324 I would hesitate to support such a proposal, not only on Resolved, That the House has heard with profound sorrow of financial grounds but also because it would destroy the in- the death of the Hon. FRANK LEsTER GREENE, a Senator of the surance principle and leave no protection to the widows and United States from the State of Vermont.

Resolved, That the Clerk communicate these resolutions to children of the veterans. the Senate and transmit a copy thereof to the family of the

A1:. a practical proposition it is clear to me that if any deceased Senator. legislation is to be passed at this session of Congress the Resolved, That a committee of 21 Members be appointed on the Proper and loo-ical thing to do would be for all the veterans part of the House to join the committee appointed on the part

b~ of the Senate to attend the funeral. to unite in the demand for the payment of 25 per cent of The resolution was agreed to, and the Speaker appointed the face value of the certificates and, even then, it is far the following committee: from certain that such legislation would be adopted before Ron. ERNEST w. GmsoN, of vermont; ELBERT s. BRIGHAM, the adjournment on March 4. But it is self-evident that of Vermont; EDWARD E. BROWNE, of Wisconsin; HENRY w. unless all veteran organizations unite in demanding the TEMPLE, of Pennsylvania; ALLEN T. TREADWAY, of Massaimmediate cash payment of 25 per cent of the face value· of chusetts; w. FRANK JAMEs, of Michigan; EDWARD H. WAsoN, the certificates such a proposal, in my opinion, will have of New Hampshire; FREDERICK w. DALLINGER, of Massachulittle prospect of being enacted int~ law. . setts; S~ER MERRITT, of Connecticut; Jmm F. MILLER,

Having presented the facts, the ISsue r.ests ~quar~ly With <>i Washington; WALLACE H. wmn, Jr., of Maine; RoBERT the veterans, and unless they pass resolutions m their posts, ' LucE of Massachusetts· HARRY c. RANSLEY, of Pennsylvania; aro~e pu~lic opinion as ~o th~ merits of the propo.sition.. and F'LET~HER HALE, of Ne~ Hampshire; JAMEs w. CoLLIER, of notify therr Represen~t1ves. m Congress and therr natwnal Mississippi; CHARLEs R. CRISP, of Georgia; JAMES P. commanders, there will be little or no chance that any pay- BUCHANAN of Texas· PERCY E QuiN of Mississippi· HATTON ments will be made to the needy veterans in this emergency w. SUMN~Rs of T~xas· HuB~RT F.' FisHER of T~nnessee· upon their adjusted-service certificates. ' ROBERT CRO~R, of Ohi~. ' '

FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE The SPEAKER. The Clerk will proceed with the reading A further message from the Senate by Mr. Craven, its of the resolution.

principal clerk, announced that the Senate had passed the The Clerk read as follows: following resolution: Resolved, That as a further mark of respect the House do now

adjourn. Senate Resolution 378 Resolved, That the Senate has heard with profound sorrow and

deep regret the announcement of the death of the Han. FRANK L. GREENE, late a Senator from the State of Vermont.

Resolved, That a committee of 20 Senators be appointed by the President pro tempore to take order for superintending the funeral of the deceased Senator.

Resolved, That the Secretary communicate these resolutions to the House of Representatives and transmit a copy thereof to the family of the deceased. ·

Resolved, That as a further mark of respect to the memory of the deceased, the Senate do now adjourn.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED Mr. CAMPBELL of Pennsylvania, from the Committee on

Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee had examined and found truly enrolled a joint resolution of the House of the following title, which was thereupon signed by the Speaker:

H. J. Res. 440. Joint resolution authorizing the payment of salaries of the officers and employees of Congress for December, 1930, on the 20th day of that month.

The SPEAKER also announced his signature to an enrolled bill of the Senate of the following title:

S. 2895. An act authorizing the bands or tribes of Indians known and designated as the Middle Oregon or Warm Springs Tribe of Indians of Oregon, or either of them, to submit their claims to the Court of Claims.

JOINT RESOLUTION PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT Mr. CAMPBELL of Pennsylvania, from the Committee

on Enrolled Bills, reported that that committee did on this day present to the President, for his approval, a joint resolution of the House of the following title:

H. J. Res. 440. Joint resolution authorizing the payment of salaries of the officers and employees of Congress for December, 1930, on the 20th day of . that month.

DEATH OF SENATOR FRANKL. GREENE

Mr. GffiSON. Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to announce to the House the death of the senior Senator from Vermont, FRANK L. GREENE. He had a long and distinguished record as a civic leader and in the military service of his State, serving in the Spanish-American War as a captain. He served in the House of Representatives from 1912 to 1923, and since that time has served with distinction in the Senate of the United States.

The resolution was agreed to.

, ADJOURNMENT

Accordingly <at 5 o'clock and 24 minutes p.m.> the House adjourned until to-morrow, Thursday, December 18, 1930, at 12 o'clock noon.

COMMITTEE HEARINGS

Mr. TILSON submitted the following tentative list of committee hearings scheduled for Thursday, December 18, 1930, as reported to the floor leader by clerks of the several committees:

COMMITTEE ON NAVAL AFFAIRS

<10.30 a. m.> To authorize the construction of certain naval vessels

CH. R. 14688). ·

COMMITTEE ON THE MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES

<10.30 a. m.>

To amend the aet of Congress of June 6, 1924, entitled ''An act for the protection of fisheries of Alaska, (H. R. 13534).

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, executive communications

were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows: 723. A communication from the President of the United

States, transmitting estimate of appropriations submitted by the several executive departments to pay claims for damages to privately owned prqperty in the sum of $25,938.90 (H. Doc. No. 688) ; to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

724. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting schedules covering certain claims allowed by the General Accounting Office, as shown by certificate of settlement transmitted to the Treasury Department for payment, in the sum of $5,256.75 CH. Doc. No. 689) ; to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be p1inted.

725. A communication from the President of the United states, transmitting records of judgments rendered against the Government by the United States district courts as submitted by the Attorney General through the . Secretary of

1000 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE DECEMBER 17 the Treasury in the sum of $37,960.23 <H. Doc. No. 690); to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

726. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting record of a judgment or order rendered against the Government by the United States District Court for the Northern District of illinois in the sum of $7,056.20 (H. Doc. No. 691); to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

727. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting an estimate of appropriation submitted by the Navy Department to pay claims for damages by collision with naval vessels in the sum of $6,272.11 <H. Doc. No. 692); to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

728. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting a list of judgments rendered by the Court of Claims, which have been submitted by the Attorney General through the Secretary of the Treasury in the sum of $460,770.68 (H. Doc. No. 693); to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

729. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting schedules of claims amounting to $227,-673.82, allowed by the General Accounting Office, as covered by certificates of settlement <H. Doc. No. 694); to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

730. A letter from the Secretary of the Navy, transmitting a draft of a proposed bill to amend the act approved June 22, 1928, entitled "An act to amend that part of the act approved August 29, 1916, relative to retirement of captains, commanders, and lieutenant commanders of the line of the Navy," as amended by the act of March 4, 1929; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

731. A letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting report from the Chief of Engineers, United States Army, on preliminary examination of harbor at Mackinac Island, Mich.; to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors.

732. A letter from the chairman of the United States Shipping Board, transmitting an analysis of report of the Comptroller General of the United States of audit of financial transactions of the United States Shipping Board Merchant Fleet Corporation, which report was printed as House Document No. 111, Seventy-first Congress, first session <H. Doc. No. 695); to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments and ordered to be printed.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XTII, Mr. HAUGEN: Committee on Agriculture. S. J. Res. 211.

A joint resolution for the relief of farmers in the drought and/ or storm stricken areas of the United States; with amendment <Rept. No. 2112). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. LEAVITT: Committee on Indian Affairs, H. R. 13132. A bill authorizing the use of Osage funds for attorneys' fees and expenses of litigation; with amendment <Rept. No. 2113) . Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. BRI'ITEN: Committee on Naval Affairs. H. R. 6810. A bill authorizing the Secretary of the Navy to accept, without cost to the Government of the United States, a lighterthan-air base, near Sunnyvale, in the county of Santa Clara, State of California, and construct necessary improvements thereon; without amendment · (Rept. No. 2114). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of Rule XIII, Mr. JOHNSTON of Missouri: Committee on Claims. H. R.

8324. A bill for the relief of John N. Brooks; with amendment <Rept. No. 2109). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

. '

Mrs. LANGLEY: Committee on Claims. H. R. 10091. A bill for the relief of Anna A. Hall, without amendment (Rept. No. 2110). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House. .

Mrs. LANGLEY: Committee on Claims. H. R. 11760. A bill for the relief of Ellen N. Nolan; with amendment <Rept. No. 2111). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 3 of Rule XXII, public bills and resolutions

were introduced and severally referred as follows: By Mr. HILL of Washington: A bill <H. R. 15354) to pro

vide payment of adjusted-compensation certificates in full to dependents of deceased veterans who died prior to the passage of the act; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. GRAHAM: A bill (H. R. 15355) to amend section 229 of the Judicial Code; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a bill (H. R. 15356) to amend the act providing for the annual conference of senior circuit judges; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Also, a bill <H. R. 15357) to amend section 126 of the Judicial Code, as amended; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. HARE: A bill (H. R. 15358) to provide for public buildings to accommodate all second and third class post offices in the United States; to the Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

By Mr. WOOD: A bill <H. R. 15359) making an additional appropriation to carry out the provisions of the agricultural marketing act, approved June 15, 1929; to the Committee on Appropriations.

By Mr. DAVILA: A bill (H. R. 15360) to provide for the filling of certain vacancies in the Senate and House of Representatives of Porto Rico; to the Committee on Insular Affairs.

By Mr. HOUSTON of Delaware: A bill (H. R. 15361) to provide for conveyance of a certain strip of land on Fenwick Island, Sussex County, State of Delaware, for roadway purposes; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. PARKS: A bill (H. R. 15362) directing the extension of farm loans by Federal land banks for a period of two years, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

By Mr. ZIHLMAN: A bill <H. R. 15363) authorizing appropriations for the improvement of roads at the Antietam Battlefield, Sharpsburg, Md.; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. BRUNNER: A bill <H. R. 15364) authorizing appropriation of funds for construction of a Federal highway from Fort Tilden, N.Y., to the border of Connecticut; to the Committee on Roads.

By Mr. HOLADAY: A bill (H. R. 15365) to authorize an appropriation for the construction of two barracks buildings at the Danville branch of the National Home for Disabled Volunteer Soldiers; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. KNUTSON: A bill (H. R. 15366) granting the consent of Congress to the State of Minnesota to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Mississippi River near Bemidji, Minn.; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. ·

By Mr. COOKE: Resolution (H. Res. 321> investigating into the reason for, and the methods of determination used in, the selection of the various sites so far chosen for veterans' hospitals; to the Committee on Rules.

By Mr. GRAHAM: Resolution (H. Res. 322) authorizing an inquiry into the power of the Congress of the United States to establish an administrative tribunal; to the Committee on Rules.

By Mr. BLACK: Resolution <H. Res. 323) to appoint a select committee on economic planning; to the Committee on Rules. ·

By Mr. WOOD: Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 444) making an appropriation to supply a deficiency in the appropriation for the fiscal year 1931 for expenses of special and select

1930 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 1001 committees of the House of Representatives; to the Com- Also, a bill (H. R. 15394) granting a penSion to Sarah A. mittee on Appropriations. ~

By Mr. SIMMS: Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 445) relating to the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a contract with the Rio Grande project; to the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Thompson; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. Also, a bill (H. R. 15395) granting a pension to Martha

Wilcox; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. Also, a bill <H. R. 15396) granting a pension to Laura L.

Dow; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. By Mr. HOPKINS: A bill (H. R. 15397) granting a pen

sion to William Fleming; to the Committee on Invalid Pen· Under clause 1 of Ruie XXII, private bills and resolutions sions.

were introduced and severally referred as follows: By Mr. HUDDLESTON: A bill <H. R. 15398) granting a By Mr. ABERNETHY: A bill (H. R. 15367) granting a pension to Fred Tribble; to the Committee on Pensions.

pension to Mrs. Charles s. McWilliams; to the Committee on By Mr. MORTON D. HULL: A bill (H. R. 15399) for the • Pensions. relief of Wilbur Rogers; to the Committee on Military

Also, a bill (H. R. 15368) granting a pension to Pauline Affairs. Sanders; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. ffiWIN: A bill <H. R. 15400) for the relief of

By Mr. CANFIELD: A bill (H. R. 15369) granting an in- Eustace Parks; to the Committee on Claims crease of pension to Catherine A. Turner; to the Committee By Mr. KEARNS: A bill <H. R. 15401) granting an in~ on Invalid Pensions. crease of pension to Lucinda Shelton; to the Committee on

By Mr. CROSSER: A bill rn. R. 15370) for the relief of Invalid Pensions. , Samuel Weinstein; to the Committee on Claims. By Mr. KETCHAM: A bill <H. R. 15402) granting a pen-

By Mr. CULKIN: A bill (H. R. 15371) for the relief of sion to Flora May Combs; to the Committee on Invalid Frank D. Lowe; to the Committee on Claims. Pensions.

Also, a bill (H. R. 15372) for the relief of W . . Glenn Lar-· By Mr. KORELL: A bill (H. R. 15403) granting an in-month; to the Committee on Claims. crease of pension to Annie Killion; to the Committee on

Also, a bill (H. R. 15373) for the relief of Ward Bell; to Invalid Pensions. the Committee on Claims. Also, a bill (H. R. 15404) for the relief of Allan W. Hart·

By Mr. DENISON: A bill (H. R. 15374) for the relief of mann; to the Committee on Military Affairs. Mary E. Stebbins; to the Committee on Claims. By Mr. LEECH: A bill (H. R. 15405) granting an increase

Also, a bill (H. R. 15375) granting a pension to Elizabeth of pension to Mary Cardiff; to the Committee on Invalid Rhodes; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. Pensions.

By Mr. ELLIS: A bill ·(H. R. 15376) granting an increase By Mr. LEAVITT: A bill <H. R. 11>406) granting a pension of pension to Waldo A. Chapman; to the Committee on Pen- to James B. Mitchell; to the Committee on Pensions. sions. . By Mr. LONGWORTH: A bill (H. R. 15407) granting an

By Mr. FINLEY: A bill (H. R. 15377) granting an increase increase of pension to Lula H. Powers; to the Committee on of pension to William H. Hensley; to the Committee on Pen- Invalid Pensions. · , sions. By Mr. LOZIER: A bill (H. R. 15408) granting an increase

By Mr. FITZPATRICK: A bill (H. R. 15378) granting a of pension to Martha Ann Parsley; to the Committee on pension to Mary Foley Jones; to the Committee on Pensions. Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. FRENCH: A bill (H. R. 15379) granting a pension By Mr. LUDLOW: A bill (H. R. 15409) for the relief of to Dan B. Dunwell; to the Committee on Pensions. John Joseph Ames; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By 1\fr. GARNER: A bill (H. R. 15380) for the relief of By Mr. McSWAIN: A bill (H. R. 15410) granting a pen~ E. G. Mason; to the Committee on Claims. sion to Annie E. Waller; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. GREENWOOD: A bill (H. R. 15381) granting a Also, a bill <H. R. 15411) granting an increase of pension pension to Minnie Hedrick; to the Committee on Invalid to Emily F. Ailshie; to the Committee on Pensions. . Pensions. By Mr. MARTIN: A bill (H. R. 15412) for the relief of

By Mr. HALL of Mississippi: A bill <H. R. 15382) granting Mary H. Jordan; to the Committee on Claims. a pension to Cora Dixia Willett; to the Committee on In- By Mr. MOORE of Ohio: A bill (H. R. 15413) granting an valid Pensions. increase of pension to Sarah Weedon; to the Committee on

By Mr. HARE: A bill (H. R. 15383) granting a pension Invalid Pensions. to Annie Florence Coleman; to the Committee on Pensions. By Mr. RAMSEYER: A bill <H. R. 15414) granting an in-

By Mr. HAWLEY: A bill <H. R~ 15384) for the relief of crease of pension to Ann E. McKissick; to the Committee on Lincoln County, Oreg.; to the Committee on Claims. Invalid Pensions. ·

Also, a bill <H. R. 15385) granting an increase of pension By Mr. REECE: A bill <H. R. 15415) granting a pensi<>n to William Bell; to the Committee on Pensions. to Dwight L. Trent; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. HOGG of West Virginia: A bill <H. R. 15386) Also, a bill (H. R. 15416) granting an increase of pension granting an increase of pension to Mary C. Davis; to the to Isabela L. Williamson; to the Committee on Invalid Committee on Invalid Pensions. Pensions.

By Mr. HOGG of Indiana: A bill (H. R. 15387) granting By Mr. SPEAKS: A bill (H. R. 15417) for the relief of a pension to Cordelia Palmer; to the Committee on Invalid Otis F. Millington, otherwise known as Albert Clay; to the Pensions. Committee on Military Affairs.

Also, a bill (H. R. 15388) granting an increase of pension By Mr. TILSON: A bill (H. R. 15418) granting a pension to Lovina Yarian; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. to Bertha Jane Barnard Smith; to the Committee on In-

Also, a bill <H. R. 15389) granting an increase of pension valid Pensions. to Lena M. Van Anda; to the Committee on Invalid By Mr. WALKER: A bill (H. R. 15419) granting an in-Pensions. crease of pension to Frederick J. Conn; to the Committee on

Also, a bill (H. R. 15390) granting an increase of pen- Pensions. sion to Lucy J. Shore; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions. By Mr. WATSON: A bill (H. R. 15420) conferring juris·

Also, a bill (H. R. 15391) granting an increase of pension diction upon the Court of Claims of the United States to to Catherine Stanford; to the Committee on Invalid hear, adjudicate, and render judgment on the claim of Pensions. George A. Garden and Anderson T. Herd against the United

Also, a bill (H. R. 15392) granting an increase cf pen- States for seven ships taken over for the use and benefit of sion to Elizabeth 0. White; to the Committee on Invalid the United States during the World War; to the Committee Pensions. on the Judiciary.

By Mr. HOLADAY: A bill <H~ R. 15393) granting a pen- By Mr. WOLVERTON of West Virginia: A bill (H. R. sion to Elizabeth White Brooks; to the Committee on Inva- 15421) granting a pension to Mary J. Carr; to the Com-lid Pensions. mittee on Invalid Pensions.

1002 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE DECEMBER 18 PETITIONS, ETC.

Under clause 1 of Rule XXII, petitions and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows:

8280. Petition of voters of congressional district No. 1, ·state of Ohio, urging the passage of House bill 7884, for the exemption of dogs from vivisection in the District. of Columbia; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

8281. Petition of Polish National Alliance; of Chicago, Til., protesting against foreign propaganda, especially against Poland, by advocating the revision of the treaty of Versailles;

• to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. 8282. By Mr. FISHER: Petition of 69 citizens of Memphis,

Tenn., urging the passage of House bill 11; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

8283. By Mr.-GLOVER: Petition of Hamp Williams, chairman Garland County unemployment committee, urging legislation be enacted now, and appropriating money for the construction of roads; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

8284. By Mr. HOGG of West Virginia: Petition of Greenbrier County National Farm Loan Association, of Lewisburg, W. Va., requesting the Federal Farm Loan Board and the Congress of the United States to devise ways and means by which the land bank payments may be passed and extended; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

8285. By Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: Petition of Mr. E. S. Graham, of Graham, Tex., favoring a tariff on oil; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8286. By Mr. O'CONNELL: Petition of Sons of the Revolution in the State of New York, favoring a suitable appropriation to acquire land in the town of New Windsor, Orange County, N. Y., to erect a perpetual memorial to George Washington; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

8287. By Mr. PATMAN: Petition of Mrs. L. Ipsen and 51 other citizens and veterans of Los Angeles, Calif., presented through the United Veterans' Aid Association, urging immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

8288. By Mr. PATTERSON: Petition of evidence in support of House bill 15321 granting a pension to Sarah Smith Lindley; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

8289. By Mr. SMITH of West Virginia: Petition of the Greenbrier County National Farm Loan Association, of Lewisburg, W.Va., requesting the-Federal Farm Loan Board and the Congress of the United States to devise ways and means by which the land bank payments may be passed and extended; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

8290. By Mr. TILSON: Resolution adopted by the American Society for Clinical Investigation, opposing enactment of House bill 7884, antivivisection bill for the District of Columbia; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

8291. By Mr. YATES: Petition of Barrett Varnish Co., 1532 South Fiftieth Court, Cicero, TIL, protesting the passage of any legislation increasing postal rates on first-class postage; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

8292. Also, petition of Sylvester Schiele, president Schiele Coal Co., 1965 West One hundred and eleventh Street, Chicago, protesting the suggested legislation increasing firstclass postage from 2 to 2% cents per ounce; to the Commit-

. tee on the Post Office and Post Roads. 8293. Also, petition of the Cracker Jack Co., Chicago, Ill.,

protesting the passage of any legislation by Congress which will increase t.he rate of first-class postage; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

8294. Also; petition of A. B. T. Moore, secretary of the Gideons, 140 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, ill., urging the defeat of proposed legislation to increase the postal rate of first-class mail from 2 to 2% cents per ounce; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

8295. Also, petition of R. L. Polk & Co., 367 West Adams street, Chicago, TIL, protesting the proposed increase in first-class mail rate from 2 to 2% cents per ounce; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

SENATE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1930

The Chaplain, Rev. Z~Barney T. Phillips, D. D., offered the following prayer:

0 Thou who in the time of shadow and darkness art revealed as the only true and lasting light, and before whose incomprehensible being even the imagination of man falters, :fluttering her pennons vain: lighten our darkness, we beseech Thee, as again we bow before the mystery of death, which maketh life to seem but a mote in the faultless glory, a ripple on the eternal calm.

In Thy loving wisdom Thou hast seen fit to take unto Thyself the soul of our beloved friend, whose patient courage, gentle courtesy, and constant devotion to his sacred trust have endeared him to us all; grant to him, therefore, in Thy blest abode, that rest remaining for the children of God, where pain shall be no more and all sorrow and sighing shall flee away. Vouchsafe unto his loved ones Thy tenderest mercies, that in Thine own sheltering arms they may find that peace and comfort which the world can not give, which

•passeth all understanding. We ask it in the name and for the sake of Him who hath

brought life and immortality to light, Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

THE JOURNAL The Chief Clerk proceeded to read the Journal of yester

day's proceedings, when, on request of Mr. FEss and by unanimous consent, the further reading was dispensed with and the Journal was approved.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE A message from the House of Representatives by Mr.

Chaffee, one of its clerks, transmitted to the Senate the resolutions of the House adopted as a tribute to the memory of Hon. FRANK LESTER GREENE, late a Senator from the State of Vermont.

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED The message also announced that the Speaker had affixed

his signature to the enrolled bill <S. 2895) authorizing the bands or tribes of Indians known and designated as the Middle Oregon or Warm Springs Tribe of Indians of Oregon, or either of them, to submit their claims to the Court of Claims, and it was signed by the Vice President.

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES Messages in writing from the President of the United

States, making nominations, were communicated to the Senate by Mr. Latta, one of his secretaries.

FUNERAL OF THE LATE SENATOR GREENE The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair requests that the fol

lowing telegram may be read. The Chief Clerk read as follows:

ST. ALBANS, VT., December 17, 1930. Vice President CHARLES CURTIS,

Washington, D. C.: Senator GREENE's funeral in Congregational Church here Satur

day morning at 11. Death followed operation performed Monday. H. H. CHADWICK, Secretary .

CONDOLENCES ON DEATH OF SENATOR LEE S. OVERMAN The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate a com

munication from the charge d'affaires ad interim of Mexico, which was ordered to lie on the table and to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

EMBAJ ADA DE MEXICO EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMERICA,

Washington, D. C., December 13, 1930. His Excellency the PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE,

Washington. MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: Yesterday afternoon, after this em

bassy's office hours, and while no member of its staff was present, the embassy was informed of the sorrowful news of the death of Han. LEE SLA1'ER OVERMAN, prominent Member of the Chamber of Senators.

•

Date post:	22-Feb-2023
Category:	Documents
Upload:	khangminh22
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

congressional record-senate 923 - Congress.gov

Documents