1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3031 John J. Muccio, of Rhode Island, now a Foreign Service

officer of class 6 and a consul, to be also a secretary in the Diplomatic Service; and

William P. Cochran, Jr., of Pennsylvania, now a Foreign . Service officer, unclassified, and a vice consul of career, to be also a secretary in the Diplomatic Service.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. McGILL in the chair). The reports will be placed on the Executive Calendar.

The calendar is in order. THE CALENDAR-POSTMASTERS

The legislative clerk proce.eded to read the nominations of sundry postmasters.

Mr. McKELLAR. I ask unanimous consent that the nomi­nations of postmasters on the calendar may be confirmed en bloc.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the nom..: inations are confirmed en bloc.

That completes the calendar. RECESS

As in legislative session, Mr. ROBINSON. I move that the Senate stand in recess

until 12 o'clock noon tomorrow. The motion was agreed to; and (at 5 o'clock p. m.) the

Senate, in legislative session, took a recess until tomorrow, Thursday, March 7, 1935, at 12 o'clock meridian.

CONFIRMATIONS Executive nominations confirmed b-y the Senate March 6

<legislative daY of Mar. 4). 1935

POSTMASTERS

ARKANSAS-TEXAS

A. Judson Pryor, Texarkana. MINNESOTA

N. Elmie Lewis, Bertha. Emily M. Drexler, Brandon. James F. Doherty, Buhl. Ingval Lynner, Clarkfield. John K. Sloan, Coleraine. Helen I. Gervais, Currie. Edward A. Buckley, East Grand Forks. Catherine I. Ackerman, Eden Valley. Edward R. Siem, Elgin. LeRoy M. Schwartz, Evansville. Henry J. Widenhoefer, Fisher. Herbert C. Whaley, Fosston. Raymond E. Garden, Gary. Bertha T. Bot, Ghent. Carleton H. Leighty, Glenville. Charles B. Seipp, Hanley Falls. Michael E. Thompkins, Hector. Edith A. Marsden, Hendrum. Fritz von Ohlen, Henning. Florence D. Markham, Hopkins. William V. Kane, International Falls. Harry W. Simpson, Jasper. Hattie G. Haas, Lamberton. Peter J. Vasaly, Little Falls. Ole C. Olson, Littlefork. Jacob Ohlsen, Luverne. James V. Sweeney, Mahnomen. Fred E. Joslyn, Mantorville. Maude E. Williams, Mora. Justin I. Brown, Nevis. Leo F. Groos, North St. Paul. Frank S. Averill, Ogilvie. Harold T. Colbjornsen, Parkers Prairie. Linus E. Dougherty, Pine River. Raymond A. Linnihan, Red Lake Falls. William H. Wilson, Rushmore. Edward M. Swanson, Russell. John A. Henry, St. Cloud. William F. Krueger, Wykoff.

NORTH CAROLINA

Mortimer H. Mitchell, Aulander. Robert Lee Brtdger, Bladenboro. Tasker T. Hawks, Norlina. Elias Carr Speight, Rocky Mount. G. Glenn Nichols, Sparta.

SOUTH DAKOTA

Lewis E. Smith, Alpena. Ian H. Maxwell, Delmont. Regina Trinen, Letcher. James R. Crowe, Yankton.

TEXAS

Robert Rowntree, Bartlett. Otto Hicks, Blum. Earl B. Hopkins, Brazoria. Theodore A. Low, Jr., Brenham. Stanley F. Labus, Falls City. Wallace J. Bludworth, Flatonia. James F. Atkinson, Florence. Robbie G. Ellis, Fort Davis. Leonadis E. Eubanks, Groesbeck. Sam H. Amsler, McGregor. E. Otho Driskell, Mansfield. Richard J. Bradford, Pettus. Willis C. Giffin, Sabinal.

UTAH

John M. Bernhisel, Lewiston. Andrew J. Judd, Manti.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 1935

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

offered the fallowing prayer:

Eternal and loving Father, on this day so filled with holy memories and with immeasurable teaching, we would with­draw to the secret place of God's pavilion. These are mo­ments of solemn thoughts and we bend low in humility at the altar of mercy. We humbly confess our sins; the remem­brance of them is grievous unto us; do Thou have mercy and forgive and let us hear Thy "depart in peace." Overturn the tables of traffic in the temples of our breasts, compass our grief, impress us with our mortality, and bless us with the song of deliverance. Strengthen us with a constant, assuring, spiritual power as a stream that breaks from the mountain side. 0 God of Bethel, pour into our minds wis­dom and courage undaunted, and into our hearts mercy unrestrained; may they sound on the ivory pavement of truth and sincerity. Grant that the labor of this day bear the mark of distinction and intensity of desire to serve our be­loved land. In our Savior's name. Amen.

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

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A message from the Senate, by Mr. Horne, its enrolling clerk, announced that the Senate had concurred without amendment in a concurrent resolution of the House of the following title:

H. Con. Res.14. Concurrent resolution requesting the Pres­ident of the United States to return to the House of Repre­sentatives the enrolled bill CH. R. 330) entitled "An act for the relief of Sophie de Sota."

MEETING OF COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

Mr. DOXEY. Mrr Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during the remainder of the week the Committee on Agricul­ture be permitted to sit during the sessions of the House.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. DoxEY]?

There was no -0bjeetion.

3032 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 CURBING WAR ~ROFITS

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to extend my own remarks in the RECORD and include therein an address given by my colleague from Ohio, Hon. FRANK L. KLoEB, over a Nation-wide hook-up on the subject of curbing war profits.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. DUFFEY]?

There was no objection. Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend

my remarks in the RECORD I include a radio address de­livered by my colleague, Hon. FRANK L. KLoEB, of Ohio, on

' invitation by the National Broadcasting Co.t. over a Nation-wide hook-up, on March 5, 1935.

The radio address follows: My friends, the Senate munitions investigation and the uni­

versal draft week of the American Legion have again brought be­fore Congress and the people the question of curbing war profits in event of another war. This question involves primarily the study of the most effective method of curbing war-time inflation of prices, for from this evil naturally flow the resultant evils of profiteering, exorbitant cost to the Government, loss of morale to the men in the field and to the civilian population, and the inevitable depression that follows post-war deflation.

Profiteering in time of war by those who would take adva.nta.ge of their government and of their fellow citizens is as old as civiliza-~~ .

General Washington wrote of the Revolutionary War profiteers: "No punishment is too great for the man who can build his

greatness upon his country's ruin." Some of our large fortunes were built during the Civil War upon

the blood and the suffering of the manhood of America. During the Spanish-American War we remember the scandal

over embalmed beef, and the terrible suffering and death that followed its use.

After the declaration of these wars, the publlc and the soldiers in the field complained bitterly at the inflated prices of all neces­sary commodities and the inordinate profits of those who would take advantage of their fellow men. After the close of these wars, the prevention of a recurrence of these evils in the event of an­other war was seriously debated. Always time served to deaden the memory of these outrages, until the subject ceased to be dls-

• cussed and another war was upon us. . During the World War the American soldier carried a gun for

$1 per day. I was one of them. The mechanic who fashioned the gun received $15 per day; the man who owned the factory received $15,000 per day. It was this inequity that affected the men 1n the service.

The American Legion, at its first convention in 1919, conceived the idea of the so-called "universal draft." It desired a law that would compel industry and labor to serve equally and without profit in t ime of war.

In 1931 Congress created the War Policies Commission, "to in­vestigate and report a feasible plan to promote peace and to equalize the burdens of war." The McSwain bill, now before the House, is the result of the efforts of that Commission. The Ameri­can Legion, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, and the Disabled Ameri­can Veterans have worked for what this measure substantially provides.

In past major wars history tells us that immediately after the declaration of war, because of speculation and a vastly increased demand, there comes a sudden stampede in prices. During the Civil War our efforts to control the stampede were feeble. After we had entered the World Wru: our effort was to so control the stampede as to bring the price leaders back on a level with their fellows. This we sought to accomplish through an excess-profits tax and a price-fixing commission. Some price leaders were checked by these means.

In studying this question of war-time inflation and its result­ant evils, we must first arrive at the basic conclusion either of seeking t o control the price stampede or of striking at the heart of the issue and preventing any stampede.

Either the device of an excess-profits tax or the commandeering by the Government of so-called "war industries" is advocated by those who see a price stampede as inevitable upon declaration of war.

The excess-profits tax during the war did not prevent 1nfiat1on. It helped to pyramid inflation. For example, the iron-ore producer had levied upon him an excess-profits tax. He, in turn, passed this on t o the pig-iron producer as an element of cost. The pig­iron producer paid an excess-profits tax out of his profits and passed t his on to the steel producer. Eventually, at the peak prtce, the Government, as the purchaser, paid the excessive cost, and thereby paid for the excess-profits taxes that it had previously collected.

In the final analysis, it was the ultimate consumer-the tax­payer az:d t he Government--who paid the excess-profits tax into the Treasury. This tax during the war penalized efficiency and rewarded inefficiency. It did not recover the excess profits; it did not keep prices down; it did not stimulate production. It did the opposite.

The e!:cess-profits tax alone would not solve the problem.

Of those who advocate that the Government commandeer all so-called "war industries", I ask this pertinent question: "What are war industries? " ·

In a modern major war, practically every product contributes its part to the winning of the war. The economic strength of a nation is just as important as is its military strength. Assuming that we could define "war industries" and that the Government would commandeer these industries, it then must have the money to pay the men who operate the industries. Government receives its money through taxation. Taxes are levied upon property and earnings. Every industry that is commandeered is so much prop­erty taken from under taxation. Eventually we arrive at complete socialization of all industry. After the close of the war endless problems would confront the Government in returning these properties to their rightful owners.

The first problem the Government would face in commandeer­ing would be a constitutional one. The fifth amendment pro­vides for reasonable compensation for property taken. When this power is exercised, the Government is required by the courts to pay reasonable compensation, which is the market price. If we permlt the stampede of prices at the beginning of a war and then attempt the commandeering process, the Government becomes a purchaser of property at-or near-the peak of inflation.

I am not going into the question of the ability of the Govern­ment to operate industrial plants. For the Government to attempt to do so would so disrupt the economic structure of the Nation as to retard production seriously and thus interfere with winning the war.

The third method proposed, which I consider the best solution of the problem., is embodied in the Mcswain bill now before the House. Under this bill the Executive is authorized to freeze prices as of a date prior to the declaration of war. By so doing, he would fix prices as of a date when business was being transacted under the normal law of supply and demand. A price ceiling would thus be established beyond which no prices could go, but under which prices might fiuctuate. A price-fixing commission would then be established, with power to conduct hearings and raise or lower prices in order to correct inequities in the price structure. No man would have cause to complain, because reasonable compensa­tion, considering the entire price level, would be received by everyone.

The speculator, knowing of the provislons for the freezing of prices, would refrain from speculation in advance of the declara­tion of war. There would ensue no undue inflation of prices and no defiation of the currency. The cost of living would remain fairly stable. All men would be working toward a common end­the same end toward which the men in the field were working­victory for the Natio~

No corruption of public ofHcials--which follows unreasonable profits-would be experienced. The morale of the military and civilian population would be enhanced. There would be no de­mand for ad.justed compensation or bonus to the service men after the war. Should the low-cost producer of a comm,odity in great demand receive inordinate profits, then an excess-profits t ax could restore that profit to the Treasury. Operating under t hese conditions the tax would not pyramid prices because the price ceillng would prevent that. There would be no reaction and con­sequent depression at the close of the war, which always accom­panies falling prices. The Nation would move from peace to war and from war to peace without serious dlsjointment of the eco­nomic structure. Business men would feel more confident in contracting for goods or services, knowing that prices would re­main relatively stable. Labor would not complain when the cc.;;t of living did not increase.

By the prevention of inflation the desired objectives would be accomplished. Peace, we desire above all else. By equalizing the burde~ of war we enhance the probability of peace.

TWO YEARS OF DEMOCRATIC CONTROL Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

to extend my own remarks and to include an address I delivered over the radio last night in conjunction with the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. KLoEB J.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachuetts [Mr. TREADWAY]?

There was no objection. Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago yesterday the

present Democratic administration took over the reins of government. It is therefore time that we take account of stock, balance the books of accomplishment and failure, and decide whether the administration has made good.

We all know that the election of 1932 came at a ti.me of world-wide depression, and that there was a definite, psy­chological tendency toward a change of party control. Em­ployment was scarce. It was easy to appeal to the husband out of a job and to the housewife lacking the needs of home. It was easy to. persuade them to condemn the existing ad­ministration and to pin their faith to the assurances of pros­perity to be gained by a change. Failure in this respect is apparent from the statistical returns showing that there are more than 10,000,000 unemployed and 19,000,000 on relief rolls.

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3033 Business is unable to make any substantial recovery be­

cause of Government interference. The basis of business prosperity is confidence. The uncertainty caused by daily changing policies necessarily breeds lack of confidence. A recent editorial written by one of the best known newspaper owners emphasized the fact that the Government should attend to its business and allow private business to manage its own affairs. A very excellent suggestion, but one far from reality at this time.

In his inaugural address President Roosevelt freely ad­mitted that the legislation which he would propose would be an experiment. How long must business suffer from experi­ments? It is an interesting fact that the only new legisla­tion tending toward permanent recovery was inherited from the last administration in the form of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation law. This Finance Corporation, created during the previous administration over the opposition of the then Democratic leaders, has done more to save the country from complete collapse than all the other alpha­betical establishments combined.

Let me quote a brief paragraph from the Democratic plat­form of 1932:

We believe that a party platform 1s a covenant with the people to be faithfully kept by the party when entrusted with power, and that the people are entitled to know in plain words the terms of the contract to which they are asked to subscribe.

Listen to . some of the contents of the covenant. It pro­vided, among other things, for a reduction in the cost of government, for a balanced budget, for the elimination of extravagance, for the preservation of a sound currency at all hazards, for strengthening the antitrust laws, for the removal of Government from all field of private endeavor. · This covenant was endorsed in his acceptance speech by Candidate Roosevelt 100 percent. Promises are one thing and accomplishments are another. Besides failing to keep these promises, the Democratic Party under the Roosevelt leadership has brought about fundamental changes in our methods of legislation which never were submitted to the people for their consideration.

The Democratic administration has tremendously in­creased the cost of government by creating a monster Fed·­eral bureaucracy and adding to the Government pay roll nearly a hundred thousand new employees who have been appointed on a spoils basis rather than on a merit gystem. It has debased the dollar, nullified the antitrust laws, and is gradually putting the Federal Government into nearly every field of private enterprise.

These are only a few of the Democratic Party's broken pledges. The effort to control private enterprise is not limited by the size of the business involved. In fact, the small business man seems to be the hardest hit and the system of code control aids the big fellow . .

To illustrate, there was in my district a small concern in a small community which cured hams and manufactured pork products. It took the surplus hogs from the nearby farmers and it gave employment, particularly in the winter­time, to about 30 or more people. The Government's control over business has caused this firm to fail, and the homes represented by those employees must resort to welfare aid. However, this incident aceords with the testimony of Secre­tary of Agriculture Wallace, who said that the smaller and what he termed " inefficient ,, industries must give way.

There was no suggestion in the Democratic platform that constitutional government in this country would be sus­pended and that the Nation would undergo a "peaceful revolution " in which the governmental structure would be overhauled by a professorial " brain trust " not responsible to the people.

The Democratic Party has failed to keep faith with the American people in accordance with its platform and its campaign promises of 1932. During the campaign Mr. Roosevelt several times stated that the cost of Government must be reduced. In one speech he accused the last Repub­lican administration of being the" greatest spending admin­istration in peace times in all our history."

However, upon examining the records of the past 2 years we find that the present administration has increased ex­penditures from $5,143,000,000 in 1933 to $7,105,000,000 in 1934, with an estimated increase to $8,581,000,000 in 1935. This latter figure is 60 percent in excess of the 1933 cost. The Budget for 1936 indicates an expenditure of not less than $8,520,000,000, so it is evident the upward trend will be continued.

The preelection ledger hardly agrees with the postelection results. The figures I have cited, which are taken from offi­cial Government sources, give President Roosevelt's own .administration, rather than the previous Republican one, the rather dubious distinction of being what he termed the "greatest spending administration in peace times in all our history."

Mr. Roosevelt, in one of his campaign speeches, said: It is my pledge that this dangerous kind of financing shall be

stopped and that rigid governmental economy shall be forced by a stern and unrelenting administration policy of living within our income. ·

At another time Mr. Roosevelt said: Let us have the courage to stop· borrowing to meet continued

deficits. • • • Stop the deficits. • • •

Worse than the record of extravagance which I have cited is the fact that the billions spent have brought about no permanent recovery. The administration's attempt to squander the Nation back to prosperity has utterly failed, and the coilntry is left with nothing to show for the ex­perience but a tremendous increase in the public debt, which eventually must be paid by the taxpayers.

The Democratic administration has burdened industry and agriculture with all sorts of restrictions, and yet it wonders why they do not recover. Its legislative enactments work at cross purposes with one another.

Under the A. A. A. the administration sought to raise the farmer's income, but under the N. R. A. it took the increase away fr-0m him in the form of higher prices for what he had to buy. .

Under the N. R. A. the administration sought to raise the wage level, but under the A. A. A. it took any increase away in the form of higher prices for food and clothing by means of the burdensome and excessive processing taxes.

The N. R. A. has driven many a small businessman to the wall, and the processing taxes imposed under the A. A. A. have put many a producer out of business, like the small packing-house firm which I mentioned.

Under the A. A. A. the administration has curtailed the production of agricultural commodities, but under the recent act authorizing the President to make tariff bargaining ar­rangements with foreign countries, it has paved the way for increased importations of such commodities from abroad, seriously damaging our own farmers.

Under the N. R. A. the administration has increased pro­duction costs, but under the Reciprocal Tariff Act it is reduc­ing tariffs and allowing greater competition from foreign producers who pay starvation wages and who are not subject to control in hours of employment, working conditions, and so forth.

Only recently a trade agreement was concluded with Cuba. The negotiations were conducted in secret, and not until the agreement was signed did its terms become public. Among other things, the President granted reductions in our duties on Cuban sugar, tobacco, potatoes, tomatoes, and other prod­ucts. Under this agreement, 300,000 tons more sugar will be imported from Cuba to displace cane and beet sugar pro­duced in this country, and the garden truck business of Southern States will be injured by the other items. Negotia­tions are now under way with some 14 other foreign coun­tries which produce commodities in competition with ours. The one just concluded with Belgium still further injures our industrial recovery.

As a Republican, I believe that the interests of this country can best be promoted by maintaining the protective tariff, rather than by destroying it. The un€mployed never can be put back to work by increasing our purchases abroad, nor can

·3034 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 the condition of agriculture be improved by allowing a .greater importation of farm products. After all, it should . be remembered that the United States is the greatest home . market on the face of the earth. We normally consume within our own borders 90 percent of what we produce, and export only 10 percent. Our prosperity is dependent upon the 90 percent and not upon the 10 percent. Even in 1929, the value of our exports was only $5,000,000,000 as compared with a national income of $90,000,000,000. The place for .American dollars is at home.

In conclusion, I want to point out that domestic recovery . depends upon a revival of business. That must be the foun­dation upcn which reemployment and everything else de­pends. Business cannot and will not revive as long as · the Democratic administration is permitted to put stumbling blocks in its way. The American people have it in their power to say whether the present policies shall be continued. I am sure that the day is not far distant when the electorate will be clamoring for a return to power of the Republican ~~ - -

This brief resume of 2 years of Democratic control shows .that in -taking inventory the liabilities greatly exceed the a~ets. '

HOME OWNERS' LOAN CORPORATION Mr. o·cor.rnoR, from the Committee on Rules, submitted

the following privileged repcrt for printing in the RECORD: House Resolution 150

· Resolved, That immed.tately upon the 'adoption of this resolution . it shall. be in order. to move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for con­sideration of H. R. 6021, a bill to provide add.ttional home-mortgage relief, etc . . That after general debate, which shall be con.fined to the bill and shall continue not to exceed 4 hours, to be equally .d.tvided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Banking and Currency, the bill shall be read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. At the"conclusion of the reading of the b1ll for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the same to the House with such amendments as may .llave been adopted, and the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, the rule I J;iave just pre­sented is for the consideration of the Home Owners' Loan · Corporation bill. The plan is to call up the rule tomorrow. The rule provides for 4 hours' general debate. That is in addition to the 1 hour on the rule. .It is desirous, if possible, that all general debate be completed tomorrow; that to­morrow be used entirely in general debate. With the 1 hour under the rule and 4 hours of general debate, it makes a fairly long day unless we start at 11 o'clock. Therefore I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today it adjourn to meet at 11 o'clock tomorrow. · The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York [Mr. O'CONNOR]? . Mr. SNELL. Reserving the right to object, to ask the gentleman from New York a question. I would not have any objection to meeting at 11 o'clock if it were necessary, but for the last several days there has been practically no business before the House and we have been adjourning early. As I understand the situation, there is not much busi­'ness before the House today. Let me make this suggestion to the Chairman of the Rules Committee. We would be willing to waive the provision whereby the rule must lay over for 24 hours and grant consent to call that up this afternoon, and finish part of the debate today and meet at the regular time tomorrow. What does the gentleman say about that?

Mr. O'CONNOR. That haS not been suggested. I do not know whether the committee members would be ready for that. I understan,d they are meeting now on some other matters, and I think that might take them unawares. The plan is, if possible, to finish the bill Friday night; that 2 days will be used on the bill, 1 day for general debate and 1 day reading the bill for amendment. I think it would be too short notice to take it up today. If that suggestion had been made earlier, we would have tried to work it out.

Mr. SNELL. I shall not object to meeting tomorrow at 11 o'clock.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from New York [Mr. O'CONNOR] asks unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today it ·adjourn to meet at 11 o'clock tomorrow .

.Is there objection? There was no objection.

ONE Mn.LION ALIENS ON OUR RELIEF ROLLS Mr. BLANTON. Mi'. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

to extend my own remarks in the RECORD and to include a brief report appearing in the morning pre~ on a splendid address on aliens being supported by our Government, de­livered by my colleague from Texas [Mr. DIES] at a D. A. R . dinner in Washington last night.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas [Mr. BLANTON]?

Mr. COX. Reserving the right to object, of course I shall not object.

Mr. BLANTON. I thank my friend from Georgia. There was no objection. The report of · the-dinner speech of Hon. MARTIN DIES, of

Texas, reported in the Washington Herald for Wednesday, March 6, 1935, is as follows: IMMIGRATION CURB DEMANDED BY D~Mn.LION Now ON RELIEF,

MEMBER OF CONGRESS TELLS D. A. R. DINNER

Immigration doors of this country must be closed, for the pro­tection of those who already have . been afforded asylum here, Rep­resentative DIES, of Texas, said last night · in a speech on Immigra-tion Conspiracy. .

America is the only country in the world, he said, which takes the taxpayer's money to pay relief to aliens, of whom there are now 1,000,000 on relief rolls .

SINISTER INFLUENCES

Representative DIES spoke at the dinner of the District confer­ence of the Daugnters of the American Revolution and charged " sinister influences ,. under different colors and different names, are at work to undermine the State Depa.rtment and Consular Serv­ice and to place in .the hands of the Labor Department discre-­tionary powers in regard to immigration.

Radicals, sentimentalists, internationalists, and the aliens them­selves, shed crocodile tears, heedless of the warnings America must stay on its own shores and protect its own people. The time is coming, he averred, when America will have to adopt the motto of George Washington, for the purpose of self-preservation. His motto was "None but Americans · on guard."

At the present time, Representative DIES said there are 3,500,000 aliens illegally in this country, Altogether there are 16,000,000 foreign born in America, 7,000,000 of them aliens, and of these aliens 6,000,000 have jobs which should have gone to American citizens.

750,000 EXCLUDED

In Germany, 1'-{exico, France, England, Switzerland, and most other countries, he pointed out, there are laws prohibiting jobs being given to aliens as long as citizens of the country in question are available fop the job. But they, he .said, perhaps are not moti­vated by the '-'lofty ideals of the professors" of this country.

He lauded the Government for its work i~ excluding 750,000 aliens within the last few months, on the grounds they might be­come public charges, and said that recently of 564,000 foreigners who have applied for visas from our consuls abroad, more than 400,000 have been rejected on the same grounds.

SOLDIERS' -BONUS

Mr. STACK. Mr. Speaker, I have a communication from my own district back home and I am convince.d that my idea . about Government is that I as a Congressman from the Sixth District of Pennsylvania should, when I can, express the sen­timent of my distrjct. I have a short communication that I think is of interest to all districts of the country, which I will be glad to read, with your permission.

The SPEAKER. How much time does the gentleman desire?

Mr. STACK. About 1 minute. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Pennsylvania asks

unanimous consent to proceed for 1 minute. Is there objec­tion?

There was no objection. Mr. STACK (reading) : MY DEAR MR. STACK: As a citizen and taxpayer and a nonveteran,

I wish to let you know my views on the "soldiers' bonus" ques­tion.

I am against the Belgrano bankers' bonus bill (Vinson bill}. The bankers and Wall Street gambl~ got their bonus in the

years 1917 and 1918. I am in favor of the Patman bill, H. R. 1. Please vote for it and vote against the Vinson bill.

Respectfully, HERMAN A. DYXE.

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3035 PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Mr. FORD of Mississippi. Mr; Speaker, I ask unanimous I may address the House for 5 minutes. - consent that immediately after the disposition of business

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the on the Speaker's table and the special orders for today I gentleman from Illinois? may address the House for 20 minutes.

There was no objection. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. ·Mr. Speaker, reserving the Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, on yesterday the minority right to object, if this request is granted, will the gentleman

leader the gentleman from New York [Mr. SNELL], requested from Mississippi address the House before the Committee on unani~ous consent that he might address the House for 2 the Judiciary is reached ·on the call of the calendar? minutes to correct certain statements in one of the news- The SPEAKER. If the request is granted, it will precede papers of the city of Washington. the call of the calendar.

The article that he referred to was one which gave the Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the Democratic leaders credit for a victory; and in the 2 or 3 gentleman wait until we shall have· disposed of at least three minutes granted to the gentleman he pointed out that the of the bills of the Judiciary Committee. article was not correct, that he felt the Nation should know Mr. FORD . of Mississippi. Then, Mr. Speaker, I modify that it was not a victory for the Democratic leadership. my request. · ·

I want to say to the gentleman from New York that if the - -Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that after the Com­Demccrats on this side were to rise and ask unanimous con- mittee on the Judiciary has yielded the floor today I may sent to correct misstatements whenever they appear in the address the House for 20 minutes. newspapers they would be obliged to rise half a dozen or Mr. SNELL. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, perchance a dozen times every day to correct the misstate- will the Chair kindly inform the House what the program men ts that are printed by the press against the Democratic Will be this afternoon? Then we shall know better how to Party. I want to say to the gentleman further that al- consider these requests. though someone might have stated to him that the steering The SPEAKER. This is Calendar Wednesday. committee made a recommendation on the bill, the gentle- Mr. SNELL. Which committee has the call, and how far man was not correctly informed, for the steering committee down the calendar is it intended to go? made no such recommendation. The steering .committee ' The SPEAKER. The gentleman will find the list printed -tries to act only when it is for the best interest of the House m·the calendar. The Election Committees are at the head of and for the best interest of the Nation, and they do not take the list, then follow the Committee on Ways and Means, the ·part in any minor measures like the one that was before Committee on Appropriations, and the Committee on· the _the Hou~e on .Monday. · Judiciary. .

Mr. SNEIL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for a Mr. SNELL. Is it understood that none of the committees question? - ahead of the Committee on the Judiciary have bills ready?

Mr. SABATH. Yes; I yield to the leader on the Republi- ~·- The SPEAKER. That is the understanding of the Chair. can 'side. Mr. SNELL. And there will be no other committees called

Mr. SNELL. I thought I was sta.ting the position cor- after the Committee on the Judiciary? . rectly, because I understood from the Chairman of the - The SPEAKER.· -The chair' would not say that. It depends Accounts Committee that a subcommittee of the steering on · how much time is consumed by the Committee on the committee appeared before the Accounts Committee with the Judiciary; and that, of course, depends upon the action of the request that the bill be reported out. If I am in error about House. that, then I am mistaken about the statement made by the Mr. SNELL. I thank the Speaker. gentleman from North Carolinai [Mr. WARREN]. The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Mississippi asks

Mr. SABATH. The gentleman from New York, as well as unanimous consent that after the Committee on the Judiciary the gentleman from North Carolina, is misinformed. has completed its business ·on the calendar for today, that

Mr. SNELL. I am very glad to get that information. he be permitted to address the House for 20 minutes. Is there Mr. SABATH. But .I say .this, as I understand the bill, objection?

it was reported by votes of the Democrats as well as of the There was no objection. Republicains. I find that nearly every day members of com- . mittees reporting bills vote for them in the committees. We have unaninious votes iri the committees, and then when the bill comes on the floor of the House, under the whip and domineering influence of the Republican leader, Members are obliged to change their position and vote against their own convictions and against the interest of the membership, as it was Monday, and against the best interests of the country.

I voted for that bill, but not as the chairman of the steering committee. I voted for it because I realized, not­withstanding the statement of the gentleman from North Carolina, that the work has not increased; I voted for it beca·use I knew that the work of this House had doubled ·since the war days. I was a member of two important committees in 1917 and 1918. I know what the work was then and I knew that the work has increased at least 200 percent. The gentleman from New York knows this as well as I. It is for that reason tMt I voted for the bill; and that is the reason others voted for it. [Applause.]

[Here the gavel fell.1 COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS

Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may have until midnight tonight to file a report from the Committee on Ways and Means.

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

There was no objection. LXXIX--192

WASHINGTON AND THE VERMONT HERITAGE

Mr. PLUMLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my own remarks and to include therein an address delivered by Hon. John Spargo, president of the Vermont Historical Association, on Washington and the Vermont Heritage. - Mr .. RANKIN. Mr~ Speaker, reserving the right to object, who is the gentleman who made the_speech?

Mr. PLUMLEY. Hon. ·John Spargo, president of the Ver­mont Historical Association, and the subject is Washington and the Vermont Heritage, delivered on Washington's Birth­day.

Mr. RANKIN. Has the gentleman from Vermont scrupu­lously consulted the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. RrcHJ on this request?

Mr. PLUMLEY. I have not. Mr. RANKIN. I suggest that he consult that guardian of

the RECORD, and if it is all right with him I have no objection. Mr. RICH. I have a large number to look after, and if the

gentleman will look after the Members on that side we will take care of the insertions not Members' own remarks in the RECORD over here. ·

Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, in reply to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. RICH], may I say that if he will look after his minority we will take care of the majority.

Mr. RICH. If we on this side put in the RECORD as much as the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. RANKIN], we would

3036 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH~

have to increase the size of the RECORD and put on another Probably there are few who, if challenged to make such a choice, shift in the Printing Office. would select his presidency of the Constitutional Convention of

1787 as the supreme manifestation of his greatness as a leader. Mr. RANKIN. If the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Yet such a choice would have great merit to commend it. It has

RICH] would put in as much, according to the number of always seemed to me that the calm wisdom and the intellectual and words he uses, that might help considerably toward improv- moral integrity of Washington contributed greatly to the success of ing the quality of the RECORD. that body of able and illustrious men, who for 4 months struggled

with the task of fashioning the structure of an enduring National Mr. GREEN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I Government. The importance of Franklin's wise counsel has been

think the gentleman from Vermont and the people of Ver- fully recognized. The brilliant genius of Hamilton and the learn­mont should have anything within reason that they desire. ing of Madison have been universally acclaimed. But it is exceed­! shall not obJ' ect. ingly doubtful whether the contributions of these giants, and of

others like Edmund Randolph, Robert Morris, Roger Sherman, and The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the Charles C. Pinckney were of greater importance than the infiuence

gentleman from Vermont? of the almost silent Washington. There is reason to believe that

Th bj t . but for his matchless leadership-a leadership of undisputed moral ere was no O ec ion. prestige--the Convention would have ended in a disastrous increase

Mr. PLUMLEY. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to extend of dissention. my remarks in the RECORD I include the following address of When the fate of the Constitution hung in the balance, a visitor John Spargo, president of the Vermont Historical Society, at Mount Vernon wrote to Thomas Jefferson concerning Washing-

! f th •t d t · t· S · t• f ton: " I never saw him so keen for anything in my life as he is for at the annua dinner o e Um e Pa no IC ocie ies 0 the adoption of the new scheme of government." It is impossible Vermont, held at Burlington, February 22, 1935: for any candid mind to study the contemporary records of the

The day we celebrate as the birthday of Washington has come conditions prevailing at the time without reaching the conclusion to hold a place in our national life as unique and as exalted as that Washington's influence and leadership made possible the that of the man himself. To a greater extent and in a pro- ad~ption of the great instrument which made us a nation, and founder sense than any other day in the year, it may be said to which for almost a century and a half has sustained the greatest have become our annual feast of patriotic dedication. In every system of popular government and personal freedom in all human part of the civilized world, wherever American citizens foregather, history. reflection upon the life and character of Washington evokes a At this time, when all thoughtful men and women are conscious sense of patriotism of rare spiritual quality. Influenced by the of the fact that the Constitution is being subjected to serious and majestic greatness of the man himself, his freedom from cant, unprecedented strains, and many of us are convinced that both from insincerity and vaingloriousness, on this day our expressions the Constitution and the whole body of rights it sustains are 1n of patriotic pride and consecration have a nobler quality than we danger of quick destruction, it is well to remind ourselves of the commonly attain. heroic past. It is well to remind ourselves that the Constitution

Even as we gather here, representatives of various patriotic so- was the consummation of the Revolution and the War of Inde­cieties and organizations of Vermont, so in every part of this pendence. Without it the Declaration of Independence would be great Nation similar gatherings of patriotic citizens have assembled no more than: a fanciful essay, and Saratoga and Yorktown mem­throughout this day to pay homage to Washington's memory and orable only as theaters of stupendous folly. to rededicate themselves to those patriotic principles so gloriously Recently, at my suggestion, our good friend Col. Robert Mccuen and inseparably associated with his name. Year after year for a introduced in the Legislature of this State a joint resolution pro­hundred and fifty years now, his countrymen have celebrated Viding for the appointment by the Governor of a commission to Washington's birthday and made of it a day of patriotic consecra- arrange for the commemoration of the bicentennial anniversary tion. In that period there have b~en sunshine and storm, pros- of the birth of Ethan Allen. I hope that when that commission is perity and adversity, triumph and disaster, and through all the appointed the members of the various patriotic organizations of spirit of Washington has been potent in guidance and inspiration. the State will throw themselves into the work with enthusiasm We need both the guidance and the inspiration today more than and zeal. Despite all that has been written about the most ever before. romantic personage in Vermont history, I am convinced that much

It is not generally realized, I think, that the custom of holding remains to be revealed. Dramatic and bizarre episodes and eccen­public celebrations of Washington's birthday began during his tricities have obscured qualities and services of greater importance lifetime. The newspapers of the time recorded great celebrations and worth. in New York and in Richmond, Va., in 1784. Although I have ob- Moreover, I hope that the commission will be empowered and served no earlier accounts of the formal public celebration of the far-visioned enough on its own account, to so broaden the ~cope day, it is worthy of note that the New York Gazetteer, in its ac- of its work as to provide for a commemoration at the same time count of the celebration In that city, refers to it as being according of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the formation of to an " annual custom." the Constitution. The sesquicentennial anniversary of an event

Those early observances were held on the exact birth date--that of such transcending importance ought not to be passed by with­is, on February 11-and that was the custom for many years. out notice under any conditions. The conditions now prevailing, Thus in 1790 in Baltimore there was much celebration of the and likely to prevail, make the sober and solemn commemoration anniversary. The account appeared in the Pennsylvania Packet of the anniversary a special obligation which you here assembled and Daily Advertiser, February 22, 1790. It is dated from Balti- cannot in decency and honor shirk. more February 16, and describes the observances as being held Within the present week a distinguished member of the Supreme "on Thursday last", which was the 11th. In his mother's Bible Court of the United States, speaking for four members of that Washington himself inscribed the date of his birth as February great tribunal, declared that "It does not seem too much to say 11. The adoption of the Gregerian calendar by the British Parlla- that the Constitution is gone" and that the fundamental rights ment by the act of 1750 brought a good deal of confusion into and guarantees of that instrument have been "swept away." local and family records. That act of Parliament decreed that in Admittedly only a serious jeopardy of the Constitution and of 1752 October 3 should be reckoned a.s October 14 throughout the the personal and property rights rooted in the Constitution could British possessions. Thus in all records October 2 would be Imme- have called forth such a serious declaration by 4 of the 9 members cliately followed by October 14. Moreover, the new law provided of the SUpreme Court. that New Year's Day, which had always been April 24, was hence- I submit that there is in that declaration a challenge to every forth to be January 1. citizen, and a special challenge to every member of each of the

This revision of the calendar did not come into effect until great patriotic bodies here represented. If the Constitution has Washington had grown to manhood. When he was born, the old in fact been so violated that it has ceased to be effective, and is to style of reckoning by the Julian calendar was in use. Had the all practical purposes destroyed, It must be restored and reinsti­new style then been in use, the da.te would have been February tuted. If, on the other hand, we hold that the dramatic declara-22, 1732. That is why we commemorate this date and not tb.e tion of the four Justices contains large elements of emotional earlier one. The actual date is of no importance, of course. Any exaggeration, it is still clearly evident that the Constitution is in day set apart for the purpose of honoring Washington's memory grave peril and needs stout and determined defense. Whichever and recalling the greatness of his service to his country would of view of the matter we take, it seems to me, there Ues at the very. necessity become a holy day. Washington himself is a symbol. heart of it a challenge we must not evade. I wish that from this From the beginning he has been revered as the examplar of great gathering there might proceed a movement to make Vermont's virtues, rather than loved for personal traits and charms. None answer to that challenge. It would be well if between now and ever regarded him with the intimate, personal affection with which 1937, every man and woman in Vermont would wear, as a badge millions have regarded Jefferson and Jackson and Lincoln. Awed of loyalty and consecration, the outward and visible sign of an reverence, rather than personal affection and familiar under- . inward grace and purpose, a simple button with the motto "Pre­standing, marks our thoughts and our speech about Washington. ' serve the Constitution " inscribed upon 1t. With that prepara-

When we consider the life of the EnglLc;h gentleman of Virginia tion, we could make 1937 forever memorable as the year in which whose destiny it was to become the First American and to be the Constitution was restored and the Republic preserved. placed among the great immortals, what deed or event shall we I shall not here discuss the issues raised in the con:tlicting select as best exemplifying his greatness? Some will turn to the opinions of the members of the Supreme Court in the cases just majesty of his agony at Valley Forge. Others will turn to the decided arising out of the legislation of Congress affecting the moment when he left the Second Continental Congress in shy 1 so-called "gold clauses" in contracts, save only to make a single confusion, as John Adams eulogized him and proclaimed his I observation. The majority opinion, equally with that of the mi­unique fitness to command the Continental Army. Still others nortty, holds that the Congress violat.ed the Constitution when it will choose as the greatest expression of his genius the stern abrogated the gold clause in Government bonds. Stripped of non~ imperiousness of his rebuke to those who would make him king. essential terminology, that is what the entire Supreme Court de-

• 1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3037 cided. That finding is in full consonance with the principle long ago laid down by Alexander Hamilton. and uniformly followed throughout our history. As Hamilton forcibly pointed out, the idea that Congress can itself enter into an obligation and then at will make a law changing the obligation is repugnant both to reason and morality. But the majority of the Court, having em­phasized thi.S sound principle, proceeded to reduce it to a mere pious admonition, of no practical value to the citizen, by holding that the citizen holding a Government bond whose value is im­paired by the unconstitutional action of Congress has no redress at law, because a. citizen cannot sue the Government without the Government's consent.

The principle that the sovereign may not be sued by the citizen without the sovereign's consent is sound law, essential probably in a democratic republic, to the existence of sovereignty itself. But for all that, its application in such a set of circumstances as a.re comprised in this case, is brutally oppressive, repugnant to morals, and inimical to stable government. It is quite plain that the present Congress will not enact legislation enabling the vic­tims of its own unconstitutional and invalid action to seek redress. It is no less certain that had the majority opinion of the Supreme Court left open and undetermined the question of the right of citizens to sue the Government for the enforcement of contractual obligations illegally abrogated. Congress would have been called upon to pass legislation specifically denying that right. . In short, we have the most flagrant and shameful repudiation

by the Government of its obligations to its own citizens, repudia­tion which the Supreme Court declares to have been improperly and unlawfully accomplished, but with no redress for the citi­zen. Regardless of our opinions upon any of the grave questions which are intermingled with the great problems of currency and credit, I believe that there is no thoughtful man or woman of good faith and good will in all this land who does not feel humili­ated and shamed by the cynical unrighteousness of this phase of our Government's policy. Governor Pownall once described cer­tain principles and plans proposed for the regulation of relations between Great Britain and the Colonies as "mere useless oppro­brious theory." So those who are responsible ·for the conduct of our Government seem to regard the universally accepted principles of honorable and honest dealing.

This is no occasion for partisan criticism or attack, and I shall not commit the offense of attempting to discuss those issues which are being contested by the political parties in our land. It ls un­fortunately true that in both the great political parties there are many who approve the shameful policy of repudiation. And it is fortunately true that the policy is as sternly repudiated in the party of the administration as in the party of the opposition. What I am concerned to point out is the serious, and perhaps, ir­reparable, damage that the repudiation has done to the Nation, and to other nations, damage which will be felt long after those now living shall have passed away.

As a student of economics and political science, I cannot close my eyes to the fact that this policy of repudiation has taken the stabilizer out of the economic mechanism of the Nation. In times past prudent and cautious men, relying upon the soundness of government obligations, have always preferred government securi­ties with comparatively low returns over other types of securities with larger returns in sufficient number. and investment volume to act as a stabilizer, a counter balance to the constant pressure of speculation. . The great fiduciary investments, based to a large extent upon the confidence that our Government obligations were beyond failure whether by accident or design, have been an im­portant part of that stabilizing mechanism. Repudiation of the obligations of the Government can have no other result than to destroy that confidence, remove all Government obligations from the position. they have heretofore held unchallenged, and make those securities as speculative as those of private issue.

It is a favorite device of orators speaking upon occasions like this in commemoration of Washington, Lincoln, Cleveland, or other great leaders of the past, to ask what that leader would do if he were alive today, challenged by today's problems. The answer is always the same, namely, that he would do just what the orator himself believes should be done. I shall not resort to that device. I do not presume to say that Washington, if he were reincarnated and returned to us in this year 1935, would do this or that thing. Whether he would support our entry into the World Court or the League of Nations, whether he would favor returning to the gold standard, or experimenting with in­flation, who shall say?

What I do assert, however, is that if he crune with the same austere rectitude of mind and consc~ence, the same selfiess pur­pose, the same high regard for the constitutional principles he did so much to bring to reality in 1787, he would be foremost among those who now are fighting to preserve those principles and the institutions founded upon them. Certainly, Washington would find himself in a bewilderingly changed world. He would see mighty mllls with throbbing motors where he had known small workshops. Instead of travel by stage or horseback he would see swift transportation through the skies. Instead of waiting months to get a simple exchange of communications with France or England, he would be able to make the exchange in a few min­utes, more easily than it was in 1787 to communicate with his next-door neighbor.

Yet these marvelous changes, and others not less striking, would perplex him less, I think, than the changes in our Government which have t aken place during the past few years. I have an idea that he would find it much easier to accommodate himself to the mechanical changes than to the political changes. The

tremendous increase in the functions and powers of the Federal Government; the invasion of the rights and sovereignties of the States; the abdication of its legislative functions by the Congress and the assumption of those functions by the President and by agents appointed by him; the steady march of the Nation toward a lock-step regimentation of its citizens; the levying of billions in truces to be expended at will by the President, without direction or limitation or accounting-i>urely these things would stagger the immortal Washington, who is still " first in the hearts of his countrymen!"

There is no evidence that Washington ever set foot in Vermont. When preparations were being made for the celebration of the bicentennial anniversary of his birth, I made an exhaustive search to find out if possible whether there was any evidence that he had been in Vermont at any time. Other investigations were made under the direction of Dr. Albert Bushnell Hart, the great historian. No such evidence was found. Of course, there are legends. There is the silly story of his supposed visit to Ben­nington, to confer with Governor Tichenor, when he is alleged to have come " disguised as a groom." There are other legends hardly less silly, but there is not a single shred of credible evidence that he ever came to Vermont at any time.

We know that he was deeply and profoundly interested in get­ting Vermont into the Union. We know, too, that in the darkest hours of the Revolution he wa.S cheered by the heroism of the Green Mountain boys and the victory of Stark's army at Ben­nington. It was fitting that Vermont should come into the Union during his Presidency, the first State to be added to the original thirteen. Because of these things, we of Vermant feel that we have special reason to cherish Washington's fame and memory. We feel that our kinship with him is second only to that of Virginia, whose son he was. And today the principles and ideals which were his are still cherished here to such an extent that from coast to coast the very word "Vermonter" is held synonymous with the title, "Defender of American Liberty."

Paraphrasing a noble declaration by Calvin Coolidge that will live as long as our language itself, I venture to say here: If the faith and the ideals of Washington should vanish in every other part of the Union, and loyalty to the institutions of liberty he helped to make should elsewhere perish, all could be replenished and restored from the generous store held by the people of Ver­mont.

IMPRESSIONS OF A NEW CONGRESSMAN Mr. MARCANTONIO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­

sent to extend my remarks in the RECORD by inserting a radio address made by the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. STEFAN] over the Columbia Broadcasting System on February 28.

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

There was no objection. Mr. MARCANTONIO. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to

extend my remarks in the RECORD, · I include the fallowing address by Representative KARL STEFAN, Republican, of Ne­braska, over the Columbia Broadcasting System Thursday, February 28, at 11: 30 p. m. Representative STEFAN dis­cussed his impression of Congress from a new Congress­man's viewpoint. He is the only radio announcer in Con­gress. He spoke from the studios of W JSV, Columbia's station for the Nation's Capital.

The address is as follows: I have been given this opportunity by the Columbia Broad­

casting System to talk to you from the standpoint of a new Mem­ber of the Seventy-fourth Congress and, also, as the only practical radio man in the House of Representatives.

Feeling that I know what a radio listener wants to hear and realizing how you feel about long-winded speeches, I beseech you to be tolerant with my efforts to tell you some of my impressions of Congress from the viewpoint of a "rookie" Member.

One of the inevitable first impressions of the House of Rep­resantati ves that comes to a new Member and to the visitor in the ~ery is that there is usually a great deal of confusion in the Chamber and that it is very difficult for Members and visitors to hear what is going on. The truth is that bttd acoustic condltions in the Chamber milltate against good order. However, better sound conditions in the House Chamber would contribute to the improved decorum of the House as well as to the ease with which business is transacted, and because of the obvious need for the improvement one of my first acts here was to discuss the existing situation on the floor of the House and to introduce a resolution for the purpose of having modern scientific appliances installed in the Chamber for the perfection of sound transmission.

I want to repeat what I said over this great radio chain on the opening day of this session of Congress-that the people are not interested in politics or politicians right now. As a new Con­gressman, I have listened eagerly for constructive legislation from men who have been in Congress for many years. Because I be­lieve I have some constructive ideas, I have endeavored to take my part early in the session by putting some of these ideas into motion, and have introduced a few bills which I feel are con­structive, such as my bill to take the Postal Service and the Post otnce Department out of politics; my bill to authorize and direct a special commission. to make a. study of the " farm dollar " and

• 3038 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-' HOUSE MARCH 6 to devise ways and means to restore and maintain an equitable and stable purchasing power of the farm dollar; also, my bill to authorize farmers to repay crop-production loans in commodities in kind, after harvest, bushel for bushel, rather tha.n in money, notwithstanding the intervening fluctuations of farm-commodity prices, etc.

I have never been a public-ofilce holder before; never before have I been a candidate for public omce. Although elected on the Republican ticket-the only Republican from my State-I am not interested in partisan politics and look at Congress from an ordinary layman's viewpoint. I realize that the United States is not contained entirely in the District of Columbia. I realize that we must represent 48 States and our Territories and island posses­sions. I realized early after com.iilg to Washington that a de­pression brings something of a boom to Washington; that it may be easy for a human being to forget that there is a depression when thousands of ofilceholders in this city display wealth and prosperity. I talk daily with great statesmen who are learned in

' legislative tactics and parliamentary law. Knowing the misery which exists outside of the city of Washington, I am amazed how quickly some of these men take advantage of partisan politics.

I have read a great deal a.bout minority and majority parties. Today, I am a member of that smaller group. I listen carefully to partisan politicians and I wonder why these leaders forget so quickly who they really represent; who really made the present majority in Congress and why.

You who are listening to me know who the forces are that made this majority, do you not? You know what forces ma.de Franklin D. Roosevelt our leader. To refresh your memory, that force includes 3,500,000 people who a.re unemployed. Some say that force is closer to 10,000,000. It also includes the millions on relief; the million young men and women out of our educational institu­tions walking the streets looking for jobs; the thousands of young people who become of age each month. That, in my opinion, 1s the force which made this majority and leadership, and that is the force which gave commands, and· that is the force which ca.n take away that majority and that same leadership unless relief based upon common sense and permanency is forthcoming.

Knowing this to be true, I feel that the biggest answer to that force came from the House when lt voted to turn over to the President about 5 billions of dollars to bring permanent recovery. Of course, that bill is now in the Senate for remodeling, and that it is being remodeled, you well know.

I can't imagine how much $5,000,000,000 is. Can you? But I can imagine the plea for help from mlllions of human beings and I pray that this money which belongs to you will be spent in such a way that it will do the most good for the most number of people, and that it wlll be spent from a nonpartisan point of view and kept free from the palms of the spoilsma.n.

The Seventy-fourth Congress has been in session 2 months. What have we, a legislative body, accomplished to the end that the economic and social ms of the country may be cured? I am impressed by the fact that about all we have done so far is to appropriate money. Insofar as the House is concerned, we have passed five of the regular annual supply b1lls-thirty-nine mil­lions for the District of Columbia; seven hundred and seventy­seven millions for the independent ofilces; ninety-eight millions for the State, Justice, Commerce, and Labor Departments; nine hundred and three millions for the Treasury and Post Ofilce De­partments; three hundred and seventy-eight millions for the War Department; and about $1,000,000 of " urgent " appropriations near the beginning of the session. We have yet to pass the ap­propriation bills for the Interior Department, the Navy De­partment, the Department of Agriculture, and the legislative es­tablishment. These, of course, will aggregate additional hundreds of millions of dollars. Notwithstanding .that we have yet to pass four of the major appropriation bills of the year, the House has already appropriated $7,076,000,000, in round numbers, since Jan­uary 3, 1935. This, of course, includes the $4,880,000,000 car­ried in the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1935. I can­not avoid the conclusion that two questions a.re now very pertinent. First how long can we continue that prodigal rate of expenditure of public money; and, second, are we not going to have to do much more and d11ferent than appropriate money to lift ourselves out of our present trouble? The challenge 1s otit to this Congress to produce some sound legislation as well as mammoth appropriation bills. _

From observation and participation in the proceedings of this historic Congress, I re'allze that public sentiment has much to do with legislation; that the voice of the people, if that voice is loud enough, usually sways action in Congress. Therefore, I feel that the force which made this majority party and this leadership will not stand for spoilsmanship in this our hour of distress; that spoilsmen will not take advantage of this the greatest money­spending program in the history of our Nation or any other nation on the face of the globe.

Most of the representatives have various ideas. They come from every State in the Union with the problems of people from their various districts. Naturally, their ambitions to serve their people are based upon the present demands of the people in their par­ticular districts. These ideas are contained in the various bills and through committees, conferences, etc., there is that exchange of views for the purpose of bringing to all of the people that mixture of legislation which in the minds of their representatives is essential to their welfare.

I am working for legislation toward the betterment of my dis­trict. Every Congressman has his program for legislation which he believes will help his district. That's why the exchange ot

ideas seems to help us new Members. We are getting considerable help from older Members, but they have their own troubles. After interviewing scores of Members of the House of Representatives, Democrats and Republicans alike, I believe that every Member has the interest of his district at heart and everyone is, first, an American and is here fighting for your welfare, and while some things are done which may look to the contrary, I believe that the United States Congress is still a representative body of men and women. I believe that everyone in the House today wants to save this Nation and to keep intact our constitutional Govern­ment.

We are at the half-way mark of the present national admin­istration. The last 2 years have witnessed many changes, some of them fundamental. Not a few of these changes occurred with the admission, express or implied, that they were temporary in nature and were induced only by the emergency. The next 2 years will do much to initiate the rem.oval of temporary expedi­ents or to cultivate them into :flxed forms incapable of displace­ment. Of this situation the American people should be fully aware, and the American people should tell its Congress now whether or not it wants these far-reaching changes perpetuated.

I want to thank Ted Church and staff and the Columbia Broad­casting System for the use of its great radio fac111ties.

It has been my privilege to walk along with radio from almost its infancy, and I am amazed a.t the strides of this great science. As one radio fan to another, I wonder if we take all of this won­derful service for granted? Those of us who know the tremendous expense and the tremendous amount of scientific research which is behind this service appreciate lt all.

And to those of you who have been so patient I want to thank you for listening to me tonight. Might as well be happy, folks, because everything is going to be all right.

JUSTICE OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES

Mr. PETI'ENGILL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent to address the House for 10 minutes to pay a brief tribute to Justice Holmes.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, I give notice that I will object to the granting of any further special privileges today.

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

There was no objection. Mr. PETTENGILL. Mr. Speaker, Justice Oliver Wendell

Holmes is dead. The great dissenter is gone. He dissented from old thought patterns in favor of new ones. It is my be­lief that if his dissents of 10, 20, 30 years ago had been ac­cepted as the true guide ·posts to our development, much of the trouble of today would have been spared us. "Holmes and Brandeis dissent." Historic words!

From my days in law school he has been a sort of spiritual godfather of mine. This is not the time to appraise his achievement, but it is certain, as he once said," We will leave our spirit in those who follow, and they will not turn back. All is ready; bugler, blow the charge." ·

On the day that his death is announced to the world I would like to point out just one, perhaps the major part of his creed-his belief in experiment.

Justice Holmes knew that growth is the law of life; that only change is changeless; that "time makes ancient good uncouth"; that men must be free to pioneer new pathways to new El Dorados.

Justice Holmes always believed in a new deal. He would, without doubt, have upheld the major purposes of the new deal of today. For 94 years he remained" invincibly young", as Justice Hughes once said. He brought to the Nation's altar the winnowed wisdom of years, but his heart was a boy's heart to the end. He never put life in a pigeon hole, nor the Constitution in a straight-jacket.

This is easily proved by his own words and I here set down "little fragments of my fleece that I have left UPon the hedges of life".

In the first chapter of his first book, The Common Law, he said: "The life of the law has not been logic; it has been ex­perience", and of course experience comes from experiment.

Again-The provisions of the Constitution a.re not mathematical formu­

las having their essence in their form; they are organic living in­stitutions transplanted from English soil. Their significance is vital, not formal.

• • • • • The fourteenth amendment (and he would have said the same

thing of any other part) is not a pedagogical requirement of the impracticable. . . ~ ~ ~ . .

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3039 The fact is that legislation in this country, as well as elsewhere,

is empirical. • • • • •

There is nothing I more deprecate than the use of the fourteenth amendment beyond the absolute compulsion of its words to pre­vent the making of social experiments that an important part of the community desires, in the insulated chambers afforded by the several States, even though the experiments may seem futile or even noxious to me and to those whose judgment I most respect.

• • • • If there is any principle of the Constitution that more impera­

tively calls for attachment than any other, it is the principle of free thought-not free thought for those who agree with us, but freedom for the thought that we hate.

• • • • We see nothing in the Constitution that compels the Govern­

ment to sit by while a food supply is cut off and the protectors of our forests and our crops are destroyed.

• • • • As any line of adjustment between conflicting rights must be

drawn on practical grounds, there is no doubt that it may vary under different circumstances. For instance, in England, in view of the national importance of their great manufacturers, juries are instructed that, in counties where great works are carried on, parties must not stand on extreme rights.

• • • • • When 20 years ago a vague terror went over the earth and the

word " socialism " began to be heard, I thought, and still think, that fear was translated into doctrines that had no proper place in the Constitution or the common law. Judges are apt to be naive, simple-minded men, and they need something of Mephis­topheles. We, too, need education in the obvious--to learn to trans­cend our own convictions and to leave room for much that we hold dear to be done away with, short of revolution, by orderly change of the law.

• • • • We know too much to sacrifice good sense to a •

syllogism. • • •

• •

The law is the witness and external deposit of our moral life. Its history is the history of the moral development of the race.

He believed in the "oughtness" of the law. Many more like these few excerpts from his wisdom might

be given, but these are here set down " in order that we may remember all that buffoons forget." He did not believe in wild swings of the pendulum because he once said, " Historic continuity with the past is not a duty, it is only a necessity." But he did pelieve that the past is not the present, nor the present the future.

He once wrote to a Hoosier friend of mine, Oswald Ryan, of the Federal Power Commission:

Life is a romantic business. It is patnting a picture, not doing a sum; but you have to make the romance. And it will come to the question, How much fire have you in your belly?

As he once said of an associate who had passed on, so we may say of him:

Sooner or later the race of men will die, but we demand an external record. We have it. What we have done is woven forever in the great vibrating web of the world. The eye that can read the import of its motion can decipher the story of all our deeds, of all our thoughts. To that eye I am content to leave the recog­nition and memory of this great head and heart.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for one-half minute.

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

There was no objection. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I should like to add

one s~ntence to what has just been said. Mr. Justice Holmes was a great jurist, who believed in a democracy in government based upon a democracy in opportunity and in responsibility. We of the South recognize him as a valiant soldier during the tragic war between the States and as a generous friend when the war was over.

Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for one-half minute.

Tha SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection. Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, as one of the Massachu­

setts delegation, I think I should add a brief word . of sym­pathy, respect, and admiration in memory of Mr. Justice Holmes.

In the death of Mr. Justice Holmes the State of Massa­chusetts has lost one of its most illustrious citizens and the Nation its most preeminent jurist. Although he is gone from our midst, his spirit will never die. He has left his " foot­prints in the sands of time."

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., was born in the city of Boston on March 8, 1841. On the ninety-fourth anniversary of his birth he will be laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery beside the remains of his beloved wife, who preceded him in death by some 6 years.

Nothing can be more fitting than that every possible respect should be shown to his memory. I am unable to . say whether Congress has ever paused in its deliberations to officially pay tribute to a person no longer holding any· public position, but, Mr. Speaker, in the present. instance there is a very unusual situation. There probably never has been a parallel case, so we do not need to look for any prece­dent. Therefore, I propose to present a concurrent resolu• tion to extend an invitation to Mr. Chief Justice Hughes to address a joint meeting of the two bodies of Congress in commemoration of the life and services of the late Justice.

As a boy Oliver Wendell Holmes lived under the influence cf his poet father-another famous son of Massachusetts-­whose full name he bore. In 1861, at the age of 20, he was graduated from Harvard University with the degree of bache­lor of arts.

Shortly thereafter young Holmes volunteered with the Twentieth Massachusetts Regiment for service in the Civil War. He was commissioned a lieutenant, and served his country with distinction, being thrice wounded. He was mustered out of service in 1864 with the brevet of colonel, a title which in his later years he revered above all others. At that time he was but 23 years of age.

There is an interesting story in connection with· his Civil War service that illustrates the close relationship of young Holmes with his father. During the Battle of 4ntietam he was wounded in the neck.

Upon learning of his son's injury, the elder Holmes set out at once to find his boy, traveling some· 500 miles, only to be directed from one place to another in Maryland and nearby Virginia. Finally he found young Holmes, who was then a captain, in a railway train at Harrisburg, Pa.

After the war young Holmes returned to Harvard and entered upon the study of law, receiving his degree in 1866. Following a lellt:,othy vacation in Europe, he formed a law partnership with his brother, Edward, and later became a member of the firm of Shattuck, Holmes & Munroe.

In 1870, 4 years after obtaining his law degree, he went back to Harvard as an instructor in constitutional law. Sub­sequently he delivered a series of lectures before the Lowell Institute on the common law, which were later printed as a textbook. This book at once established Mr. Holmes as a master of legal jurisprudence and after 54 years is still in wide use.

In 1882, shortly after he had been appointed to a new professorship at Harvard, he was named by Governor Long of Massachusetts to be an associate justice of the State su­preme court. Seven years later he was made chief justice.

He served upon the supreme bench of his beloved State for a period of 20 years, during which time he wrote many scholarly opinions, running through 45 volumes of legal re­ports, which marked him as a jurist far above the average.

His reputation became so great that in 1902 he was named by President Theodore Roosevelt to be an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. At that time he was 61 years of age, and although some question was raised as to the advisability of appointing a man of such advanced years, the wisdom of President Roosevelt's choice has been more than vindicated. Although most men :have passed the zenith of their careers at that age, Mr. Justice Holmes was but entering upon what was to become 29 years of further distinguished service. When he retired frbm active duty in 1932 on the occasion of his ninety-first birthday, he had firmly established himself as one of the most brilliant jurists of all time.

3040 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-.·- HOUSE MARCH 6 Mr. Speaker, the Psalmist wrote: The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by

reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labor and sorrow; for it ii? soon cut off, and we fly away.

Oliver Wendell Holmes not only reached fourscore years, but was within striking distance of :fivescore when his busy. useful, and brilliant earthly existence was terminated. He died as he lived, calmly and peacefully, and retained his strong mental faculties and his hopeful philosophy until the end. His last years were not years of "labor and sorrow." Age did not wither him, but on the contrary lent l~ter to his brilliant mind.

Oliver Wendell Holmes is a name that will ever be con­nected with the best in American life-the best in literature, in poetry, in philosophy, in law, and in jurisprudence, and yet above all, the best in human sympathy to his fell ow man. In nearly a half century upon the bench Justice Holmes sought to dispense equal justice without fear or favor; and if in some of his decisions he leaned toward so-called " liber­alism ", it was not as a dissenter but as one who preferred to err, if be erred at all, on the side of those whose rights he felt it his bounden duty to safeguard.

Justice Holmes was the oldest justice ever to actively sit upon the Supreme Court bench, and only eight justices in the entire history of the Court exceeded his record of 29 years of service. These were Justice Bushrod Washing­ton, of Virginia, 31 years; Chief Justice John Marshall, of Virginia, 34 years; Justice William Johnson, of South Caro­lina, 30 years; Justice Joseph Story, of Massachusetts, 34 years; Justice John McLean, of Ohio, 32 years; Justice James M. Wayne, of Georgia, 32 years; Justice Stephen J. Field, of California, 34 years; and .Justice M. Harlan, of Kentucky, 34 years.

Mr. Speaker, the people of the Commonwealth of Massa­chU.Setts loved and admil'ed Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, and were justly proud of him as one of their illustrious native sons. In fact, he was loved and revered by his fel­low men everywhere, not alone for his works which live after him, not alone for his great learning, not alone for his deeds with sword and pen, and not alone for his cul­ture and versatility, but because he was a man of exalted and noble character. ·

Permit me to quote an appraisal of Mr. Justice Holmes by one of his former associates, Mr. Justice Stone, who often joined him in dissenting opinions. Justice Stone said:

It may fairly be said that no judge in the entire history of Anglo-American law has written opinions exhibiting as profound an insight, with such crystalline clarity of thought and such literary grace. as Justice Holmes, and few have exercised a more profound influence on the law an<;i on legal thi~ing. ~n th~, his dissenting opinions have been qwte as influential as his opinions for the Court. Many of the latter have already become the law of the land, and many more will ultimately become so.

Mr~ Speaker, on the occasion of his ninety-first birthday, fallowing his resignation from the Court. Mr. Justice Holmes was showered with the praises and tributes of the bar of the Nation, led by Chief Justice Hughes. His response to that ovation was characteristic and gave an insight into his true feelings regarding life and death. I quote his words in con­clusion of my remarks. Mr. Justice Holmes then said:

In this symposium my part is only to sit in silence. To express one's feelings as the end draws near is too intimate a task.

But I may mention one thought that comes to me a.s a listener-in. The riders in a race do not stop short when they reach the goal. There ls a little finishing canter before coming to a standstill. There is time to hear the kind voice of friends and to say to oneself: "The work is done." But just as one says that, the answer comes, "The race is over, but the work is never done while the power to work remains." The canter that brings you to a stand.still need not be only coming to rest. It cannot be, while you still live. For to live is to function. That is all there is in living. ·

And so I end with a line from a Latin piet, who uttered the message more than 1,500 years ago:

'Death plucks my ear and says: "Live-I am coming."•

The SPEAKER. Under the special order of the House the gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAVERICK] is recognized for 15 minutes.

Mr. MAVERICK. Mr. Speaker, my subject today is" Free­dom of Speech "; and as an example I cite the talks made

by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. SUMNERS} and the gentle­man from Massachusetts [l\.J.lr. TREADWAY]. [Applause.]

I begin with a very fine example of tolerance and freedom myself [laughter}. That is because I agree with the ideas of one of the gentlemen and disagree with the ideas of the other, and the Members may guess with which I agree and disagree. But I yield to both! I am going to speak on an attitude that has been assumed by some American peop.Je. We have what is called another "red" scare. Some of us are worried to death by Communists, taking over this Gov­ernment. Some of us have the jitters~ We are afraid that the Communists are going to con·upt our soldiers and sailors, and that the Communists are going to take over the Army, the Navy, Marine Corps, and, as stated the other day, the Coast Guard, the Reserve Corps, and Rese1·ve Officers' Train­ing Carps. It is all bunk. The American people have too much sense, and moreover, cannot be driven like cat tle.

Mr. Speaker, I am not worried about that situation, I am not afraid of it, and I am tired of hearing about Communists all day long. It reminds me of a story that is said to have happened at one time in Tammany Hall when Pat was mak­ing a speech. He was pouring it on the Republicans, and somebody said: " Pat, you may say anything you please about them, because there are not any of them here."

Now, we may talk here about Communists, and be as brave as we please, all we want, because there is not a single Con­gressman who is a Communist nor a sympathizer of Com­munists; and, as a matter of fact, there . are very few of either in the whole of the United States.

The gentleman who preceded me here, the able gentleman from Indiana [Mr. PETTENGILL J, made a very brilliant speech on the life of Justice Holmes. He was a grand old man and loved liberty. I hope his soul goes marching on with us. I had several things in my mind ta say about his beliefs, but the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. PETT~GILLJ did it better than I can. However, I want to repeat one of his quotations from the opinions of Justice Holmes:

If there is any principle of the Constitution that more impera­tively calls for attention than any other, it is the principle of free thought-not free thought for those who agree with us-but free­dom for thoughts that we hate.

I am not going to lecture this Congress, because I am not a wise man, and there are wise men in this body. However, I am going to read the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of rell• gion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof-

It did not set out any particular sect. Then it says: or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.

It did not designate the character of speech, and does not say Republican papers or Communist papers or any other kind of papers. It says " freedom of speech and press ", and that is what it means, and for a very good reason. If you suppress one philosophy or idea, you can suppress oth· ers; therefore, the only guaranty we have of free govern­ment is free speech.

In the last few weeks there have been various examples of violations of the right of freedom of speech, and I am going to give some of them, taken from the press.

Out in California the other day a newspapermaµ went into that State to write a story of the lettuce pickers, and was summarily thrown out and illegally deported. They said he had "Communist literature on him." He did have Communist literature in his possession, because he had col­lected all kinds of literature for his story in order to give the whole story. He even had chamber of commerce literature in his possession. According to their rule out there in Cali­fornia, if we pass any of this gag legislation, if a Congress­man were to go to New York, as I did the other night, and buy a daily paper called "The Daily Worker'', they could arrest such Congressman and put him in jail and say he was a Communist because he had a copy of the Daily Worker. As a matter of fact, I bought the paper, and it was a very dull paper. It was not worth reading, and I

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3041 threw it away, but, accidentally, someone might have come up to me and arrested me if we had such gag laws.

The story is contained in the New York Post and in the other New York papers. In line with this I am going to mention something that was said the other day by a member of our Cabinet. Mr. Harold L. Ickes stated:

I am going to read here part of an editorial from the New York Post concerning this arrest out in California. It stated: I think it disgraceful that recently Norman Thomas, the Socialist,

Feudal tyranny walks through the great agricultural valleys of was prohibited from speaking in Illinois by a tear-gas barrage California. thrown by police; and of all places, in Abraham Lincoln's home

The arrest and illegal deportation of James Rorty, nationally known poet and writ er, from the Imperial Valley lights up the rapidity with which American liberties are being destroyed there.

It should have added, "and in many other states." Then it says: In the process the destruction of civil liberties has reached th~

stage where a writer cannot enter a town to gather material for a book without being jailed on a trumped-up charge of communism, and then driven out of the State.

Then it says further:

State. In freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and free assemblage

lies the safeguard of liberty. Instead of spending excessively for the upkeep of large police

forces and bigger and better courts, funds should be spent on the uplift of the people from the slums--

He declared. I have many clippings on this which show public opinion;

and I think intelligent public opinion and the big majority of the press are exactly right about it. They oppose such gag laws. Let us try to be leaders for calm thought and

Unless Congress and the Federal courts intervene soon, a rullng- intelligent action; let us step this " red " scare. class dictatorship will be firmly established in rural Callfornia on There will, perhaps, come before this House "Various and European models, and t he success of strong-arm methods there in crushing labor is likely to bring the same methods into use sundry proposed statutes-which are gag laws-and I think elsewhere. this is in line with the same old " red " scare we had in 1920.

Then the editorial mentions hired ·giumen and sheriffs, Let me mention some of them. One of these bills goes on and I want to call particular attention to this fact-the use to define a Communist as a person believing in common own­of so-called " peace officers " committing illegal acts. When ership. Common ownership, for instance, would take in the a sheriff or other peace officer illegally knocks a man in the

1

Tennessee Valley Authority, and, of course, in some of these head and deports him out of a State or county, little is said bills you could drive trucks through them and use them for about it and nothing is done about it; but if some poor, any purpose you want, and if a man were in favor of the weak-minded Communist says something to which no atten- Tennessee Valley Authority he would be a Communist, and tion is paid we all begin to shout and holler all over the then, I am afraid, they would get the Honorable J oHN country abo~t it. RANKIN, of Mississippi, and he could not talk about Tupelo,

When this alleged peace officer illegally arrested this news Miss., or public ownership, any more, and they would even reporter, who was an American citizen legally traveling in get the President of the United States and put him in prison. his own country, he, the sheriff, "violently overthrew the . '?1en the~e is a military bill, and this miµtary bill makes go11ernment" at least temporarily. Suppose some so-called it illegal to mfluence a soldier in almost any way, and I have "radical" h~d deported the sheriff? The Governor would an opinion on this subject. It is another bill through which have ordered out troops, and, if that had not been enough, ~ou can W:ive a 10-ton truck and do anything you want with a section of the Army would have been sent there. That it. The bill sounds very patriotic, but it is bound to lead to is the reason that I say we should require our peace officers grave a?uses. Our Army and NavY have gotten along 150 to obey the law just as any other citizen, and there is no years without such laws, and we do not need them now. law on earth that gives a sheriff the right to deport an Some of ~~e~e gag laws introduced seem to make it a American citizen out of a given State because the sheriff felony to cr1t1c1ze the Government or any foreign govern-does not happen to like the thoughts of the visitor. ment; at least it might be so construed, and this would alsC>

Mr. COLLINS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? bring on the gravest of abuses. Mr. MAVERICK. I yield. If a man should come to this country, say from Germany,. Mr. COLLINS. The gentleman is aware that the so-called and complain of the way Hitler had treated him, it would

"abduction" he is speaking about was at the request of this be prison or deportation for him. If some Jew should come Communist. He asked to be escorted out of the State by here and express an opinion against Hitler, he could be put the sheriff. in jail. If a rebel, a priest, a nun, or any political or

Mr. MAVERICK. The gentleman is not talking about religious refugee came from Mexico complaining ·of that Rorty? country, it appears from the reading of the statute, that

Mr. COLLINS. I am talking about Sheriff ware's taking such person could be jailed and fined here for expressing this man down to Yuma. hatred for, and a desire to overthrow, the Mexican Govern-

Mr. MAVERICK. If he was given a request of that kind, ment. he was given an illegal request. No sheriff should pay any Those are the things which appear to be suggested in these attention to an illegal request; and if he is asked to do some- bills. thing that is illegal, he should refuse to do it. If the King of England should come here and advocate a

Mr. COLLINS. This man asked for protection so he monarchy, we would have to put him out, or in jail-or de-might be escorted out of this area. port him. If Darwin were alive, and came here and at-

Mr. MAVERICK. No; I would not say the gentleman is tempted to taik about evolution-he would not have to go tC> not telling the truth, but the facts do not show that. Tennessee, but in New York he could be fixed up right there.

Mr. COLLINS. That is what the sheriff states, at any If Charles Dickens, the great English author, should be alive rate. and visit, and talk as he did on his visit here, it would be

Mr. MAVERICK. That is not what any of the facts show jail or deportation. in the case. This article tells the whole story of this Call- I have got the laws here, but I am not going to read them fornia episode. I have no desire to embarrass any of my for it is too tiresome. I refer to a reading of these laws-­colleagues from California, and I do not think California is we have plenty of laws. the worst State in the Union. I served there during the war. Now, if we have able officers, able generals, able admirals, I think there has been violation of civil liberties in practically who have courage and intelligence enough, they can control every State of the Union, and I am talking more about the the Army of the United States and the NavY of the United psychological attitude than I am about particular facts any- States. It has been done up until this time. They are not how. The facts in the Rorty case, however, are that he was supposed to be a bunch of sissies coming to Congress and illegally and against his will deported out of the State of begging for the enactment of laws to tell them how to run California. I did not understand at first; I thought you the Army or execute its discipline. If they do not trust their. meant someone else asked for Rorty's deportation. Of men, and are afraid of them, it is an indication of lack of course, Rorty did not ask it. ability to command troops.

3042 CONGRESSIONAL RECORI}-HOUSE MARCH~. We have the postal laws making it a felony to send out

information which will lead a person to violate the law and the postmaster can stop almost anything he wants.

If the Army and Navy are worrying about Communist literature being sent through- the mail, they can stop it through the Postmaster General and send people to the penitentiary and fine them a few thousand dollars. Per­sonally, even if it is true that soldiers and sailors are re­ceiving Communist literature, it will have no effect on them. But, in any event, the military and naval forces have every protection on earth, and if we enact more legislation than is necessary and put into effect repressive measures, we pass control of the Government from a civil over to a military authority. This was obnoxious to the minds of om fore-

. fathers and is obnoxious to Americans today. Some of the military bills give all kinds of rights of search and seizure. I think these so-called " rights " are unconstitutional, and it is better not to enact them. If the law goes into effect, in any event, it would put a dangerous power in the hands of the military, which they might use indirectly to persecute whom they pleased among the civilians. According to the war-time interpretation of various military statutes, it was not necessary to show any effect on the persons affected­in this case, soldiers. It was not even necessary to show that a publisher actually sent the so-called "improper mail", and such statements that soldiers were being mis­treated, not fed, nor getting proper medical attention were held to be in violation of the law.

In other words, when we enact laws of this kind it leads to all kinds of excesses and abuses and, inasmuch as we have enough laws now, it is better not to enact any more. We have had the same old treason laws for 150 years, and trea­son is still punishable by death.

All these statutes are written in such a way as to put the person opposing them in an embarrassing position, because the bills are couched in most bizarre language, mentioning assassination and murder, overthrow of government by force, and so on. But excesses will be committed under them. Such laws have been enacted before, the first being the alien and sedition acts, in the early days of our Republic. The excesses were so great they had to be repealed; but there are enough laws on the statute books now to save this country.

Mr. DUNN of Pennsylvania. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. MAVERICK. Yes. Mr. DUNN of Pennsylvania. Is it not a fact that we hear

broadcast over the radio that those who believe in an old­age pension and unemployment insurance, as well a.s those who believe that the Government should purchase the public

is concerned; .but I believe that we should not pa.ss these repressive and gag statutes which, however nicely they are couched in language, prohibit the freedom of speech in general. Likewise, let us remember that this is not a mili­tary nation and that the Army is not supreme; we have given the Army and Navy protection enough and money enough to run their organizations efficiently and let us tell these officers of the Army and Navy to attend to their own business and to go back and maintain discipline. If we pass any statutes at all on that subject, let us pass statutes to protect labor and the people of this country in organizing for their own rights. Let us stop police brutality, deportations, and illegal actions by officers. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Texas has expired.

Mr. :MARTIN of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the time of the gentleman may be extended for 2 minutes.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. MARTIN of Colorado. In order that I may relate a.

brief incident that will be a contribution, I think, to his speech.

Mr. MA VERIGK. I yield to the gentleman. Mr. MARTIN of Colorado. The best thing I ever heard in

my life, and the most helpful thing with relation to com­munism and the freedom of speech, was related to me by a friend in Colorado, who is a very able civil engineer and a very conservative man. He said that at one time when in Seattle he went down to the water front, where there is a section of 2 or 3 blocks-and I have been in that section myself-given up to "soap boxers." While strolling along he stopped in front of one of these men on a box who was tearing down the Government and destroying the Constitu­tion. A big Irish cop was standing by. Of course, if there was a cop standing by, he was an Irishman and he was big. In the excitement of listening to what this fell ow had to say, uninterrupted by the officer, my friend ran up and grabbed the officer by the arm and said, "Officer, are you standing here listening to such disloyal, anarchistic stuff as that?" He said the big cop looked down at him with a forbearing smile, tapped him on the shoulder, and said, "Get a box, me boy, get a box." [Laughter.]

Mr. MAVERICK. My friend the gentleman from Penn .. sylvania [Mr. RrcH] just gave me a clipping to read, and it shows that the gentleman from Pennsylvania and I agree on this subject of the freedom of speech, at least. This is a quotation from Woodrow Wilson which I read:

Woodrow Wilson: "If there is one thing we love more than utilities, are advocating a brand of communism? another in the United states, it is that every man should have the

Mr. MAVERICK. Of course. They are branded as Com- privilege, unmolested and uncriticized, to utter the real convic­munist.s, but when a man is a Communist one day, he may be tions of his mind. I believe that the weakness o! the American

hat character is that there -are no growlers and kickers among us. something different later on. Governments change; t we have forgotten the very principle of our origin if we have for-is what liberty is for. It is not what a man is called. gotten how to object, how to resist, how to agitate, how to pull Patriots are often branded by opprobrious names. down and build up, even to the extent o! revolutionary practices,

Mr. DUNN of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, will the gentle- if it be necessary to readjust matters." man yield? [Applause.]

Mr. MAVERICK. I shall yield only on the subject of the Mr. Speaker, there is little more than can be said on freedom of speech. If it involves freed.om of speech I yield this subject. Although I have not gone into all the statu­to the gentleman. tory details, I have presented the main idea and some of the

In fact, Mr. Speaker, I decline to be interrupted further recent facts concerning the violation of civil liberties. What on the freedom of my time. I am glad for all persons to I desire, I repeat, is to impress upon this House that our have freedom of speech, but not on my time. [Laughter.] duty is to discuss freely and to enact fundamental legisla-

The subject r have talked about today is in my opinion the tion. It is very necessary that we do fundamental things most serious thing that we have before us. How much for the restoration of world ti·ade, for agriculture, for the serious, fundamental legislation have we passed during this rejuvenation of business and, ~ general, puttin~ 11,00~,000 session of Congress? It is easy enough to talk about these men back to work. If we begm to enact hystencal legIBla-24 500 Communists which constitute two in every 10,000 1 tion, hunting "reds'', and talking about war, we give too po°pulation. but what about the 3,000 people out of every much f~e adv~tising. to the "reds ", a~d talk . too much 10,000 that constitute the families of the unemployed, and 3:bout things which might ~ndanger our mternat1.ona~ rela­what about all the various sections of our · J;lOpulation? I t1ons. So let me urge agam that we always mamtam the do not mind differing on how this question is to be handled. freedom _ of speech and press, and the liberty of conscience i do not care what gentlemen on this side-the Democratic- and religion. [Applause.] say; and I do not care what they say on the other-the Mr. Speaker. I desire to offer for printing in the RECORD

Republican---side-insof ar as the subject of freedom of speech a few editorials:

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3043 (From the Washington Post, Monday, Mar. 4, 1935]

COMMUNISM AND JITTERS

From Moscow comes word that the Communist Party is defi­nitely ascending in the United States. In the opinion of the New York correspondent of the ofBcial Soviet newspaper, Pravda, the revolutionary party during the past year has succeeded in making substantial advances into the ranks of American workers, particu­lar gains being noted in Negro neighborhoods. The dispatch fur­ther indicates that the party has taken the leadership along a broad front in a fight for social insurance and that its ideas are now considered sober and its method practical by the broad masses. The popular fear of the "red" has disappeared, the article con­cludes.

Except for the conclusions, ·this round-about news jibes in some measure with the mounting outcry, particularly legislative, heard daily in this country. The correspondent erred, however, in re­porting that the popular fear of the "red" is subsiding. As a matter of fact, the reaction toward communism tends more toward the hysterical.

In these circumstances, it is refreshing to hear the calm words of Representative MAVERICK, of Texas. Speaking in Congres.s the other day, he declared that no extraordinary legislation is re­quired, as certain of his collea.,aues are demanding. The American people have a case of Jitters, he said. pointing out that there are only 24,500 Communists in the country and they are all crackpots.

Specific assertions that Communist influences a.re penetrating the Army and Navy may not be too blandly dismissed, however. Revolt and sedition in defense lines is a serious business under any circumstances. But certainly hysterical legislation would only add to the danger, if any. A little less drill and a little more attention to teaching buck privates citizenship and history might be the best insurance. Failing this, the guardhouse or kitchen police cannot yet be defunct items of military organization.

In the New York Herald Tribune on March 2, 1935, there appears an editorial entitled" Through Red Spectacles." It explains that the Moscow correspondent is given· a report of the advance of communism, especially among the Negroes.

Then the editorial says, "This is very interesting for sev­eral reasons, but it is impossible to find it very disturbing." . In the New Y.:ork Times on the same day it mentions a con­gressional committee discovering propaganda by American Ccmmunists being distributed in tracts in the Army and Navy. The editorial goes on to say the Russians think that the United States is just about to fall before . the " red" revolution.

The editorial comments: This is what comes of overdoing it in the news ·at home and

immensely exaggerating it in foreign reports. To the authorities-­Federal, State, and municipal-familiar with the actual status of the agitation and the numbers engaged in it the p.eril seems almost nonexistent. It is true that a good deal of seditious literature is printed and scattered about where it is thought it will do the most harm. It is also true that some hotheads and scatterbrains are talking glibly, though guardedly, about an impending revolution in this .country. But no outburst that the police alone a.re not able to cope with is in the slightest degr.ee likely to occur anywhere.

It also says: Ih our case also sedition, whether red ·or any other color, should

be punished according to the terms of the law. But it is a thing to go about coolly. We should not give the agitators and incendiaries the satisfaction of knowing that their goings on can even momen­tarily frighten us out of our seven senses.

The following is a portion of a telegraphic article wired the New York Post of Tuesday, March 5, 1935, by James Rorty from San Antonio, Tex., entitled "Imperial Valley Labor Reduced to Peonage; Glassford Declares":

General Glassford went into the Imperial Valley in April 1934 as special conciliator, representing the United States Department of Labor, the United States Department of Agriculture, and the Na­tional Labor Board. At the conclusion of his investigation, in a report signed at Brawley, Calif., 14 miles north of El Centro, on June 13, 1934, he wrote:

"After more than 2 months of observation and investigation in Imperial Valley, it is my conviction that a group . of growers have exploited a Communist hysteria for the advancement of their own interests; that they have welcomed labor agitation, which they could brand as " red ", as a means of sustaining supremacy by mob rule, thereby preserving what is so essential to their profits-cheap labor; that they have succeeded in drawing into their conspiracy certain county officials who have become the principal tools of their machine."

Coming from a former Army ofBcer of high rank and a repre­sentative of the Federal Government, this is strong language. Back of it lies the personal experience of General Glassford and bis secretary, now Mrs. Glassford, during their 2 months' stay in the valley. Their telephone line was tapped.

They had reason to believe that the confidence that is _ suppo.sed to surround telegraphic communications by Western Union and Postal Telegraph was violated. ·

During their brief stay in the valley they lived surrounded by an atmosphere of fear and of espionage. Few persons would talk; those who did insisted that the~ be not quoted. Those who wrote rarely signed their communications. Mrs. Glassford told me that only after they had left the valley did she feel able to draw a free breath-this from the assistant of a special investigator, acting with the full authority of the Federal Government.

[Editorial from the Baltimore Sun, Mar. 4, 1935] A MAVERICK, FO' SHO'I

That an effort is being made to dragoon the Army and Navy into the current "red" hunt is proved by the fact that high ofBcials have urged the House Military Subcommittee to take prompt steps to save American doughboys and gobs from communism. Secretary Swanson declared that "existing law is inadequate to control it."

But evidence that at least one member of the full House Military Committee is not taking orders from the "red" hunt generals is shown by the prompt statement of Representative MAURY MAVERICK, Texas Democrat, who "ridiculed suggestions that corrective legis­lation was neces.sary because, he said, the American people are get­ting jittery over nothing." After listening to "red" scare state- ' ments endorsed by Brig. Gen. Harry E. Knight and others, Repre­sentative MAVERICK remarked that there are only 24,500 Com­munists in the country, and " they are all crackpots ", adding:

"If the colonels and generals had tact, courage, loyalty, and brains enough they would keep the soldiers from disloyalty."

Obviously this Texas MAVERICK'S background is worth looking into. Is he just out of Russia? Is he a cringing pacifist? Well, as it happens, the biographical notes of the latest Congressional Direc­tory reveal that he was born in San Antonio, was educated in Texas ·­and Virginia, served in France as a company commander, Twenty­eighth Infantry, First Regular Division, was badly wounded Octa- · ber 4, 1918, cited for" gallantry in action and extremely meritorious service." Silver Star, Purple Heart,. etc., etc., etc.

One is hardly surprised, then, to discover that he is the grandson of old-Samuel Maverick, Texas patriot, signer of the Texas Declara­tion of Independence, a cattleman whose rambunctious yearlings wore no man's brand, and hence gave rise to the term "maverick" (see any good dictionary), meaning, in latter-day parlance, a "sho' nutt' independent." . -

The SPEAKER. Under a special order the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. DOUGHTON] is recognized for 30 minutes.

Mr. DOUGHTON. Mr. Speaker, I .ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to extend my remarks in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection. · Mr. DOUGHTON. Also, I ask that I be not interrupted

until I have completed my main statement, after which, if I have time, I shall be very glad to yield to any questions.

Several days ago I said I would reply to some of the wild statements that have been made in the last 2 ·or 3 weeks by my colleague and friend, the· gentleman from Massachu­setts [Mr. TREADWAY] regarding the trade agreements of the present administration under the 1934 Tariff Act. The gen­tleman from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] on day before yesterday, I believe, referred to the 1934 Tariff Act, author­i:ting the President of the United States, under certain con­ditions, to negotiate trade agreements with foreign countries as in iniquity. I believe as it appeared in the RECORD it ap­peared as "in equity", but I think the gentleman meant to say and did ~ay "iniquity." I would say in that respect that if the Tariff Act of 1934 is an iniquity, the Smoot-Hawley­Grundy Tariff Act is an abomination that has produced more desolation and more ruination and more economic damnation than any act that has ever been placed on the statute books of the United States.

The penetrating mind and prophetic vision of my good friend as to what may occur in the future is far superior to his memory as to what has occurred in the past under the Smoot-Hawley tariff law.

The gentleman from Ohio [Mr. HARLAN] has, in my esti­mation, ably answered the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] relative to this matter. I have such a strong feeling, however, in relation to the reciprocal tariff measure that I desire to express a few observations on this subject and to further answer the gentleman from Massa­chusetts. Anything I may say in favor of the program, of course, will be in answer to the gentleman from Massachu­setts, because he apparently opposes every phase of this program, even though his own State is in a position to benefit

3044 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 in exports to Cuba, Brazil, and Belgium as a result of the trade agreements with those countries.

I wish to begin my observations upon the tariff-bargaining program by repeating some statements I made nearly a year ago when the bill was before tlie House. The events since the passage of the act convince me that my summary of the program was substantially correct. I wish now to first re­peat those observations with some minor changes.

OBJECTIVES OF THE TARIFF-BARGAINING PROGRAM

First. To round out the recovery program. This act merely gives the President the authority in foreign trade which the Congress had already vested in him in domestic commerce and trade. The recovery program cannot be fully effective without the execution of the authority granted to the President in the Trade Agreements Act.

Second. To reopen the markets of the world to the prod­ucts of American farms and factories, or otherwise face the prospect of adopting as permanent the policy of curtailing acreage and of reducing manufacturing capacity in many of our most efficient industries.

Third. To exchange the surpluses which we have built up for surpluses which other countries have accumulated of commodities which we do not produce in sufficient quantity to keep our industries going. Until channels of trade are developed so that these surpluses can move, normal recovery

-in America cannot take place. Fourth. To plan our commerce and industry so as to di­

rect our labor and resources into the most profitable chan­nels conducive to American standards of living and efficient and effective production. '

Fifth. To provide for the intelligent and enlightened ap­plication of the protective principle whereby the maximum opportunity of employment and production may be assured to our industries, large and small alike, as well as to agri­culture.

Sixth. To provide for mitigation of those irritating re­strictions contained in the Hawley-Smoot-Grundy Tariff Act which have antagonized the rest of the world to our serious injury.

Seventh. To support the President in the only effective method for meeting the current international trade situa­tion. Almost all important commercial powers are fallowing such a program. .

. Almost all of the nations of the earth have granted their executives authority similar to that granted the Executive of the United States.

Only through reciprocity agreements can America par­ticipate in the commercial negotiations for the benefit of American agriculture and industry.

Eighth. To rejuvenate world trade which will increase the purchasing power of foreign countries as well as our own people and thereby provide greater opportunity for the sale of American agricultural and industrial products.

TRADE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Since the gentleman from Massachusetts is an extreme isolationist, I should like to call his attention to the depend­ence of his own State on foreign trade. I hold in my hand a card entitled " Who Says Isolation? ": [From poster by Massachusetts branch Women's International

League for Peace and Freedom} Materials, imported from: Canada, calfskins; Mexico, cochineal;

Central America, cochineal, divi-div1; West Indies, mangrove; Argentina, heavy hides; South America, goat and sheep skins, divi-divi, mangrove; Newfoundland, cod oil; England, Glauber, Epsom salts; Scotland, linen thread; France, horsehide, calfskin; Belgium. fiax; Netherlands, calfskin; Germany, Glauber, Epsom salts; Italy, sumac; Baltic shores, amber; South Africa, wattle bark; West Mediterranean, myrobalans; Africa, sandarak; eastern Europe, valonia; Persia, tragacanth; India., heavy hides; China, heavy hides, albumen; Dutch East Indies, buffalo hides; East Indies, gambler, mangrove; Australia, sheepskins, kangaroo; New Zealand, sheepskins.

Are sold to Canada, Mexico, Panama, Jamaica, Cuba, West Indies, Colombia, United Kingdom, Netherlands, China, Phllip­pines. (National Council for Prevention of Wa.r, 532 seventeenth Street, Washington, D. C.)

This card shows that some 20 or 25 materials which go into Massachusetts shoes come from 25 or 30 foreign coun­tries; it further shows that Massachusetts shoes go. to at least 11 countries throughout the world. Isolation indeed! It is true that a large percentage of the total production of shoes do not go abroad. Under the infamous tariff act sponsored by the gentleman's party and ably, but disas­trously championed by him, that percentage has further dwindled and had it not been for a reversal in spirit toward foreign trade brought about by the Democratic ad.ministra­tion, that trade would have all but vanished by now.

Let us look ~bit more in detail at the importance of ex­port trade to Massachusetts, the State probably more de­pendent than any other in the Union on foreign commerce, both imports and exports.

Before the depression during 1929, the value of exports from Masschusetts was $111,531,000. In 1932 the latest year for which export statistics by States are available, ex­ports decreased to $32,256,000, or a loss of 71 percent . How many jobs would a gain of $75,000,000 or $80,000,000 fur­nish to wage earners in that State? How many workers would this export trade, were it redeemed, take off the streets and off relief rolls? How much liji.ppiness would this trade bring to many families of Massachusetts? Let those from that State now opposed to tariff bargaining and some other administrative measures make those calculations. They are responsible for those conditions to some extent.

In reply to the above questions, it may be suggested that in tariff· bargaining, some industries of Massachusetts would be injured by imports as a result of concessions made to other countries; that has been the argument of the opposi­tion all along the line. If perchance the revenue duty on coal, petroleum, or some other raw materials needed in Massachusetts were reduced for the benefit of enlarging ex­port trade, how, it may be asked, does Massachusetts stand to lose? It would seem that such reductions in duty for which other countries are willing to make concessions would be a great aid to Massachusetts as well as other New Eng­land States. Why does the gentleman from Massachusetts assume that industries of his State are to lose in tariff bar­gaining? Does he admit that the rates are too high?

Let us look at some of the largest items of export trade from Massachusetts. Take leather, a product of the gen­tleman's district. In 1929, some $14,000,000 worth went out from that State. This was reduced to $5,000,000 in 1932. It so happens that leather is one of the items of export which has been increased to Cuba as a result of lower duties made by that country in the reciprocal trade agreement. Exports of machinery, rubber manufactures, safety-razor blades, paper and manufactures, and even lard have been increased since the signing of the Cuban agreement. These are all products exported from Massachusetts.

The gentleman may say there is no surplus of lard produced in Massachusetts; but, anyway, it goes through Massachusetts and is exported from the ports of Massa­chusetts, and thereby gives employment at least to some labor.

Submitted with my remarks is · a table showing the value of the first 15 items of export, in order of importance, from Massachusetts. It will be noted that each of these 15 items amounted to more than a million dollars in 1929; only 5 of them exceeded a million dollars in 1932.

From the table it is seen that the decrease in exports of individual items, from .1929 to 1932, ranged from 57 percent to nearly 90 percent.

The falling off in exports under the Smoot-Hawley tariff law of goods produced by factories in the gentleman's own State amounted to 57 to 97 percent. This to me would cause any man in his position to think seriously of such a policy.

These figures indicate that many producers in Massa­chusetts will gain in a tariff-bargaining program which in­creases export trade.

1

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:..::.HOUSE 3045 Exports from Massachusetts

Classification 1929 1932

Percent of de­crease (or in­crease) 19~2

Total exports_________________________ $111, 531, 000 $32, 256, 000 7L 1

Leather.-----------------------------Machinery ___ -------------------------Safety-razor blades __________________ _ Rubber and manufactures _______________ _ Paper and manufactures ___________________ _ Other machinery, vehicles, and parts ______ _ Cotton cloth, duck, and tire fabric.----------Leather footwear __________________________ _:_ Other electrical machinery and apparatus ___ _ Cotton mill waste._-------------------------Other iron and steel manufactures __________ _ Abrasives _______ ----- ____ -------------------Lard ______ - ------ -- -- -----------------------Optical goods _______________________ _ Books, maps, pictures, etc ___________ _

. Official data.

14.188,000 11, 303,000 5, 978, 000 5, 512, 000 4, 279,000 4, 233, 000 3,606, 000 3,504, 000 3, 334, 000 2, 985, ()()() 2, 787, 000 2, 381, ()()() 1, n2,000 l, 392,000 1,287,000

5,000, 000 3,017, 000

875,000 1,691,000 1, 538, ()()()

781,000 1, 253, 000

360, 000 820, 000 798, 000 665, 000 696,000 573, 000 574, 000 554,000

64. 8 73.3 85.4 69.3 64. l 81.5 65.3 89. 7 75.4 73.3 76.1 70.8 67. 7 58.8 57.0

· A few typical newspaper · excerpts from Massachusetts in­dicate that the people of that enlightened State do not share the opinion of some of its representatives in Congress, par­ticulariy those who continue to oppose the tariff bargaining program, in spite of its favorable reception and admitted benefits to the country. . The Courier Citizen, Lowell, Mass., after reciting the bene­fits that have already resulted from the treaty, says: · The advantage to our export trade is likely to exceed by far any loss that special industries may suffer. Benefits to our shipping are expected to be equally great.

· The Boston Daily Globe, of Boston, Mass., states: Nevertheless, it ts heartening to learn that within the month

elapsed since the new reciprocal treaty between the two countries went into operation its benefits have proved greater than the fondest champions of a new trade relationship expected. The figures tell the story with emphasis.

HOW TARIFF AGREEMENTS ARE MADE

A great deal of misinformation regarding the manner of negotiating the reciprocal tariff agreements is being dis­seminated. Some of it is willfully propagated with ulterior motives, and some of it is disseminated solely because of lack of complete knowledge of the situation. _

There has been a great deal said about tariff agreements being made in star-chamber proceedings and in the dark. I will give you the history of how they are made, in order to correct such erroneous statements.

An example of apparently deliberate misstatement is that these agreements are concocted by the Department of State, in secret, with foreign countries, and then, when completed, perfunctorily shown to the Committee on Foreign Trade Agreements. The gentleman from Massachusetts has re­peated this notion from time to time.

Nothing could be further from the fact. That is a pretty bold statement. In the first place, the Committee on For­eign Trade Agreements is composed of representatives not only of the Department of State but also of the Treasury, Agriculture, and Commerce Departments, the Tariff Com­mission, and of the office of the Special Adviser to the Pres­ident on Foreign Trade. The representatives of a number of these departments or agencies on the committee are not fully in accord with the tariff program of the administration, and thus we can rest assured that all points of view are considered on each and every item involved in a trade agree­ment. What could be faU:er than this?

In this committee, all questions relating to the agreements are fully discussed. When it is learned, through the usual diplomatic -channels, that a foreign country wishes to enter into a reciprocal tariff agreement with the United States, formal notice of intention to negotiate such an agreement is given by the Department of State, to which the world can have access, so that everyone can have knowledge. At the same time, dates are set for the presentation of views by those interested in the commerce between the two countries

to the Committee for Reciprocity Information, which has been set up for that purpose. A final date is set for the filing of briefs and another for a public hearing, which is ilsually a week later than the limit for filing briefs.

Meanwhile, a subcommittee, called a country committee, is formed to make a thorough and expert study of the trade between the United States and the country concerned. On this subcommittee, as on the parent committee, are represen­tatives of the different departments. This committee uses all available material and examines with the utmost care all the briefs and testimony submitted to the Committee for Reciprocity Information. When the study, which requires weeks, ha..s been completed, a report is made to the full com­mittee. In the formulation of this country's case, the De­partment of Commerce suggests what concessions should be asked of the other country, and the Tariff Commission sug­gests what concessions can be made by us without injury to domestic industries. Thus, not only is the fullest opportu­nity given to everyone to be heard, but every aspect of the question is given most careful consideration by every depart­ment of the Government concerned.

While the United States is preparing its case, the other country is doing the same for itself according to its own methods. When both are ready, actual negotiations begin, and through these the final ·agreement is reached.

Nothing could be less captious and summary than the proc­ess of making these agreements. Notice this-instead of be­ing framed hastily in the dark, they are the result of pains­taking labors by experts with open minds who represent all parts of the Government. ·

In his discussion of the Cuban agreement. (RECORD, p. 592, Jan. 17), the gentleman from Massachusetts spoke of pota­toes as being on the losing end of the Cuban agreement. The gentleman from Maine [Mr. BREWSTER] whose State ex­ported the greatest quantity of potatoes in recent history as a result of the CUban agreement, also has waxed warmly and wrathfully against trade agreements, seemingly against in­creasing exports of potatoes from his own State.

The following excerpt from the Habana Post (Wednesday, Oct. 17, 1934) indicates how at least some Maine farmers felt about the agreement with Cuba: MAINE FARMERS GET CUBAN TRADE-ISLAND BUYING MORE POTATOES

FROM UNITED STATES, LESS FROM CANADA

HOULTON, MAINE, October 16.-An unprecedented demand from Cuba for Maine potatoes brought encouragement today to the distressed planters in Aroostook County, Maine's vast potato empire.

With their product bringing only 50 cents a barrel, less than the cost of raising, and 15 percent of the crop snowed under by last Friday's storm, the outlook heretofore this season has been gloomy indeed.

But the central potato inspection office announced today that a Cuban tariff on Canadian potatoes and a prospective duty on American exports to become effective November 1 has resulted in a sudden demand for 80,000 sacks of Maine "spuds."

Sixty-two carloads are now being loaded on board a vessel at Searsport, and buyers now in the county have orders for 100 car­loads more.

The rush of export business prompted Commissioner of Agri­culture Frank P. Washburn to increase the size of the inspection staff here. Washburn said the demand was the outstanding ex­port business for Aroostook County in the past few years, and ex­pressed the hope that it might be retained under the new tariff arrangements.

Last year Cuba bought most of its potatoes in Canada. While the temporary advantage which American producers now enjoy as a result of the tarHI on Canadian exports will be reduced after November 1, the duty on shipments from the United States is ex­pected to be less than that on exports from the Dominion.

The gentleman from Maine will probably say that the reduced seasonal rates of duty on Cuban potatoes more than offEet any pene:fit to be derived from Cuba's reductions. Tariff hogs, of course, are never satisfied.

Recent official dispatches state that there is little possi­bility of potatoes being exported from Cuba in any substan­tial quantities during 1935. The imports from Cuba in 1934 were not enough to supply the city of Washington with po­tatoes for one day-a mere pittance of 157,400 pounds. Those opposed to any liberality in trade are forever filling the roads full of ghosts which in reality are not seen.

3046 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 HEARINGS ON TARIFF MAKING

The gentleman from Massachusetts states that interested parties appearing before the Committee for Reciprocity Information are havmg to " shoot in the dark " in present­ing their views. They do not have to "shoot in the dark" any more than they do when they appear before the Ways and Means Committee before a tariff bill is introduced in the House.

I respectfully submit that everyone appearing before the Ways and Means Committee in 1928-29, before the Hawl~y­Smoot bill had been introduced into the House, had to "shoot in the dark", just as they do before the Committee for Reciprocity Information. In the hearings in 1928-29 they were preparing for Mr. Hoover's limited tariff revision. Limited to what, I ask the gentleman from Massachusetts? Limited to "everybody's feet in the trough!" That is the method the Republican Party applies in its frequent revision of tariffs, the grand old logrolling scheme where the largest contributors to the party campaign fund collect tariff graft in proportion, as was expressed by Mr. Grundy. This method is. not now evident in making reciprocal tariff agree­ments. The opposition is bewailing the fact that such methods of tariff making are past, and we hope past for­ever, from the American legislative scene.

When questioned by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. CocHRANl on February 5 on the floor of the House, the gen­tleman from Massachusetts evaded the issue as to recent methods of fixing tariffs by legislation. He knows full well that the committee works behind closed doors after the hearings until the bill ' reaches the floor. That does not pre­vent interested. lobbyists from getting the ear of certain people. Their tactics are not working at present.

If some of the special interests have not received what they asked for or have been promised. the Halls of Congress swarm with lobbyists. They set about to see that they ob­tain tariff grafts in proportion to their campaign funds or ability to manufacture propaganda. This is really the mat­ter that is hurting the gentleman from Massachusetts and those schooled in his tariff philosophy. They do not like to see the old tariff graft system pass away. It was too rich in political favoritism. ·The G. 0. P. can no longer project itself into power through tariff lobbying under the present scheme. Thus we may expect to hear the continued lamen­tations and swan song of the gentleman from Massachusetts. He cannot become adjusted to the new order, and therefore spreads his discontent. He continues his campaign of fear from week to week. He d-0es not seem to be interested in letting business settle down; he does not want business con­fidence as long as his party is not in power.

[Here the gavel fell.J Mr. OLIVER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that

the time of the gentleman from North Carolina be ex­tended 15 minutes.

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

There was no objection. Mr. DOUGHTON. The gentleman from Massachusetts

[Mr. TREADWAY], who now seems so concerned about the rights of the representatives of the people to enact tariff levies, utterly disregarded the rights of the Members of the House during the consideration of the Hawley-Smoot­Grundy bill. Let us review the record in this respect and see what opportunity was afforded the representatives of the people to have a voice in the enactment of that bill. In all l9 hours and 6 minutes were given for the consideration of this bill, which contained 434 pages. The fact of record is that only 82 lines out of 10,681 contained in the bill were read under the 5-minute rule; of the 183 sections contained in the bill only a fraction of one of them was read and considered.

The tactics employed by the gentleman from Massachu­setts [Mr. TREADWAY] and his Republican colleagues on the Ways and Means Committee absolutely denied representa­tion to the other Members of the House in the framing of the Hawley-Smoot-Grundy bill. In this conn-ection let me quote what a distinguished ex-Member of the House from

Maine, Mr. Beedy, a member of the gentleman's party, had to say during the consideration of this bill. Mr. Beedy stated:

The relation between the Ways and Means Committee and the Members of the House which exists now is something akin to that of the king and his subjects.

Of course, he had reference only to the Republican me~ bers of that committee. Just before he made this statement the same gentleman, who frequently manifested the spilit of a free man, said:

I want to suggest there are a good many farmers tn New England who are apparently forgotten by the Ways and Means Committee.

The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] speaks of our allowing foreigners to dictate what rates of duty we shall levy on imports into this country, and speaks of the star-chamber methods of tariff making now -being practiced, as he alleges, in the making of trade agreements. The gentleman from Massachusetts would have us return to the old logrolling method of enacting taliff s and to the star-chamber methods he and his party have employed in taliff legislation. Would the gentleman have us return to the practice of having the secretary of the Connecticut Manufacturers Association in attendance at the executive sessions of the committee, dictating the rates that should be levied? Does the gentleman want us to return to the method of tariff making whereby those seeking special privi .. lege wrote in their own rates, with no regard whatever to what effect it would have on the consuming public?

Speaking of star-chamber methods, let us review the star .. chamber methods employed by the gentleman from Massa .. chusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] and his colleagues on the Ways and Means Committee at the time the nefari-0us Hawley .. Smoot-Grundy Act was being written. Under the steam .. roller tactics resorted to by the gentleman from Massachu .. setts and the other Republican members of the Ways and Means Committee, the minority members were driven from the committee room while the bill was being framed, and then by a gag-rule process were not permitted even to offer an amendment during the consideration of the bill in the House. ·

Under the rule adopted, and under which the House con .. sidered the Hawley-Smoot-Grundy tariff bill framed in star­chamber sessions above ref erred to, it was provided-

That the bill shall be considered for amendment under the 5-minute rule, but committee amendments to any part of the bill shall be in order at any time; that consideration of the bill for amendment shall continue until Tuesday, May 28. 1929, at a o'clock p. m., at which time the bill, with all amendments that shall have been adopted by the Committee of the Whole, shall be reported to the House, whereupon the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and all amendments to final pas­sage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit.

FALLACY OF SELF-CONTAINMENT

There has been so much said recently as to the importance of the home market and how we are independent of foreign countries, ·I wish to go into the fallacy of self-containment in some detail.

The gentleman from Massachusetts keeps harping on the home market as taking 90 percent of the production. A school child in the South realizes the fallacy of such a state­ment when applied to cotton. This is the doctl'ine of the self-contained school. ·

It is a common impression that the United States produces nearly everything that it requires and is thus very largely self-sufficient. Those opposed to the reciprocal tariff act are making much of this point. They are going to con­siderable pains to stress the self-containment doctrine-a defensive alibi for legislation the Republicans sponsored which has almost destroyed American foreign trade. They take the position that we have largely lost our export trade and that it was never important-not worth the attempt to regain through any method of tariff bargaining.

Furthermore, it has been suggested that we need to im­port few products; that we are so self-contained and that about the only product we really need to import during peace times is rubber. We are told that synthetic rubber is being made, of course, at a much higher price than the natural

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3047 imported product, but that we shall soon be self-sufficient in this.

The fallacy of this doctrine is obvious to anyone who is capable of analyzing it. Those who take this position of self-sufficiency do not understand the fundamentals of trade between different regions, areas, sections, States, or nations. These bases of trade are the factors underlying the law of comparative costs-an economic law which the reciprocal tariff act takes into consideration, a law which the Republicans either cannot or will not understand.

It may be well to once more briefly review these funda­mental bases of trade, in the hope that our friends on the other side may have a better und,erstanding as to what we are attempting to do in carrying out this important measure. These elemental reasons for trade may be roughly divided into three categories.

1. DIFFERENCES IN RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS

E'very race of people produces articles of its particular civilization. Massachusetts produces a number of excellent products desired by other countries; for example, boots and shoes, machinery, and electrical apparatus, and trade is thereby originated. Certain artistic goods of Italy, the brass articles of Chinese handicraft, and the carvings from India .illustrate this point. The American Indians were producing articles characteristic of their civilization when they were discovered in the new world. Im.mediately, these articles served as a basis cf trade between the white man and the redskin. It is not necessary to further stress this point. Examples will occur to anyone-even to Republicans-who reflect upon this basis of trade. The administration's tariff program aims to make such trade possible. It is foolish for the opposition to whine that trade of this nature will unbal­ance any domestic industry.

2. DIFFE.."tENCES IN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT

Since the first half of the nineteenth century, the differ­ences in industrial development have been important factors in the development of foreign trade between nations, or be­tween different sections of the same country. This basµ of trade may be illustrated in the difference in the occupa­tions of, say, a New England mechanic and a western herds­man. This difference is largely a matter of the density pf population or difference in industrial development. The sparsely populated area calls upon nature or the extractive industries for a living, while the densely populated country must depend on the skill of its workers to add value to raw materials. The difference in industrial development is not always as clearly distinguished as between the New England worker and western rancher, or between the agricultural and the industrialized sections of a country.

Even between highly developed industrial countries there is a sort of international division of labor. For example, the United States imports considerable quantities of cotton cloth and also exports substantial amounts. These cotton cloths are largely of a di.ff erent class or grade, the imparts being of the finest countable cloths, the exports of the coarser grades. The United States also exports certain chemicals to Germany in spite of the fact that that country has a reputation of being one of the world's most efficient chemical producers. Many other examples of a similar na­ture could be cited. Much profitable trade has its origin in the differences and unequal industrial development of various countries. Those opposed to the present tariff program would further wreck this fast-vanishing trade.

3, DIFFERENCES IN NATURAL RESOURCES

The differences in natural resources are the most funda­mental basis of trade. It is true that the other two bases, just mentioned, tend to equalize or even up over a period of time. Those who maintain that the United States is and should be self-contained must hold that this equalizing process has already taken place. They go further and claim that the differences in na.tural resources are not impartant. They would even rob us of our morning cup of coffee, ot at least make us drink it without sugar, two important products whose trade originates from differences in natural resources.

It is probably true that the trade of the world, owing to certain equalizing tendencies, must more and more depend

upon these differences in natural resources. Within our own country we know that cotton will not grow in the Spring Wheat Belt, semitropical fruit will not thrive in New Eng­land, nor will the fine fur-bearing animals of Alaska flourish in the Southern States. This basis of commerce is fre­quently referred to as North-South trade. The difference in temperature, however, is only one phase of the differences in natural resources. Differences in rainfall, in the topog­raphy, fertility of the soil, nearness to bodies of water, and so on, play an important part in bringing about trade be­tween areas, regions, sections, States, or nations.

Former President Hoover apparently had this kind of trade in mind when he said in his Boston speech of October 15, 1928-and I hope those on the other side of the House. who still see some hope in Mr. Hoover, may note well these words:

Without continued interchange of tropical products with those o! the Temperate Zone, whole sections of the world, including our own country, must stagnate and degenerate in civllization. We could not run an automobile, we could not operate a dynamo, or usa a telephone were we without imported raw materials from the Tropics. In fact, the whole structure of our advancing civilization would crumble and the great mass of mankind would travel back­ward if the foreign trade of the world were to cease.

Under our present depressed conditions, with the falling oft' of foreign trade, we admit that Mr. Hoover was somewhat of a prophet. We have been traveling backward. He ap­parently forgot .his own prophecy, however, when later as President he signed the infamous Hawley-Smoot tariff bill, which we are attempting to correct in a perf~ctly logical and reasonable manner.

Let us once more examine some of the more necessary articles of import trade of the United States. During the World War the War Department found that it was necessary to import 30 commodities in substantial quantities in order to carry on war. That Departqient classified them as strategic products. Some were not produced in the United States at all; others were not produced in sufficient quantities even for peace-time purposes.

Some may ask why, if the Smoot-Hawley-Grundy Tariff Act is so nefarious and has produced such adverse effects, it is not repealed. Of course, everyone knows that foreign countries, copying our example, are beating us at our own game, and have erected trade barriers, embargo restrictions, and countervailing duties until now their rates in many in­stances are even higher than ours; and unless we can get them reduced by international agreements, we cannot lower our own exorbitant high tariff rates.

The :ro commodities classified by the War Department were antimony, camphor, chromium, coffee, cork, flaxseed, graph­ite, hemp, hides, iodide, jute, manganese, manila fiber, mica, nickel, nux vomica, opium, platinum, potassium salts, quick­silver, quinine, rubber, shellac, silk, sodium nitrate, migar, tin, tungsten, vanadium, and wool.

All of these articles are necessary. They are articles or impart, without which we could not possibly have carried on our part in the great World War.

Some of these articles are now produced in the United States in larger quantities than during the war, substitutes are manufactured for some of them, but substantial quanti­ties of imports of most of these are still needed in our indus­trial and commercial life. Chromium, for example, is indis­pensable to the steel industry and to industries making fire­arms, airplanes, motor cars, cutlery, and others. Manganese is absolutely essential for the production of open-hearth steel. Nickel has many uses, hundreds of alloys being made from it. Tungsten is also required for steel, particularly tool steel. The steel industry, it has frequently been pointed out, imports in varying quantities no less than 40 commodi­ties from some 57 different countries.

Raymond B. Fosdick, a well-known statesman, summed up the fallacy of the self-containment doctrine in the following succinct manner:

A country that could not make a locomotive, an automobile, or an airplane without material from abroad can scarcely be called self-contained. A country that could not even carry on war with­out the aid of 30 essential commodities from other countries can­not boast of its national independence. By the sa.m.e token, "

3048 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH Q country .whose exc~ wheat and cotton are rotting in fields and storehouses because its foreign market has gone to pieces is not in position to talk in terms of Washington's FareweII Address.

What would have become of the South if our exports of cotton and tobacco were cut off? What would have become of the industries of New England and the industries of other sections of the country if the ptirchasing power of the South, made possible by the production and sale of cotton, had been cut off-as would be the case if we followed the nationalistic system and concluded we were self-contained­and our foreign markets forever lost? It is not only the life­blood of the South but essential to New England industries and to the industries in every section of this great country.

Mr.- TREADWAY. Will the gentleman yield for a ques­tion?

Mr. DOUGHTON. I yield to the gentleman from Massa­chusetts.

Mr. TREADWAY. The gentleman has asked me several questions in the -eourse of his address, which I greatly enjoy listening to.

Mr. DOUGHTON. I am glad of that. Mr. TREADWAY. I would ask the gentleman when it is

agreeable to him to have me reply to the numerous questions whieh he has asked me. I shall be glad to take those ques­tions up at his convenience at a later date.

Mr. DOUGHTON. May I say in reply the gentleman did not consult me as to my convienience when he made his five or six speeches· on the floor of the House. He knows that the courtesy of the Members of the House will grant him permission at any time to answer the speech made by myself or anyone else. ·

[Here the gavel fell.] . Mr. TREADWAY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent

that the time of the gentleman be continued until he com­pletes his speech.

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

There was no objection. Mr. DOUGHTON. I thank i:µy friend for his courtesy.

NECESSITY FOR FOJl.EIGN MARKETS

Those advocating a self-contained United States argue that not more than 10 percent of our production is shipped abroad and that, therefore, we are 90 percent self-contained. implying. that it will be only a matter of time until we shall be 100 percent. The gentleman from Massachusetts keeps reverting to this statement.

The use of this 10-percent general average for this pur­pose is fallacious. The vital organs of the body weigh less than 10 percent of the whole; could we gradually remove the heart, lungs, and so forth, and go on functioning as if noth­ing had happened? Ali a matter of fact, foreign markets .are of vital importance to many basic American industries. A much greater percentage of the production is shipped abroad in many instances.

Cut .off all our foreign trade and take that business from the manufacturers and producers in the United States, and you will find those people out of employment and they will be placed on the relief rolls. This would result if we lost our foreign markets. Imagine the misery, sorrow, and the destitution which would follow.

In 1929, for example, nearly 55 percent of our cotton, more than 40 percent of our tobacco, 33 percent of our lard, and about 18 percent of our wheat were exported. These rela­tively large percentages are not limited to agricultural prod­'llcts. More than 40 percent of the typewriters, 29 percent oi the printing machinery, 28 percent of the sewing ma­chines, 23 percent of the agricultural machinery, 21 percent of the locomotives, and 14 percent of the passenger automo­biles were sent abroad .in the sa:rp.e year.

In such lines of production as those noted above, and others, the loss of export trade is a matter of great concern. The administration has set about to correct this situation. The decline in the foreign demand for cotton, it has been reliably estimated, might readily make the difference between 16- and 6-cent cotton.

In other words, were we to lose our export trade in cotton, I doubt if it would sell for 6 cents a pound, and 6-cent cot­ton means devastation and ruination of the South, which would in turn be reflected in every part of the American Union.

It is a fundamental principle that the price of export surplus in some of the above lines may determine the price of the entire home product. Whether it is 10 percent or 50 percent of the production, the existence of the outlet may be the balance wheel or " margin of safety " for a nation's industries.

Those who point to our much-vaunted self-sufficiency base their ideas upon a fundamental misconception of the work­ings of industry. The large and thriving domestic markets generally depend upon foreign markets for a measure of their prosperity. To repeat, it is misleading to argue that since our export trade as a whole constitutes only 10 per­cent of the total trade, it is relatively unimportant. The effect of the change upon the fundamental conditions in each industry is the important point. A 10-percent loss of business does not indicate that the remaining 90 percent of the total trade is left in first-class condition; it usually means the opposite. The last 10 percent of production, in many lines, means the difference between a profit and a loss in the whole business.

The conclusion that the export trade of the United States, because it is no more than 10 percent of the total, is not justifiable. The Honorable Cordell Hull, while he was in the Senate, had the following to say regarding this fallacious notion.

Whether or not you agree with Cordell Hull, Secretary of State, a former Member of this body and of the United States Senate, you all recognize his outstanding ability and his high and patriotic determination to better our present economic conditions.

No economic falsehOOd ever deceived as many credulous people as the stock phrase that America only exports about 10 percent of her production and that home consumption of the 90 percent completely controls our economic situation. In the first place, instead of all American industries exporting 10 percent each ot their production, a few dozen of our greatest industries, on the prosperity of which the prosperity of the entire Nation absolutely depends, are obliged to export not 10 percent but a large propor­tion of their production.

If this fallacy of self-sufiiciency had not received such wide-spread attention, sometimes falsely disseminated by propagandists, it would not be necessary to further labor the point, to show how essential it is for opening markets for our commodities produced in abundance; to make arrangements for receiving those products essential to our domestic econ­omy-numerous products which would have little effect in unbalancing any domestic industry, a number used in the industries of Massachusetts .

The export figures do not tell the whole story about the interrelation of industries. For example, the conditions of the automobile industry are reflected in a number of other industries whose materials it purchases in large quan­tities. This industry consumes in its production, to men­tion only a few, 19 percent of the steel of the United States. and has largely accounted for the recent activity of that industry. The automobile industry uses about 68 percent of the alloy steel and varying percentages of other steel products, . 55 percent of the malleable iron, 23.5 percent of the aluminum, 15 percent of the copper, 33 percent of the lead, 7 percent of the zinc, 11 percent of the tin, 24 percent of the nickel, about 7 percent of the cotton, 54 percent of the upholstery leather, 14 percent of the hardwood lumber, 40 percent of the plate glass, 73 percent of the rubber, and 85 percent of the gasoline produced in the United States. If the conditions of the automobile industry, which fur­

nishes employment directly or indil·ectly for some 4,000,000 people, could regain a substantial portion of the foreign market which took more than $500,000,000 worth in 1929, the effect on American industry in general is self-evident. In all the above industries, as well as in others, additional employment would result. It may be added that the auto-

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE . 3049

mobile indust-ry utilizes products from every State in the of control of these carping critics who are doing everything Union. Whatever retards this important industry affects possible to defeat"the new-deal policies of the present admin­numerous other industries. By the same logic any improve- istration. ment in the conditions of such an industry has far-reaching They will not lose sight of the distress, sufiering, and effects in the industries noted above. Thus the fallacious misery caused by the Smoot-Hawley-Grundy tarifI law, notion that 10 percent of such an industry may be lopped and other policies adopted during the reign of special privi-off without evil effects becomes obvious. leges.

We on this side of the House are just as anxious for our In retrospect, let us visualize, lest we forget, the situation country to be self-sufficient as those on the other side if it that existed in America on March 4, 1933, the day that Pres­can be done at a reasonable cost. During the past 10 or 12 ident Roosevelt assumed the duties of the Presidency. At years we have had to realize that our economy is inex- that time the economic barometer of the country registered tricably interwoven with that of other countries. As has the lowest mark in all our history. It was the zero hour in been said on other occasions, we are faced with a reality and the life of the Nation. The financial system had collapsed, not a theory, a reality which the Republicans have ignored credit had been destroyed, industry had become paralyzed, during the past 10 or 12 years. agriculture had reached the brink of bankruptcy, and the

There is one other point brought up by the gentleman farmers were in the depths of despair and were being forced from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] on the floor on Feb- to dispose of the fruits of their toil at ruinous prices. Mil­ruary 20 which I desire to comment upon. The gentleman lions of farmers had lost their homes, through no fault of belabors himself to show that there is no relation.ship be- their own, as a result of tax sales and mortgage foreclosures. tween branch factories going abroad and the last Repub- Fifteen million working people were out of employment and lican tariff. He has very obligingly placed in the RECORD unable to procure support for themselves and their depend­(p. 234) of that date the number 9f branch factories mov- ents, making an army of around 45,000,000 needy and sufier­ing into Canada for many years past. Of course, he could ing people, with all the evils attending such conditions. Ac­not see any connection between the fact that, in 1928, only tual starvation stared many in the face and terror had seized 14 branch plants went into Canada and the greatly in- the public mind. creased number which have been going into Canada since Conditions were so serious that many of the States had al­that time. For example, in 1929, 38 American branch plants ready closed all State banks by official mandate and those located in Canada. It will be recalled that by the middle that were not closed, had lost, or were rapidly losing, the of 1929 the nature and extent of the tariff increases in the confidence of the public. Old financial institutions that had Hawley-Smoot Act were fairly well determined. Canada and weathered all previous storms were headed for ruin at ave­other countries promised retaliation if the act should be locity that bewildered the mind and staggered the imagina­passed in its 1929 form. This threat of retaliation drove tion. All lines of business were at the lowest ebb in the his­American plants across the border. The number of plants tory of the Republic. The old order had failed utterly. The going into Canada since 1929 has been more than twice as attempt to restore prosperity by dumping millions of dollars great as before the Tariff Act of 1930 was being considered into failing banks, in which people had no confidence, de'." and went into effect. funct corporations, and big business generally had completely

Of course, no one will expect the gentleman from Mas.5a- failed. chusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] to· draw such a conclusion. Every- The last 2 years of the Hoover administration will go one else who has given any serious study to the problem down in history as the darkest and most devastating period realizes that a continued high-tarifI system for the world, of American life. with the self-sufficiency doctrine, will drive American indus- It appears to me that those who were responsible, or who tries abroad. The gentleman's party must assume consider- were in control, when these perilous times were brought upon able responsibility in the world nationalistic drive. Instead the country could well afford to refrain from EO much criti­of producing at home, using materials and employing domes- cism, at least until the policies being tried, or that will be tic labor in the vicinity in which the plants are located, and ( tried, to restore or rescue the country from the awful plight exporting surpluses, large and ably financed United States in which they left it, can be tried out. industries will start a branch plant in other countries behind Former President Hoover has more adequately defined the tarifI walls. I do not here maintain that the tarifI is the only conditions which the present administration inherited from reason that these industries have located in foreign coun- its predecessor than any other person. In his Cleveland, tries. There are various other reasons, but the intense na- Ohio, speech in 1930, he referred to these conditions as an tionalism advocated by the gentleman from Massachusetts "economic pestilence", and in his speech of acceptance in and his colleagues has been an important factor· 1932, as an " unparalleled calamity in the history of our

THE BELGIAN AGREEMENT Nation." On March 4 the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] stated

TREADWAY] dwelt in some detail on one side of the Belgian in his speech this week, referring to the debate he had with trade agreement. That is to be expected, since Republicans the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. HARLAN] that he would en­can only see one side of foreign trade. The value of the deavor to have the last word on the subject. I do not blame experts on which we obtained concessions from Belgium the gentleman from Massachusetts for this, as his Epeeches amounted to more than $16,000,000 in 1933, or about one- are so barren of facts and so pregnant with errors and mis­third of our exports to that country. We granted them con- statements that he must continue to explain and defend the cessions on imparts amounting to less than $6,000,000, or best he can in support of a weak case. one-fourth of the imports from that source for the same year. Truth once stated, stands of its own strength, but decep-Of course, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. TREAD- tion and error must continuously be buttressed. WAY] can see no good in any trade agreement whatever, even I shall not leave the work of my committee and my other if the United States gains two or three times as much as the important duties to take the time of the House every 2 or 3 other country involved. days, or each week, in defense of the reciprocal tariff act of

The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] went 1934, or the policies of the present administration. However, into a rage about the comparatively small reduction made in I felt that inasmuch as I introduced this bill in the House the duty on cement. The reduction in the Belgian agreement I should give some attention to the attacks made upon it. was from 6 to 4.5 cents per 100 pounds. Even in time of free As to what may be the effect of the 1934 act is a matter trade in cement-that is, before the Tariff Act of 1930, im- of opinion and guesswork, but the disastrous results follow­ports were insignificant. Imports of cement do not ordi- ing the 1930 Smoot-Hawley-Grundy Tariff Act is a matter narily go beyond trucking distance from the port of impor- of knowledge that will not fade out of the minds of the tation under any conditions. American people for many generations.

The people of this country will long remember the pre- In spite of the almost daily outpourings of the gentleman dicament in which they found themselves after 12 years from Massachusetts [Mr. TREADWAY] and other vocal oppo-

3050 ~ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 sition, the administration has taken a step forward in carry­ing out the basic objectives of a new foreign trade policy, as expressed in the Reciprocal Tariff Act.

I desire to end my remarks by quoting part of the message of the President in submitting the tariff legislation to the Congress. He sai~ in part:

You and I know that the world does not stand still; that trade movements and relations once interrupted can, with the utmost difilculty, be restored; that even in tranquil and prosperous times there is a constant shifting of trade channels. • • •

If the American Government is not in a position to ma.ke fair otrers for fair opportunities, its trade will be superseded. If it is not in a. position at a. given moment rapidly to alter the terms on which it is willing to deal with other countries, it cannot ade­quately protect its trade against discriminations and against bargains injurious to its interest. Furthermore a promise to which prompt effect cannot be given is not an inducement which can pass current at par in commercial negotiations. • • •

The exercise of the authority which I propose must be caretully weighed in the light of the latest information so as to give assur­ance that no sound and important American interest wm be injuriously disturbed. The adjustment of our foreign trade rela­tions must rest on the premise of undertaking to benefit and not to injure such interests. In a. time of difficulty and unemployment such as th.is, the highest consideration of the position of the dltrer­ent branches of American production is required. • • •

[Applause.]

PERMISSION TO ADDRESS THE HOUSE

Mr. KNUTSON. Mr~ Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that on Monday next~ following the reading of the Journal and the disposition of business on the Speaker's table, I may be permitted to address the House for 30 minutes.

Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, Monday is going to be a busy day, I imagine. What does the gentleman want to talk about?

Mr. KNLJTSON. I wish to speak on the state of the Union.

Mr. CULLEN. That is a broad subject. Mr. KNUTSON. Well, this is a broad country. Mr. CULLEN. If it is on the tariff, I have no objection. Mr. KNUTSON. It will be on the tariff. Mr. CULLEN. I have no objection. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the

gentleman from Minnesota? There was no objection.

THE IRVING SCRAM PLAN FOR REEMPLOYMENT

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the RECORD and to include therein a short statement of a constituent of mine on a proposed plan of recovery. It just consists of a half page.

Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, of course, I am one of those who do not believe in clogging up the RECORD with a lot of immaterial stuff :which does not give information to the Members of the House. If this has reference to a speech which the gentleman himself made, I have no objection.

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

There was no objection. Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, under the leave to extend my

remarks in the RECORD, I include the following short state­ment of a constituent of mine on a proposed plan of recovery:

The problem of putting America back to work nears a solution with the adoption of the following plan submitted herewith.

As there are approximately 5,000,000 men out of work at the present time who are solely dependent upon relief, I propose:

1. That every person receiving money through relief be classi­fied according to profession, trade, or vocation.

2. That these unemployed perso:r;is be placed for 6 months (or a longer period, if necessary) at a job to which they are fitted; their salary to be determined by the N. &. A. wage existing in each respective territory and paid by the Government.

a. Only N. R. A. approved concerns are to receive extra help. b. Regular employees must not be discharged unless a tangible

, reason exists. . 3. That the present relief commission be placed in charge of

ct\asstfying, and placing the unemployed in N. R. A. approved shops, bu...~ess houses, etc.

Let\µs take a spec11lc case of both a manufacturing concern and a buslUess house:

1. A man is placed in my s"!ioe store. I do not need him to wait on trade, consequently, I keep him busy by dusting boxes, clean­ing up, and doing odd jobs.

Now, the existing condition that has come about putting every­one back to work ha.s increased my business. At the end of 6 months, the Government, according to this plan, ceases paying this man. But, my business, having increased necessitates keeping this man to wait on trade. He is already an experienced shoe salesman from past employment. There is no alternative; I put this man to work.

2. Now let us take the case of a manufacturer: In each locality each manufacturer will receive an allotted number of men ac­cording to the unemployment condition of the locality and deter<' mined by the commission set aside to classify those on relief.

It being absolute folly for a manufacturer to create an over­supply, he puts h1s Government-paid men to work doing the numerous odd jobs that can. be done in any plant.

With the elapse of a. short period of time an increased de­mand is created for his products, due to an inevitable increase in business conditions. With a flood of orders for his com­modities, he uses his Government-paid men for the increased production that has been brought about by a marked gain in the business trend.

At the end of the allotted period the manufacturer will have a regular place on the pay roll for every man placed in his em­ploy by the Government.

With the adoption of this plan every newspaper and periodical in the United States would be eager to carry the screaming headlines: America Goes Back to Work.

Mr. GREEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 1 minute.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I hope the gentle­man from Florida will not insist upan his request. This is Calendar Wednesday, and we hope to get on call, and we have now taken up 2 hoW's.

Mr. GREEN. I shall be pleased to ask for the 1 minute later on.

Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object. the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee is anxious to get the floor with some bills, and I think probably it would be well to allow the bills to come up as soon as possible.

Mr. GREEN. I shall withdraw the request and submit it later.

Mr. HOOK. :M:r. Speaker, I· ask unanimous consent to address the House for 15 minutes following the remarks of the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. FORD l this afternc'On.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. The gentleman means after the Committee on the Judiciary is through?

Mr. HOOK. Yes. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I have no concern about that. Mr. McREYNOLDS. Mr. Speaker, I shall have to object.

There are other committees on call. The SPEAKER. Objection is heard. Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask for the regular order. The SPEAKER. The regular order is recognition of the

Commissioner from the Philippines [Mr. DELGADO] to ad­dress the House for 15 minutes.

Mr. DELGADO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay a well­deserved tribute to a typical American, a man who, in the comparatively short space of 40 years, has risen from a cabin to the Governor General's palace in Manila, and to testify to his contribution to the greatest task, the grandest task that a great and mighty Nation has ever undertaken for the benefit of a young and small but hopeful country. ·

I have no set speech prepared, although I have jotted down a few notes, because I should like to let the sentiments of my heart flow freely this afternoon. Therefore, I plead for your indulgence if there should be lack of coherence or lack of elegance in my expressions.

1il. Speaker, I know I would not be representing the true feelings of the 14,000,000 souls whom I have the honor to represent here, were I not to preface my first effort in this, the greatest of all popular assemblies in the world, with a reiteration of the loyalty and gratefulness of the Filipino people to America and to you, gentlemen. [Applause.]

I can say with absolute certainty that this loyalty and devotion is inspired neither by fear nor by mercenary mo .. tives, but by that lofty feeling-one of God's greatest gifts to the human heart-the purest sense of gratitude for favors past and present. [Applause.]

Also, I Wish to be permitted to digress for a few moments from my subject and indulge in some personal reminiscences

1935 _CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3051 so that I may the better illustrate why I feel that my first words now should be devoted to what .America has done for the Philippines and for me.

Mr. Speaker, it has been my 'privilege to be one of the first 100 students sent by the Philippine government to the United States, in 1903, upon the initiative of that illustrious American, Gov. William Howard Taft. I have gone through some of the finest schools. and colleges here. I have worked as a common laborer in one of your tin-can factories, and I have sold scopes and pictures out in northern Ohio and southern Michigan, in that iich farming country, and I have a living witness in this very Congress of some of my activities of that time. I refer to the distinguished gentle­man from Ohio [Mr. KNIFFIN], who still remembers how I worked on his kindly grandfather in the summer of 1907, to persuade him to buy a scope and a few pictures from me, so that I might further pursue my studies in this country. I am not ashamed of these humble incidents of my student days in this country; on the contrary, I am proud to say that the greatest of all lessons I have learned here from a stay of over 5 years as a student, was the experience I gained as a common laborer in a tin-can factory and as a peddler of scopes and stereopticon views. They are among the most cherished memories I have held down to this day.

So I feel that I have come to learn your likes and dislikes, have acquired from my association with you many good habits and some not so very good; but I am equally proud of each and every one of them. [Laughter and applause.]

Therefore it is most fitting, Mr. Speaker, that my first effort in this body should be one of thanksgiving and appre­ciation of what you have done for my country, for my people, and for me personally, because I yield to no one of my countrymen in attachment and devotion to this country, which I have regarded, now regard, and shall always regard as my second home, because of the many favors I have received here. [Applause.]

How can I more appropriately express that thankfulness for and appreciation of your benefactions than by telling you of the magnificent and able stewardship of your highest rep­resentative in the Philippines? First of all, he has trans­lated into action your enactments, your desires, your orders, even your idealism in regard to the Philippines. In other words, he brought to our beautiful oriental isles the spifit of true Americanism as first enunciated in the policy laid down by McKinley and subsequently followed by all the Presidents of the United States and by all the Congresses, and which I know will be followed by this Congress and all future Con­gresses. [Applause.]

Governor Murphy has signally succeeded in bringing into the hearts of the Filipinos the conviction that nothing but altruism has moved this country and its great people in undertaking the task that is about to come to a glorious completion.

There have been 11 Governors General in the Philip­pines since the American occupation, and it is a privilege, gentlemen, for me to be able to state that each and every one of them represented the very best type of American man­hood and statesmanship. [Applause.]

Every one of the 10 illustrious predecessors of Governor Murphy-Taft, Wright, Ide, Smith, Forbes, Harrison, Wood, Stimson, Davis, and Theodore Roosevelt, Jr.-had contrib­uted, during his administration, to the progress and well­being of the country over which he ruled, and the sum total of their contributions stands as a living monument there of America's unparalleled altruistic colonial policy. I regret that time does not permit, nor does the occasion warrant, an enume1·ation of the great accomplishments of each of these able administrators.

However, the mention of the creditable part taken by some of them in the formation and development of the Philippine government is inevitable, for there are three epochal periods in the development of democratic government in the Philip­pines which stand in bold relief as the turning points in each step taken toward the establishment of a truly popular gov­ernment there. It was under Mr. Taft, the first civil Gov-

LXXIX-193

ernor, that the foundations of that government were laid, for it was he who first carried out the instructions of President McKinley and later put into actual operation the plan em­bodied in the first Philippine bill enacted by the Fifty­seventh Congress in 1902. The era of real participation by the Filipino people in the operation of their government was ushered in by Governor General Harrison. He was the first to carry into execution the provisions of the Jones law (Public Act 240) enacted by the Sixty-fourth Congress in 1916. But it remained for Mr. Murphy, the present Amer­ican Governor General in the Philippines, to combine the achievements of his predecessors and add greatly to the solidity of the edifice wherein the new Commonwealth government provided for in the Tydings-McDuffie Act, passed by the last Congress, shall be safely lodged.

To Governor General Murphy belongs~ therefore, the credit of bringing to a happy culmination a great task greatly performed.

That Governor Murphy perf armed this most difficult func­tion in the manner in which I know each and every one of you would wish and expect him to perform is abundantly shown by the unanimous praise made of his administration by all the different elements in the Philippines.

The leaders of all political parties have supported his ad­ministration and have lauded his accomplishments. I am sure I can do no better, to give an idea of this general ap­proval, than to request, as I do, Mr. Speaker, unanimous consent to incorporate and make a part of my remarks the speech delivered by the President of the Philippine Senate, Hon. Manuel L. Quezon, the outstanding leader of the Fili­pino people, at the farewell banquet tendered Governor Murphy before his departure from Manila. I quote:

Two days ago, at a banquet given in my honor by the Philippine Columbian Association, the president of the association, in the course of his remarks, gave me the impression that the banquet was given in his honor and not in mine. I hope that you did not get the impression, after listening to my friend Mr. Luz here, that this banquet is the result of a conspiracy between him and me to launch publicly my candidacy for the presidency of the Common­wealth.

Gentlemen, this is a great occasion and a happy one; a great occasion because it is a banquet given by a great people to a great man. And a happy one for yon, Mr. Governor, and for us. your friends, for this is a. very sincere demonstration of affection and admiration for you, both as a man and as a Governor.

Governor General Murphy was appointed Governor General of the Philippine Islands at a most critical period in Philippine his­tory. The Congress of the United States had just enacted a law determining the future relations between the United States and the Philippines. And this act was to be submitted to the Filipino people for their acceptance or rejection, and it was a question for the Governor Gen«al to decide what part, if any, he was to take.

It was important that the decision of the Filipino people should be right, but from the standpoint of the United states, the ques­tion was not whether the decision of the Filipino people was to be right, but whether that decision was to be the result of an abso­lutely free determination on the part of our 12eople; and Governor Murphy at once saw where his duty lay. There was an act approved by Congress. In the passage of that act, leaders of his own party had taken a very important p_art. The temptation must have been great for him to so act, at least indirectly, as to facili­tate the acceptance by the Filipino people of that act of Congress, his own Congress, an act in which his friends and political associ­ates had been interested.

But Governor Murphy saw his duty, saw that his duty was to keep neutral in the controversy that was going on amongst the Filipino leaders. He saw that it was in the interest of the Filipino people as well as the United States that the determination as to whether the act should be accepted or not should be freely made by the people of the Philippine Islands themselves. So Governor Murphy, from the minute that he arrived on these shores, has allowed no one to have any misgivings as to where he would stand in this controversy. He told our people, publicly, and told every one of us, those of us who were taking a very active part in the controversy, that he had made up his mind to be neutral, and that he was going to allow no one to use his office, directly or indirectly, to influence the decision of the Philippine Legislature in accepting or rejecting that law.

I want to say to you gentlemen that from that time on, I have admired Governor Murphy. He kept his word. He was n eutral and he remained neutral until the legislature had spoken. And after the legislature had spoken, he still remained neutral until the question was again decided by the Congress of the United states and passed upon by the Philippine Legislature. Then, when the legislature had taken action he was ready tc cooperate with it so that the necessary steps might be t aken to carry out the provisions of the law as accepted by our legislature. No Governor General has, in my opinion, interpreted both the letter

3052 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 and the spirit of the Jones law better than the present Governor General has. He remained neutral in the last elections. He allowed no public official to use the prerogatives of his office in influencing the results of the elections. But when the results were known, he at once accepted them as final and consulted in the affairs of this Government with the leader of the party that had won the election.

When Governor General Murphy arrived in the Philippines it was not only the question of the acceptance or rejection of the law by the people of these islands that confronted him. There were, in addition, the everyday problems that any government has to meet. And at that particular time, as it is still now, the most important problem before the Philippine government is the balancing of its budget. Before the Governor General arrived the Philippine Legislature already had in its previous session balanced our budget, so that he did not find here a bankrupt government. On the contrary, he found a government on a sound financial condition, unlike the state of many of t he governments on earth today. Governor Murphy not only continued this policy of keeping our budget balanced-the insular budget-but he went forward and encou..raged every provinc1al government to also keep their ex­penditures within their income.

Moreover, during the short period that he has been at the head of this government the surplus of the government has increased. I believe sincerely that if Governor Murphy had done nothing else in the Philippines this alone would give him credit for being one of the best executives in the world today.

But he has done more than that. Within the resources of our government he has interested himself in giving our people new services. His heart is with the helpless, with the poor, with the needy. And so he has given a large part of his time to the con­sideration of our social problems, and he has started and worked along these lines which, I hope if continued by the government which is to succeed the present government, will make this country very soon one of the most progressive governments upon the face of the earth.

I have had occasion to know Governor Murphy intimately. It has been one of the happiest moments of my life to have met our Governor at this particular time. My conferences with him on public questions have not only been pleasant on all occasions, but have been very instructive and inspiring. I am sure that I am paying him inadequate tribute when I say that he has but one purpose, and that is to serve the best interests of the people of the Philippine Islands in everything he does and at every moment.

I am not now endorsing everything that has been done by the Governor. As a matter of fact, we have had sorne disagreements and I have . been vain enough to think that when he had not agreed with me, he was wrong and I was right. But what I want to make public now is, that whether the Governor has agreed with me or not, I know that whenever he has made a deci­sion, he has done it because he thought it was right, because he thought it was just, because he thought it was honest, because he thought it was for the best for the government and people of the Philippine Islands.

The Governor is going to America. He himself has said that he is going to America because the President of the United States desires to confer with him. I shall refrain from surmising about the subject or subjects of that conference. But I feel per­fectly safe in saying that the Governor General, in that conference with the President, will give him the best information as to the conditions prevailing in the Philippine Islands; will tell, the Presi­dent what he honestly believes to be the wishes of our people, and will do what he can to promote our best interests.

In this connection I wish to take advantage of this opportunity ·to say one thing to the people of these islands, and that is, that everybody should settle down to work upon the assumption that nothing will happen that will stop the program as agreed upon between the Congress of the United States on the one hand, and the Filipino people on the other, when the act approved by Con­gress was accepted by the Philippine Legislature. We will gain nothlng by aeiuamg ourseives into believing that something may happen or will happen that will change the course of events that will necessarily follow the acceptance on the part of the legislature of the law enacted by Congress.

Let no one think that the government of the Commonwealth will not be established. The government of the Commonwealth will be established just as soon as the constitutional processes as determined in the McDuffie-Tydings law have taken place. The only thing left undone is to improve the provisions of that law, if they can be improved, in the interest both of the United States and of the Philippines. I do not know whether the trip of the Governor has any connection whatever with the pi.:ovisions of this law. Nor do I know whether at the next session of Con­gress there ls any plan or idea of reconsidering some or any of the provisions of that law. But this, as I said, I an;i prepared to state: If and when the opportunity should present itself for improving those provisions as they affect the Philippine Islands and the Filipino people, I have no doubt that the Governor Gen­eral will do his best to help us. And knowing this, I feel Mr. Governor, that we are not doing enough for you. I feel that every evidence of affection and confidence in you that the people of the Philippine Islands may give you before your departure, is not sufficiently expressive of the feelings they have in their hearts.

Personally, I want to say t.hat I have no better friend in this world than you. And I waut to add that I have not admired any

man more than I admire you. Gentlemen, I want to offer a toast for the health of the Governor, his happy trip and quick return to the Philippine Islands.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Commissioner from the Philippines asks unanimous consent to revise and extend his remarks so as to include a speech delivered upon the occa­sion of the farewell banquet tendered Governor Murphy in Manila and newspaper and other comments. Is there objection?

There was no objection. Mr. DELGADO. Business men in the Philippines-Ameri­

can, foreign, and Filipino-all praise the administration of Governor Murphy.

The press, which, in the Philippines as here, is ever vigi­lant of the conduct of public men, have also unanimously praised Governor Murphy's administration. And their ap­praisal of his accomplishments have been so just and fair, that Senator HAYDEN has seen fit to have printed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (Feb. 21, 1935) an editorial of the Tribune of Manila, which is an organ of the opposition party in the Philippines. The Herald of Manila, in its issue of · January 23, 1935, said the following:

The peace and contentment of the people in general-that is Governor General Murphy's definition of governmental stability. It ls, in fact, the only test of good government. We have been peaceful, and we have been contented. Why? Because we have lived within our income, have remained united in spite of our political antagonisms, have advanced educationally, have improved in health, and have enjoyed the full measure of our democratic rights.

Of Governor Murphy, personally, the same paper said: Here indeed is a noble man, gifted with the culture of truth

and possessing a character that refuses to step out of itself in the interest of expediency. All those who have known him here know that he has worn no mask, that he ls what he is rather than what lie might be represented to be. There is, in other words, not the least trace of sham and pretense in his personality and his m1nd.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the Commis­sioner from the Philippines has expired.

Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman's time be extended for 5 minutes.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection? There was no objection. Mr. DELGADO. Mr. Speaker, I regret exceedingly that

time -will not permit an adequate enumeration of the accom­plishments of Governor Murphy in the Philippines; but I may say, in the briefest way possible, that Governor Murphy has brought financial stability to the Philippine government to the extent that we have not only lived within our income during the 2 years of his administration but he has laid the foundations for . the government's financial security in the future.

A long speech can be delivered on each of Governor Murphy's splendid achievements in the Philippines. If I had enough time, 11 could describe to you at length his sys­tematic plan to solve many social problems in our country. In an admirable spirit of helpfulness he eradicated, in the short span of less than 2 years, the unhealthy slum districts in the city of Manila and he raised to an unprecedented degree of efficiency our hospital standards and health service. The Philippine government under him has always been ready to extend relief to needy families. Not even the unfor­tunates behind the prison bars were overlooked. The inde­terminate sentence and parole systems were instituted that hope for social rehabilitation may still be theirs.

He brought with him that sympathy, that understanding of Filipino aspiration and ideals that have caused the people out there fully to realize the truth of that famous Jeffer­sonian principle-" that no government can be just unless its pow~rs are derived from the consent of the governed "; and, last but not least, because of his faith in the Filipinos, because of his sympathy with our ideals and aspirations, he has revived good will and has made each and every one of our people feel, as never before, that America can always be depended upon for its justice, for its equity, for its fairness. These were his reassuring words:

This count ry is not going to ruin. This civilization is not going to crumble . . There is not any necessity for this nation to slip

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3053 back. This ls n-ot a political task; it 115 a task of .service, through and. thrnugh, and we must have courage to meet it. • • • I llkewlse predict that there wm be nothing to fear tn the future f<H' ~ Philippine Islands.

Mr. Speaker, if the present administration had done for the Philippines no more than to send Governor Murphy to the Philippines-and there are many other things that it has done-we feel that the Filipinos have enough to thank for. Governor Murphy's policies, not unlike the new deal here, have . brought faith and .confidence, new hopes to our people, which have moved them to go on and iace all the problems that beset our country with confidence, with trust in God, and trust in the idealism of this Nation, which will send us onward to the goal we have set for ourselves long ago.

Again I wish to thank you fox all you have done in the Philippines and will close by saying that the Philippines are the vanguard of Christianity in the Far East. They repre­sent a civilization founded on three centuries and a half of Spanish influence. With the fine superstructure that .Amer­ica bas built over that foundation along the lines of twen­tieth century Anglo-Saxon ideas of progress and hum&Il betterment, we believe that we shall forever rem.a.in the out­:post of Christianity and of westem civilization in the Far East, and the supporters of everything you .stand for and the principles that you taught us .and you so well love.

lldGehee Meeks Robinson, Utah Shannon .McLaughlin Montet Ragers,N. H. Thom McLean Melson 'Romju-e Thomason JilcSwJdn O~rl.en &haefer Thompson l&J.oney Peyser Schneider Tobey May -Pierce Schuetz White

The SPEAKER. Three hundred and filty-five Member.s have answered to their names. A quorum is present.

Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker, I move to dispense with fur• ther proceedings under the .call

The motion was agreed to. The doors were opened.

N. R.A.

Mr. REED of Neiw York. Mr. Speaker. I ask una.nimDus cm.sent to extend my ()WD remarks in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER Without objection. it is .so Drd.e.red. There was no objection. Mr. REEDm N-ew Ymk:. Mr.Speaker, theNactional Indus·

trial Recovecy Act was passed June 6, 1~3. No time was lost to put the small business man under the lash of the die'taror. .M1m who h.arl their backs to the wan struggling to keep theiT men employed were driven into banlm.u>tey; <>thers 'We!"e fined heavilY; cl.hers were imprisoned. .

It is inte:test:i:ng to observe how tenderly m of the favor­ite monopolistic oorparations a.n.d their omcers were treated by the master dictator. Take the cigarette manufactur.exs as an example. 'Time and again during the past year, [Applause.]

CALENDAR WEDNESDAY the new.spapermen at the White House oonferenee ha v-e in-The SPEAKER. Today is calendar Wednesday and the quired what progress was being made with the prop0sec!

Clerk will call the committees. cigarette code, only to be told that it had nGt appeared in Mr . .BLANTON. Mr. Speak.er .. before the -calendar is-called the wire basket. Now, after a period of 20 months since

I make the point .of order that there is no .qu<>rum present. the enactment of the N. R. A., the cigarette <QGde appears. There are bills of importance to eome up and I think the The history .of the transactious nf SGille of the large to-Membership -0f the House should be here. bacco companies who have been basking in the sunshine .of

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas makes the political favor is .not witoou.t interest t.o those wh0 have felt point of order that there is no quorum present. the blade of the dictator's ax. I am infonned that the

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I wish the gentleman would president of the American Tobacco Co .• Mr. George Wash-not do that. ington Hill, was paid $8'25,tltlO for bis year"'s work in 1931.

Mr. BLANTON. I regret that my duty compels me to 00 He received about $16;0l)O per week.. ms wutkers received it. There is .one bill on the calendar that sets a very bad less than $14 per week. precedent, and it is something that just now, with the present '.!'he four big tobacco ·companies showed earnings of lil.1 national atmosphere,, could not be properly eXPla.ined to the percei+t on th~ir invested capitaJl. These companies during country. I think the Members ought to be here when the the 12 succeeding. years reinPested $27<>,<YOn-COO, or .about bill is taken up. . 1 refer to the bill to p~ a pension of $20,()00 one-fourth of their profits, in further mechaflization~ an a year for life to .Justices of .the supreme Court after they a.mount far. in excess Di what they paid out in wages. This have reached 'lO years of age. large expenclitur.e l.n meehan':'ization only .added to the prab-

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. That is not the intent or the Jems cf unemployment.. .lt i.i iJ.rter.estmg t.o note that by language of the bill. 19S1 their <earnings anwu.nred to 16.3 percent (}n their -allg-

Mr • .BLANTON. That is just what it means a.nd it ought mented investment. or .25.l> -percent an their 1"920 inves't­not to pass. And if we can get the Member.s here -so they ment. will understand it, they will not pass it. . Testimony given before a subcommittee ef tbe Ways and

Mr. SUMNERS .of Texas. lt is .a gQod bill and ~ ought Means Committee in 1934 reveals an '3"Stounding situation .as to pass it and we a.re going t.o pass it. . to the profits of the .so-called '".Big .Four." "What does the

Mr. CULLEN. I hope the gentleman will not press his · testimanv .disclose? It shows that ·during the year 1931, the point of order. year of the depression, the aggregate net pro1its were $11:0,-

Mr. BLANTON. I feel compelled to make the point of 000,DOQ, which was .3'> percent grea.ter than -the aggregate order from a sense of duty. 'Ille Membership ought to know ?et profi~ for 1929. The testimony further shows that dllr­when a bill of that kind is coming up, and <0ught to be here .mg a penod whe.n the toba.ooo growem were unable to realize during the debate, and I insist upon my point 1>f order. · the cost of producl~ .the manufacturers' profits were

The SPEAKER. The Chair will .count. (After rounting.) .$147,000.))DO" or 69 per.cent while lhe growers received .only One· hundred and eight members pr~ent, not a .quorum. $66,000,000, or 31 percent.

Mr. CULLEN. Mr. Speaker .. I move a ean of the House. Does~ fair-~ed persc.u doubtf.or one minute that the The motion was agreed to. k.ey position which Mr. Clay Williams has held until ms The doors were closed. resignation today has been to the :financial advantage .of The Clerk called the roll.. and the following Members the Big .Four monopoly and to the distinct .dis.advantage -Of

failed to answer to their names: the small tobacco mam1factur.ers?

Andresen .Bacharach Eankhea.d Beam Bell Biermann Boehne Boileau Brooks Buckley, N.Y. Bulwinkle card en Casey

(Roll No. ~l "The wage earners of. the in~Y .~eceived in 1931 only 1.9 Claiborne F.lsh ,percent of w.hat the compames .rece1v.ed f.or their products.

..Johnson, W. V&. ~··th let ~Idaho .FJan,nagan xawi .l."UJ. er.mare, me call attention to the tact that to raise g~::r ::-rill ~!!::r the wag.es Bf their cigarette wcrkers 10 percent would cost Cooley Gasque Kleberg the owner.s -only a little over 1 per.cent of the more than Cooper. Ohio G~christ Kramer .$100..,.000"000 they make in profits each year. ~~s g~~ough ~=son Now as to the cigarette code. Mr. Clay Williams, vice Disney Goodwm Larrabee chairman of the R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co .. one of the so:.. Duffy, N. Y. Greenway Lea, Call!. .called .. , .Big Four"' which completely controls the tobacco Dunn, Miss. Hamlin Lee Q.kl'S. b - f tb f--.. ed · Eckert · Hancock N. c. :r..eWts. Md. usmess o · e .oounw...r. oppos any codlfica.tion under Fernandez Bart ' Llo1'1 N. R. A. wbich might involve the slighte.st raise in wages. Mr...

3054 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 Williams is chairman of the National Recovery Board and as such he has had tremendous influence in forming codes affecting his business. Even though 90 percent of American business had been placed under codes, yet the Reynolds To­bacco Co., until within a few days ago, has escaped codifica­tion. I may add that while Mr. Clay Williams opposed the labor policies of the N. R. A., he did not oppose its price­raising tendencies.

Furthermore, to offset a $10,000,000 increase in costs due to the operation of the A. A. A. processing tax and the Presi­dent's reemployment agreement, the cigarette industry raised its wholesale price by $60,000,000. All that it did to meet these new burdens was to multiply the added cost by 6 and pass them on to the consumer. This clever piece of manipu­lation added a clear $50,000,000 to its profits in the first year under the new deal.

The administration now asks Congress to extend the life of the N. R. A. The favored few, those who enjoy monopo­listic privileges under the N. R. A., those who control and direct its policies now join the ad.ministration in urging Con­gress to extend the life of the National Industrial Recovery Act. Two years more of political favor will enable the large industries to drive their few surviving competitors into in­solvency. This will give them a free hand to further exploit the public.

ATTENDANCE ON COMMITTEE

Mr. MARTIN of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, the mem­bers of the Committee on Agriculture are in session on busi­ness authorized by the House and could not answer to their names on the quorum call.

Mr. O'CONNOR. The majority members of the Commit­tee on Agriculture received permission to sit this afternoon and may have been absent during this roll call.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the first committee on the calendar.

The Clerk proceeded to call the committees. RETIREMENT OF SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas <when the Committee on the Judiciary was called). Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill <H. R. 5161> to amend section 260 of the Judicial Code <U. S. C., title 28, sec. 375), as heretofore amended.

The Clerk read the bill, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That section 260 of the Judicial Code

(U. S. C., title 28, sec. 375), as heretofore amended by the Act of March 1, 1929 (45 Stat. L., ch. 419, p. 1422)., is hereby a.mended by adding at the end of the first paragraph thereof the following: "And, instead of resigning, any Justice of the Supreme Court, who ls qualified to resign under the foregoing provisions, may retire, upon the salary of which he is then in receipt, from regular active service on the bench, and the President shall thereupon be author­ized to appoint a successor; but a Justice so retiring may never­theless be called upon by the Chief Justice and be by him author­ized to perform such judicial duties, in any judicial circUit, in­cluding those of a circuit justice in such circuit, as such retired Justice may be willing to undertake."

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. SUM­NERS J is recognized for 1 hour.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this is a very important bill. It is a bill with regard to which a great deal of misinformation has been spread about. Some statements have been made that are not correct.

This bill proposes to deal with the personnel of the Su­preme Court of the United States. In a sentence, this bill does this, and nothing more, and any statement to. the con­trary is wrong. This bill gives to the Justices of the Supreme Court exactly the arrangement with regard to res­ignation and retirement that is now given by the laws of this country to every other Federal judge in the United States. Now, that is one point. I am going to repeat it. This bill proposed to give to the justices of the Supreme Court exactly that arrangement given by existing law with regard to all of the other Federal justices and judges in this country. That is one proposition.

Let me state another proposition. The statement has been made that this proposes a pension to Federal judges, and that is not correct. Federal judges hold office under the Constitution of the United States during life, subject to good

behavior. They do not have to quit except when death makes them separate themselves from the bench. That is another proposition. If anybody says I am not stating the facts correctly, I will yield to be corrected.

This is the third proposition: In the experience of this country it is found valuable to give to other justices who reach retirement age the privilege of retiring without having to resign. It may be that we in this Congress have a supe­rior sort of character to that of the Justices sitting over there, but it has been found from human experience that when a man begins to slow up a little bit he would like not to quit entirely. He would not like to check out entirely. Recognizing that with regard to the circuit court justices and district court judges, we provided many years ago that when they begin to slow up, if they want to, instead of re­signing they may retire. When they retire they are subject to incidental service by assignment.

With regard to the Justices of the Supreme Court, it has been deemed advisable, for reasons that are perfectly ap­parent, that when they get where they feel they cannot do a full da,.y's work, instead of hanging on they may retire. That is the reason for this bill. The position they occupy requires full vigor, mentally and physically. I know there will be a great deal said about men in· high places cashing out when they reach the point where they cannot do a full day's work. Maybe we all ought to ha,.ve been made so that if we were getting $18,000 or $20,000 a year, we would just check out and quit when we reached the slowing up point, but the thing which should determine our judgment as to what human beings will do is common sense, experience, and observation. We know that human beings do not act tha.t way. I would not risk many of the Members in this House who criticize Supreme Court ·Justices for not quitting. I would not risk them to get out of here and surrender their sa,.laries because they are sick or getting a bit old.

So this bill gives this arrangement, that when the Justices of the Supreme Court have served 10 years and have reached the age of 70, instead of resigning they may retire. They are then subject to assignment in the circuits by the Chief Justice of the United States, to do incidental service.

Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yield for ai question if it will

be illuminating. Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. I am interested in the

gentleman's statement that under the terms of the pending bill that after resignation of a member of the Supreme Court, the former member would be subject to call of the Chief Justice to be assigned to the circuit court?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yes; but not as a regular judge. Mr. JOHNSON of Oklahoma. But he would not be forced

to accept such assignment unless he wanted to? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. The same pro­

vision is made with regard to the justices of the circuit court of appeals and with regard to the district justices when they shall have reached that age.

Now I will yield for questions, if some gentleman does not understand. I do not want to make a speech.

Mr. MOTT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yield. Mr. MOTT. At the present time no legislation can be

passed decreasing the· salary of a judge while he is in office. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. You cannot decrease it. Mr. MOTT. But you can decrease a judge's retirement

pay after he has resigned. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right; I was going to

make that statement. Mr. MOTT. Now, if this bill is passed and in.stead of re­

signing a judge simply retires from active service on the Bench, which is to all intents and purposes the same thing as resigning, then it would be quite possible for a judge in effect to resign and the Congress could never pass any legislation lowering his salary.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. Mr. MO'IT. And that, I take it, ~ is the real purpose of

this bill. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I would not like to say that;

but I will say, and I .say it very candidly, that my judgment

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3055 is that if Justices feel perfectly secure in the continuation of the salary which they may hold, they would be more dis­posed to retire. Do not forget they have a cinch on that salary as long as they live. Does the gentleman understand that?

Mr. MOTT. Yes. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is merely a matter of

horse sense, a point to start from. We cannbt take it from these judges by any law that we can enact.

Mr. MOTT. The gentleman does not mean that the Congress cannot reduce the judge's pension upon his resig:.. nation?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. No; but I am talking about the judge who does not have ta resign.

Mr. MOTT. That is true. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I mean that we are just using

horse sense here. People have common sense, let us use it. Mr. MOTT. In other words, the purpose of the bill is to

make the judge's retirement pay secure in any event, so that Congress in the future will have no jurisdiction over that subject.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is one of the effects of the bill.

Mr. MOTT. I am glad the gentleman has so thoroughly and fully explained it.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Sure; everybody knows that; and there is something rather important in that, too, per­haps. As long as a judge can hold office during life and get paid during life this sort of bill is common sense. I believe everybody in this House is bound to recognize it. If it were · a question of initial legislation and legislative control over the salary of Justices after they reach the age of 70 years, we would confront a di:ff erent proposition, but we have no constitutional control over their salaries during their lifetime, absolutely none on earth. Now, there may be some good in that, I am not sure about it, there is a good deal of weight on each side. For a long time we have held rather strongly for an independent judiciary in this country. There have been a long line of Anglo-Saxon prac­tical experiences in trying to control the judges of this coun­try and it has not been a happy experience.

When a man goes on the Supreme Court Bench he ought to take the veil insofar as any purpose to make a dollar from that time on is concerned. He ought not to have one minute's thought about a dollar. These men hold key places, and we should not quibble abo:ut $15,000 or $20,000 in mak­ing certain the independent uncontrolled judgment of the men whose opinion influences the Constitution of this coun­try. It is as nothing. I _ am not sure that it is not a good thing for a judge who is a member of the Supreme Court to know that from the moment of his appointment ·on until God calls him to his reward he will not have to think a minute about a dollar-will keep himself free from every financial interest and involvement. [Applause.] Now, what are you going to do about it?

Mr. MILLARD. Pass it. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yes; that is right. Mr. EKWALL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yield. Mr. EKWALL. I do not presume that any Justice of the

Supreme Court would hesitate to resign i! he felt that he had gotten to the point where he could not perform his duties. Does the gentleman think so?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. No; but I think he would feel a whole lot better and more able to stay on the Bench if he did not have to worry about the future. I am telling the truth. I think the same thing about the gentleman who asked me this question, and I do not even know him. ·This is purely impersonal, understand. I think were the gentle­man a Justice of the Supreme Court, and not qulte up to par, he would feel a little less incapacitated and a little more willing to keep on the Bench if he was afraid his salary might be cut off entirely if he should quit. There is nothing personal about this, understand. ·

Mr. EKWALL. I understand, but does not the gentleman feel that the Justices of the Supreme Court are going to be

Willing to rely on the fatiness of the coming Congresses and that they will be willing to take their chances along that line?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I will say to the gentleman that there is nothing in this bill which, if passed, would prevent a Federal judge resigning instead of retiring if he wants to. Does that answer the question? The gentleman is not dealing with theory. Nothing under this bill prevents any Justice who is willing to resign from resigning and subjecting himself to the legislative judgment.

Mr. MOT!'. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. · I yield. Mr. MOTT. The gentleman will admit, I suppose, that if

th.is bill is passed, no Supreme Court ,rustice ever will resign in the future; they will all i·etire.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I think that is true. Bear in mind this, that it is only within the last few years that it has occurred to anybody that Congress would disturb the salary of the justices of the Federal courts after they resigned.

Justice Holmes, just deceased, was the only Justice of the Supreme Court in the history of this Nation whose salary has ever been disturbed during his lifetime. May I make this further statement: I do not care what you do with this bill. I am simply making a statement here in explanation. I have no interest in it whatever which is not shared by each Member.

Mr. CHRISTIANSON. May we be assured that there is no purpose anywhere--and I am not referring to the gentleman who is now occupying the floor-to use this bill as a means of changing the complexion of the present Supreme Court of the United States?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Of course, I cannot answer that question.

Mr. CHRISTIANSON. It would have the effect of facilitat­ing such a change if such change were desired?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Possibly so. I understand there is a good deal of apprehension in certain quarters with respect to that.

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. It is entirely optional with the present judges of the Supreme Court.

Mr. CHRISTIANSON. In using their discretion about resigning or retiring, they would be more likely to exercise that discretion if they were assured that their present salaries would be continued for the rest of their lives?

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. Why not? Mr. CHRISTIANSON. Then, the purpose of the legisla­

tion is to make it easier for the judges to exercise that discretion?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. May I answer the gentleman in this way?

Mr. CHRISTIANSON. The Members of the House have. a right to know what the purpose is.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I am going to state it exactly .. May I direct attention to the section of which this bill is amendatory:

When any judge of any court of the United States, appointed to hold his office during good behavior, resigns his office after having held a commission or commissions as judge of any such court or courts at least 10 years, continuously or otherwise, and having attained the age of 70 years, he shall, during the residue of his natural life, receive the salary which is payable at: the time of his resignation for the office that he held at the time of his resignation.

That applies to all justices with this exception: But, instead of resigning, any judge other than a Justice of the

Supreme Court, who is qualified to resign under the foregoing provisions, may retire, upon the salary of which he is then in receipt, from regular active service on the bench, and the Presi­dent shall thereupon be authorized to appoint a successor; but a "judge so retiring may nevertheless be called upon by the senior circult judge of that circuit and be by him authorized to perform such judicial duties-

And so forth. You will observe that the provision of the law of which

this proposed bill is amendatory provides that any judge or justice of the United States may resign or may retire, except Justices of the Supreme Court, whenever they shall have served IO years and shall have reached the age of 70.

3056 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 This bill proposes to make identical that anangement with reference to the Supreme Court, and nothing more.

Mr. EKWALL. How many Justices are there who would be eligible if this bill passes?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Three, at least. I\fi'. EKWALL. May I make the statement that I was on

the bench about 13 years and resigned to come to Congress. I voluntarily paid back to the State over $2,000 of my sal­ary as a good citizen in order to help the State. I am sure the Just ices of the Supreme Court are perfectly willing to take their chances with the people of the United States, as represented by the Members of Congress, and I am sure that none of them will be harmed to any great extent if this bill does not pass. It seems to me it is rather discrim­inatory and pe1·sonally I can see no reason for the passage of the bill. ·

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. May I say to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. EKWALL] if he is conect in his con­clusions they will all do that because we are not cutting them off from the chance.

Mr. HEALEY. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yield to the gentleman from

Massachusetts. Mr. HEALEY. Will the gentleman state the circum­

stances under which a Justice of the Supreme Court may withdraw and how his future income may be governed by congressional action?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. He may resign now and his salary can be cut off entirely.

Mr. HEALEY. That depends on the action of Congress? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yes. The judges of the Su­

preme Court of the United States are the only Federal judges that do not have the privilege of retiring instead of resigning.

Mr. CELLER. In other words, we endow the judges of the Supreme Court of the United States by this bill with the same privilege that we have already endowed the dis­trict judges and circuit judges, which has not been deemed a discrimination. •

Mr. McFARLANE. Under existing law, so that we will understand just what the effect of this bill is, when a Jus­tice of the Supreme Court resigns, his salary is automatically cut off?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Congress can cut it off. Mr. -McFARLANE. Well, under existing law has it ever

been done? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Congress may pass any bill it

wants. We cut Justice Holmes' salary in half, I believe. Mr. McFARLANE. Does it make any difference whether

he resigns or retires? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. If he retires, it cannot be done.

The circuit court of appeals judges have the privilege of retiring and not resigning, and their salaries cannot be disturbed.

Mr. McFARLANE. Can a Supreme Court judge now retire at full pay?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. They may resign at full pay, but it may be cut off at any time. It is subject to congres­sional action. It takes the thing out of the constitutional­guaranty status and makes it.subject to congressional action.

Mr. MONTAGUE. A Justice of the Supreme Court can­not retire. He must resign.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. Mr. IIlLL of Alabama. Can the gentleman advise us what

the reason was for not including Supreme Court Justices in the original act which gave these other judges the right to retire?

Ivrr. SUMNERS of Texas. I think I can. I think this . proposed arrangement is a thing thought out after that. The district judges and the justices of the circuit court of appeals, of course, do not hold a place of such tremendous, strategic importance as the Supreme Court Justices. For instance, it was thought that the justices of the circuit court of appeals could retire and be subject to assignment and still be justices.

May I make this statement? The Justices of the Supreme Court have two jobs. One is sitting in that room yonder, under the Constitution, and the other is going on circuit. Under this bill, when they retire, they retain the power of being sent on circuit. I think this is a thing that was thought out after the law granting privilege to the other Federal judges to retire was passed. The President may as­sign a district judge to perform a certain duty--

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. The Presiding Justice. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. My colleague is correct about

that, of course. They may be assigned by the Presiding Justice, but it would be impracticable, it would be dangerous, if we had two or three retired Justices over here, for the Chief Justice, in a close case, to have the power of picking one of them out of two or three men to sit in the case. The Chief ·Justice, however impartial, could not afford to exercise such a power. You can all readily understand that. So it is deemed advisable to remove these judges who retire from opportunity to sit on the Supreme Court Bench.

Mr. MOTT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yes. Mr. MOTT. As a matter of fact, the practice of Justices

of the United States Supreme Court going on circuit has long ceased to exist.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. Mr. MOTT. How many years ago was it when the last

Supreme Court Justice went on circuit? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I do not know. They do not

go on circuit now. Mr. MOTT. And probably never will again. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. If this bill is passed, they will

not go on circuit in the ordinary sense. Mr. MOTT. They will not, anyway, will they? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. They do not, and under this

bill they would not in the ordinary sense, but it is believed that they frequently could be assigned to the circuit to do specific service--understand?

Mr. MOTT. I think I understand. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I mean you understand the

statement? I do not ask you to believe it. Mr. MOTT. In the gentleman's opinion is it likely in the

future that any Supreme Court Justice will ever go out on the circuit?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I believe so. In my judgment, for instance, where you have a situation where one of the justices of the circuit is sick, or something of that sort, I think he would be sent out.

Mr. DRISCOLL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yield. Mr. DRISCOLL. Is not this the situation? If we pass

this bill, the man who retired remains a judge? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. Mr. DRISCOLL. And draws a judge's salary? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. . Mr. DRISCOLL. But his place on the active Bench of the

Supreme Court may be filled by appointment? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. Mr. DRISCOLL. And by reason of his retirement, his

compensation continues, under the statement in the Consti­tution that judges shall receive a compensation which shall not be diminished during their term of office?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is right. Mr. DRISCOLL. That is the purpase of the bill? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. That is the effect of it. Mr. ANDREWS of New York. Mr. Speaker, will the gen­

tleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yes. Mr. ANDREWS of New York. Is there any other system

of retirement in our courts or in our Government service · wherein a man is retired with full pay?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I do not think so. I think the Federal Bench is the only place where a man is guaranteed full pay during life.

Mr. ANDREWS of New York. Is not this a rather danger­ous precedent for the Government to set?

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3057 Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I do not think so. You have of $20,000 per year for life. Because under this bill he

set it. The Constitution has set it. That is what I have cannot be compelled to do 1 hour of work after he retire.s been trying to get fixed in the minds of the Members here. and while he is drawing his $20,000 per year gratuity. What You do not set anything by this bill. These men have a is that but a pension? It is a pension pure and simple. cinch on this salary for life under the Constitution. Con- Under this bill Mr. Holmes would have drawn this $20,000 gress cannot di~turb it. Why in the world you keep asking per year for 24 years after he had reached the age of 70, for that question I do not understand. You do not set anything he would have reached his ninety-fourth birthday tomorrow. here. The Constitution gives it to them and they have got When a Justice of the Supreme Court holds his position it. You are not taking any salary from them and you ar e for life, he does so by continuing to be a judge for life. When not giving any salary to them. They have their salaries for hE ceases to be a judge his job stops and his salary stops. life. The Constitution gives it to them and Congress cannot And when he ceases to be a judge, he is not entitled to a take it from them. Why can we not accept that proposition dollar under the Constitution; but, under this bill it would and go on and talk about something else? permit him to retire at 70 years of age and receive $20,000

Mr. GREEN. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? a year for the rest of his life, which might be a quarter of a Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yes. century, and dming that quarter of a century he need not ~'.Ir. GREEN. I was very much interested in the state- render any service to the Government for the $500,000 he

ment of the gentleman across the aisle. It was quite notice- receives in retired pay. able that during our economy drive here, when everybody We have a distinocruished colleague in service in this House, from President to charwoman took their 15 percent cut, only who actively serves with dignity and with great ability, who a half dozen or less, I understmd, Federal judges would per- comes from Connecticut [Mr. MERRITT], and if we had forced mit their salaries to be cut one penny. him to retire at 70 years of age he would have retired 11

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Yet you have nine men on the years ago, for he is 81 years old, yet he is still one of the Federal Bench and you cannot cut their salaries, because active, ablest, and most valuable men in this House. [Ap­the Constitution stands between you. plause.J His retirement from this Congress would be a

Mr. BLANTON. Ml'. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? distinct loss to the country. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield the geri- The many years of service performed in this House by

tleman from Texas 7 minutes. "Uncle Joe" Cannon that were most valuable to this Nation Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, in my 7 minutes I want to were the years he served after he was 70 years of age.

tell my colleagues something that my good colleague from I want to say to you again that when you permit a Justice Texas has not told. of the Supreme Court to retire at 70 years of age on a salary

In the first place, as some of you may know, Supreme of $20,000 a year for life it is a pension. Why is it not a Court Justices draw $20,000 a year. The Chief Justice draws pension? If he draws a salary when he is not rendering $500 additional as Chief Justice, or $'20,500 a year. While any service, it is a gratuity; it is a pension from this Gov­they hold their offices for life, subject to good behavior, they ernment. cease to hold their office when they resign. And when they I am not willing to pay just $30 per month to the good resign their salary stops, and they then receive only such women of this country and the aged men who have lived amount as Congress sees fit to allow. In other words, after honorable citizens in the United States and been of value to they resign, Congress holds the purse strings and conb:ols their Government for over three score years. as provided in the situation. the bill that is to be brought in and passed by a committee

If you pass this bill, Congress no longer will control the in a few days and discriminate against them by passing this situation; and they can retire after reaching 70, having bill authorizing a Justice to retire at 70 years of age and served 10 years, at $20,000 per year for life. draw a pension of $20,000 a year for lite. Are you willing

Under the Constitution and laws of this country there are to make such discrimination? I am not. only nine Supreme Court Justices. Under this bill, when- While everybody else has to pay an income tax, no Federal ever a Justice reaches the age of 70 and has served 10 years, judge has to pay one dollar. Supreme Court Justices draw he can retire on $20,000 per year for life, and you would $20,000 per year, yet do not pay one penny income tax. soon have more retired Supreme Court judges drawing Mr. Justice Holmes, if he had been retired at the age of $20,000 per year for life than the nine active judges on the 70, would have drawn a pension from this Government of Supreme Bench. $20,000 a year for 24 long years, or the sum of $480,000,

After being appointed, most of them would not have to and would not have had to pay one dollar income tax. wait long before retiring on $20,000 per year for life, as I do not think there is a man in the Nation who has a most of them are over 60 years of age when appainted. I keener mind than my friend from Texas [Mr. SUMNERS]. I guarantee that if this bill passes and it should inveigle two think he is one of the valuable men of this House and I Justices to retire from the Supreme Bench on $20,000 a would like to follow him. I think he is an ornament to the year for life-I guarantee that the men whom the President great Judiciary Committee, of which he is the Chairman. will appoint will be over 60 years of age. Then they will I would like to be able to fallow him and support his bill, not have to wait long until they reach the retirement age but it is a bad precedent to establish at this time, as I have and can retire for life on $20,000 a year. said, when the country is out of gear, when people are in

This morning we heard a deserved eulogy to a great man, a condition of unrest, when there is not a proper state of one of the great Justices of our High Court, by the gentleman mind in the people scattered throughout the United States. from Indiana, on Justice Holmes, who passed away yester- It is an improper time to pension certain men at $20,000 a day, and whose passing grieved us. year for life after they reach 70 years of age, and then allow

Tomorrow Justice Holmes would have been 94 years old- other good men and women all over the United States, just 24 years after the retirement age fixed in this bill. The as worthy and deserving, only $30 per month, when all are eulogist this morning showed you some of the most impartant of equal importance under the law. decisions rendered by that great jurist, after he was 70 years Mr. FADDIS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? of age; when he had reached the years of experience, when Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? he had reached the years of ripe judgment, we had the great Mr. BLANTON. No; I am sorry. I do not want gentle-decisions rendered by that great jurist. · men to intersperse my 7-minute speech with inane witti-

My friend and colleague from Texas [Mr. SUMNERS] says cisms. that you cannot call this a pension. Why can you not? Mr. CELLER. He gets the same amount if he resigns. We What is it but a pension? When you strip away the tech- give them that privilege now. nical language and analyze it in plain everyday language, Mr. BLANTON. No; he would not, if he resigned. it simply means that every judge of the Supreme Court upon Mr. CELLER. Certainly he does. reaching the age of 70 years, having served as many as 10 Mr. BLANTON. No; the gentleman is entirely mistaken. years, may retire on a pension, or retired paY:, or a gratuity, Mr. CELLER. What does he get?

3058 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 Mr. BLANTON. Only what Congress sees fit to give him.

Whenever. he resigns, he ceases to be a judge. The purpose of this bill is to assure him that he will thereafter get $20,000 per year for life if he will retire at the age of 70 years. When he resigns now he gets only what Congress sees fit to give him. It behooves all of us to watch these bills closely and net let them pass. I objected and stopped this bill last Mon­day on the Consent Calendar. Many such bills come from comrffittees with a unanimous report. And when the com­mittee calls them up on Calendar Wednesday they are hard to kill, because the committee controls all time in debate. But we must watch them closely and kill the bad bills.

Oh, I know that in a generous atmosphere here, when we had a Treasury full of money, Congress has been in the mood of passing bills and paying a pension of $5,000 a year to Presidents' widows. I have fought against all such bills. That ought not to have existed, and we ought to stop it, and we ought to kill this bill here today. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Texas has expired.

Mr. SUM1'1"ERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Justice Holmes could have resigned twenty-odd years ago. If he had re­signed he would have drawn his full salary up until 2 or 3 years ago when Congress first began to reduce during life the pay of the resigned judges. When Justice Holmes resigned he did not have the slightest idea that CoD.i::,oress was going to cut his salary. You can take that from me. I do not care what you do with this bill, but if you want vigorous judges on the Federal Bench you had better pass it. I speak as a matter of general policy and with no reference to the present occupants.

I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. PERKINS.]

Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, if noise could make the worse appear the better reason, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. BLANTON] should succeed in deceiving us all. Does the gentleman from Texas think that we are so simple and in­nocent that we do not now know that judges can retire or resign and receive the same compensation they received when they sat?

Mr. CELLER. That is $20,000 a year less 5 percent? Mr. PERKINS. Yes. There is no question about that,

and the whole weight and sound argument of the gentleman from Texas depends on deceiving us all a little bit, so that we will think that we are now passing a pension bill. We are not passing any pension bill at all.

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. The gentleman means Mr. BLAN­TON of Texas?

Mr. PERKINS. Oh, yes. There is only one gentleman from Texas where noise is concerned.

Mr. BLANTON. Unless one can make a noise, he could not be heard in this forum. Since the gentleman is so unkind and uncouth, will he yield to me.

Mr. PERKINS. I would not be unkind and uncouth to the gentleman, and I am not. I yield to the gentleman.

Wtl'. BLANTON. Does not the gentleman from New Jersey CMr. PERKINS] and the gentleman from New York [Mr. CELLERJ know that Mr. Justice Holmes has not for a number of years drawn $20,000, and do they not know that when a Justice resigns it is left entirely to Congress as to what he shall receive?

Mr. PERKINS. Yes, of course. Mr. BLANTON. The Chairman of the Committee on the

Judiciary [Mr. SUMNERS of Texas] will tell the gentleman that.

Mr. PERKINS. Yes. Mr. Speaker, the Constitution of the United States guarantees to Justices the position during life but it does not guarantee to them health, and when a judge reaches the position where he feels he would like to resign or let up a little on his work, we all know it is human for him to continue, just the same as we do as Members of Congress, when some of us should be thinking of retiring,

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Can the gentleman tell us any reason why a Supreme Court Justice should not have the same right as a district judge? ·

Mr. PERKINS. There is no reason why they Should no~

Mr. HOEPPEL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. PERKINS. Yes. Mr. HOEPPEL. Did the gentleman sign the petition to

bring the Townsend pension plan to a vote? Mr. PERKINS. I have not signed that petition. Mr. HOEPPEL. In that there is a proper pension plan

for a Supreme Court Justice. [Laughter.] :Mr. PERKINS. There is absolutely no reason why Jus­

tices of the Supreme Court should not be on the same basis as judges of the district courts. As far as we are able to ascertain, there was no reason why in the original law these words were placed " other than the Justices of the Supreme Court." We know that if there is any position in the whole country that should be absolutely free from any worry or disturbance or any thought of future existence, it is that of a judge of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the mere fact that he may draw a pension, if you will, or retirement pay, or whatever it is called, during the rest of his life, ought not to weigh the slightest bit when you think of the importance bf the decisions being handed down from day to day.

Mr. SHORT. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. PERKINS. If the gentleman does not ask me any­

thing about the ~nsend plan, I will yield. Mr. SHORT. I certainly would not charge that it is the

motive or purpose of this bill, but will not the effect be to provide a place or a berth on the Supreme Court· Bench for the distinguished Senator from Arkansas who will be re­placed by the distinguished Senator from Louisiana next year? [Laughter.]

Mr. PERKINS. That might be an argument in favor of passing the bill.

Mr. Speaker, I yield·back the balance of my time. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes

to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. EKWALL]. Mr. EKWALL. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me there is no .

particularly good purpose to be served by this bill. As I stated a few moments ago, I was on the ciicuit bench of Oregon for a number of years, and during the financial emer­gency in my State, although I had such constitutional pro­tection as precluded the possibility of my salary being re­duced during my term of office, I voluntarily, in order to help out, paid back several thousand dollars to my State. I was glad to do it, although my salary was $6,500 a year and not $20,000. There is nothing so sacred about the Bench that judges should be precluded from sharing in such reduc­tions in times of emergency and stress the same as any other employees of the Government.

I have the highest respect in the world for the splendid gentleman on the Supreme Court Bench. I do not believe it would be possible to get nine finer or more competent justices in the entire country than we have, but I believe that they should, under our democratic form of government, take their chances with Congress, a coordinate branch of our Government.

I do -not believe the gentlemen of the Supreme Court care particularly whether this bill is passed or not. As a matter of fact, when a judge has been on the Bench for at least 10 years at a salary of $20,000 a year, he has a reasonable opportunity to put something aside for the day when retire­ment becomes necessary. It seems to me they have all the protection they should need now, and that if the necessity comes they should and, · I believe will gladly, take a reason­able reduction. Personally, I do not believe these gentlemen would ask for the passage of this bill if they had a voice in the matter on this floor, and I think we should vote the bill down. [Applause.]

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. EKWALL] has expired.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this debate is going to close if my motion for the previous question is sus­tained. I believe we have heard about all there is to it. I hope when you come to vote you will just take this practical consideration of the question: The Supreme Court is a very important place. Prior to this bill we provided that justices of the circuit courts and district courts, upon reaching 70

1935 CONGRESSION.AL RECORD-HOUSE 3059 years of age, with 10 years of continuous service, might re­tire instead of resigning. I call your attention to the fact that since the enactment of that legislation there has not been any proposition that I k;now of to change it. Now, we come with the same proposition exactly with r~f erence to the Justices of the SUpreme Court, providing that when those men shall have reached the age of 70 years and shall have had 10 years of service, it could be possible, if they are not well or able to do a full day's work, but may ~e able to do some work, to assign them to positions which they can perform, and make it possible for a man more vigorous to be put on the Supreme Bench, if those Justices are willing and want to retire.

Now, just this concluding thought: We have a concrete example of what we may expect to happen. Mr. Justice Holmes, according to the statement of my colleague from Texas, for 20 years could have resigned on full pay; but he served his country without resigning, and there is no reason for any man in this House to say that a single man on the Supreme Court, if able to serve, wowd be unwililng to serve. Such men do not occupy that Court.

Now, what is the converse of the proposition? It is that a man on that Court who feels he is slowing up ought to have the privilege of being given lighter work. It is not for the judges. From the arguments we hear one would imagine this is all for the judges. I am ashamed of a man who would make that sort of a statement on the floor of this House. [Applause.] It is for the courts of the United States. It is for the Supreme Court of the United States, for the people of the United States that this legislation is proposed. Will any man stand on the floor of this House and say that he does not believe we ought to have men who are vigorous men­tally and physically that this country can follow? They talk about a pension. I say you are putting· a. pension on a man staying there when he should come off. This is not trying to buy anybody to leave by refusing to pass this bill You are trying to have somebody stay there who ought not be there. I am not speaking of the present Justices. I am dis­cussing this matter purely as a matter of public policy.

Mr. McFARLANE. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. SU!\WERS of Texas. I yield. Mr. McFARLANE. Would the gentleman intimate that

the men on the Supreme Court are taking the Government's money when they are not able to perform the work?

Mr. SUMMERS of Texas. No. Mr. McFARLANE. That is what the gentleman indicated. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I say there are many of us

fellows sitting here taking the Government's money that are not able to do the work, too. [Laughter and applause.] It cannot be measured on that score.

Mr. McFARLANE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. No. If it were measured on that

score, the gentleman and I would pack our grips and get back to Texas tonight.

Mr. McFARLANE. Maybe we should. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. You a.nd I both. _ Mr. MARTIN of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, will the gentle­

man yield? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yield. Mr. MARTIN of Colorado. We understand clearly, do

we, that all Federal judges below the Justices of the Supreme Court can now retire and enjoy their active salaries?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Just the same Mis proposed in the pending bill.

Mr. MARTIN of Colorado. The question I want to ask, based upon this assumption, is, What was the origin of this distinction between Justices of the Supreme Court and jus­tices of the inferior courts? There appears to be a dis­crimination against the Justices of the Supreme Court.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. It was a discrimination. Mr. MARTIN of Colorado. What caused it? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I am trying to tell the gentle­

man, because it was more difficult I imagin~l did not wlite that bill-but I imagine it was more difficult to arrange to give the Supreme Court Justices some work than it was difficult to find assignment for the other justices. Since

then it has been concluded, I imagine, that they could be given assignments to the circuits. -

Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question. Mr. MOT!'. Mr. Speaker, I would remind the gentleman

from Texas that he promised to yield to me 3 minutes. Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I looked for the gentleman, but

could not find him. The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Texas hlsist

upan his motion? Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I am going to yield

·3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon, because I prom­ised it to him.

Mr. MOTT. Mr. Speaker, first I want to say that I ad­mire the very frank way in which the gentleman from Texas has presented this bill; and I want to say, too, that from the angle from which the gentleman views this problem there is considerabie merit in his contention. In my opin­ion, however, there are objections to this bill which far out­weigh any of the merits claimed for it by the distinguished Chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

There are two serious questions that I think the House should consider when they vote upon' this bill. The first is the loss of jurisdiction by Congress of a proper, legitimate subject of legislation which will necessarily follow the pass­age of this bill. The second is the power and opportunity which the bill will afford the executive department of the Government for determining the political and economic complexion of the judicial branch of the Government. We all admit, no matter what side of the aisle we are on, that these two branches of our Government as well as the legis­lative branch, ought to be kept separate and that executive influence ought to be exerted on the other two branches as little as possible.

There is only one legitimate purpose to this bill and that, I think, will be admitted by everyone; it .is to secure the retirement pay of Justices of the United States Supreme Court by taking away the jurisdiction of the Congress to lower their pensions after they have retired from active service on the Bench. Retiring under the provisions of this bill amounts, for all practical purposes, to resigning. Upan the resignation of a Justice, under existing law, Congress may fix his retirement pay. Upon the retirement of a Justice under this bill, Congress would be precluded by the consti­tutional prohibition from either fixing or interfering with his retirement pay. Under this bill a retired Justice will draw his full salary of $20,000 for life, and no Congress in the future can pass any law decreasing it. That is the sole eistensible purpose of the bill.

Under ordinary circumstances, a Justice of the Supreme Court may not be inclined to resign when he knows that his retirement pay may be put in jeopardy by enactment of some future Congress, but that is not a sufficient reason for the Congress surrendering jurisdiction. This may be one reason why some Justices stay on the Bench after the time when, by reason of age, they ought to resign. But that is a matter with which Congress has nothing to do. Personally, I think that when a Supreme Court Justice has drawn a Sa.lary of $20,000 per year for 10 or 20 or 30 years, and the time comes he thinks he ought to retire, that he should do so without insisting that Congress give up its right to determine the amount of his retirement pay.

I believe Congress should retain its jurisdiction over the pensions, not only of the Justices of the Supreme Court but of every Federal officer. I think it was a mistake to pass this kind of a retirement pay law with respect to district judges and circuit judges.

Now, let me discuss just for a moment my second objection to this bill, and that is that under it the Chief Executive may be placed in a position to change the personnel of the Supreme Court under circumstances never intended by the Constitution.

We do not need to tax our imaginations to visualize a situation under which the Chief Executive might want to make a new appointment to the Supreme Bench, an appoint­ment which he could not make while the Bench was fulL The gentleman from Texas has already told you how

3060 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE unwilling Supreme Court Justices are to resign so long as Congress has the right to fix or change the amount of their pensions, and how willing they would be to retire under this bill when the proper time for retirement comes, because the bill guarantees full pay for life after retirement.

Now, please do not misunderstand me, for I am not im­pugning the motives of anybody. But I simply say, and I submit it for your thoughtful consideration, that under this bill, which offers every inducement for retirement when the proper age for retirement comes, retirements from the Supreme Bench will become the usual instead of the unusual thing with those eligible for retirement, and consequently the Chief Executive will be placed in a position to fill vacancies on the Supreme Bench at much more frequent intervals than the Constitution ever contemplated.

I am not referring to any present particular situation on the Supreme Bench. I am speaking broadly of the bill, and am simply pointing out this feature of it as showing its possibilities in the direction of enlarged Executive prerogatives.

Mr. ANDREWS of New York. Mr. Speaker, a parlia­mentary inquiry.

The SPEAKER. Does the gentleman from Texas yield for a parliamentary inquiry?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I yeld. Mr. ANDREWS of New York. If the previous question

were defeated, could an amendment be offered which would reduce the retirement salary to two-thirds of the active salary?

The SPEAKER. Any germane amendment would be in order if the previous question were voted down.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. If the Chair will permit, the gentleman may not be technically confused, but he would be practically confused, because if these judges are retired instead of being allowed to resign-I want to be very can­did with the House-they are still judges and under the Constitution they cannot be disturbed in their salary.

Mr. MOTT. If the gentleman will permit, the gentleman's amendment would be good as to any Justice appointed in the future, would it not?

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. No; not at all. I make just this statement to my friends and then shall

move the previous question. I have much respect for my good friend, but in the matter of the jurisdiction of Con­gress, everybody knows that Congress has no more jurisdic­tion over the salary of these Justices than it has over the territory of the moon.

Mr. MOTT. I was not talking about salary; I was talking about retirement pay in event they voluntarily desired to retire and accept a stipulated retirement pay.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. I know, but Congress has no jurisdiction over their salary; you cannot disturb them; you cannot make them get off the Bench.

Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question. The previous question was ordered. The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third

time and was read the third time. The SPEAKER. The question is on the passage of the

bill. Mr. BLANTON. Mr. Speaker, on the passage of the bill

I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken; and there were-yeas 144, nays

210, not voting 77, as follows:

Adair Barden Berlin Bland Bloom Boland Boylan Brennan Brown, Mich. Buck Bulwinkle Carmichael Cartwright

[Roll No. 23] YEAS--144

Cary Cell er Chandler Chapman Citron Clark,N.C. Cochran Colden Cole, Md. Collins Connery Cooper, Tenn. Corning

Cravens Cross, Tex. Crosser, Ohio Cullen Daly Dear Delaney Dempsey Dickstein Dingell Disney Dobbins Dockweiler

Dorsey Doughton Driscoll Du1fey, Ohio Du1fy, N. Y. Duncan Eagle Ellenbogen Evans Ferguson Fitzpatrick Frey Fuller

Gassaway Goldsborough Greenwood Greever Gregory Hancock, N. Y. Hancock, N. C. Harlan Hart Harter Healey Hennings Hess Hill , Ala. Hobbs Hollister Igoe Johnson, Tex. Kee Kennedy, Md. Kerr Kleberg Lambeth

Allen Amlie Andrew, Mass. Andrews, N. Y. Arends Ayers Bacon Binderup Blackney Blanton Boehne Boileau Bolton Brewster Brown, Ga. Brunner Buckbee Buckler, Minn. Burdick Burnham Caldwell Cannon, Mo. Cannon, Wis. Carlson Carpenter Carter Castellow Cavicchia Christianson Church Cole, N. Y. Costello Cox Crawford Crosby Crowe Crowther Culkin Darden Darrow Deen Dies Dietrich Dirksen Ditter Dondero Driver Dunn, Pa. Eaton Eckert Edmiston Eicher Ekwall

Andresen Arnold Ashbrook Bacharach Bankhead Beam Beiter Bell Biermann Brooks Buchanan Buckley, N. Y. Burch Carden Casey Claiborne Clark, Idaho Coffee Colmer Cooley

Lanham Lesinski Lewis, Colo. Lucas McAndrews McCormack McGrath McKeough McLaughlin McMillan McReynolds Martin, Colo. Mason Massingale May Meeks Merritt, N. Y. Michener Mitchell, m. Monaghan Montague Nelson Norton

O'Connell O'Connor O'Day O'Leary O'Neal Palmisano Perkins Peterson, Fla. Quinn Ramsay Ramspeck Rayburn Rogers, N. H. Russell Sanders, La. Schulte Scrugham Shanley Sirovlch Sisson Smith, Conn. Smith, W. Va. Somers, N. Y.

NAYS-210 Engel Kopplemann Englebrtght Kvale Faddis Lamneck Farley Lehlbach Fenerty Lemke Fiesinger Lewis, Md. Fish Lord Fletcher Luckey Focht Ludlow Ford, Calif, Lundeen Ford, Miss. McClellan Gavagan McFarlane Gearhart McGehee Gehrmann McLeod G11ford Maas Gildea Mahon Gingery Mapes Goodwin Marcantonio Granfield Martin, Mass. Gray, Ind. Maverick Gray, Pa. Merritt, Conn. Green Millard Griswold Mlller Guyer Mitchell, Tenn. Gwynne Moran Halleck Moritz Hamlin Mott Higgins, Conn. Murdock Higgins, Mass. Nichols Hildebrandt Oliver Hill, Knute Owen Hill, Samuel B. Parks Hoeppel Parsons Hoffman Patman Holmes Patterson Hook Patton Hope Pearson Huddleston Peterson, Ga. Hull Pettenglll Imhoff Pittenger Jacobsen Plumley Jenkins, Ohio Polk Johnson, Okla. Powers Keller Rabaut Kelly Randolph Kennedy, N. Y. Rankin Kenney Ransley Kimball Reece Kinzer Reed,lli. Kloeb Reed,N. Y. Kn11Hn Reilly Knutson Rich Kocialkowsk1 Richards

NOT VOTING-77 Cooper, Ohio Jones Cummings Kahn DeRouen Kramer Doutrich Lambertson Doxey Larrabee Drewry Lea, Calif. Dunn, Miss. Lee, Okla. Fernandez Lloyd Flannagan McGroarty

· Fulmer McLean Gambrill Mcswain Gasque Maloney Gilchrist Mansfield Gillette Marshall Greenway Mead Haines Montet Hartley O'Brien Houston O'Malley .Jenckes, Ind. Peyser Johnson, W. Va. Pfeifer

So the bill was rejected. The Clerk announced the following pairs:

Mr. Biermann (!or) with Mr. Doutrich (against)~

MARCH 6 Spence Stack Steagall Sullivan Sumners, Tex. Sweeney Terry Tolan Truax Umstead Underwood Utterback Vinson, Ga. Vinson, Ky. Walter Warren Weaver West Wilcox Williams Wilson, La. Zimmerman Zioncheck

Richardson Robertson Rogers, Mass. Rogers, Okla. Rudd Sadowski Sanders, Tex. Sandlin Sauthoff Scott Sears Secrest Seger Short Smith, Wash. Snell South Starnes Stefan Stewart Stubbs Sutphin Tarver Taylor, S. C. Taylor, Tenn. Thomas Thomason Thompson Thurston Tinkham Tobey Tonry Treadway Turner Turpin Wadsworth Wallgren Wearin Welch Whelchel White Whittington Wiggleswort_h Wilson, Pa. Withrow Wolcott Wolfenden Wolverton Wood Woodru1f Young

Pierce Robinson, Utah Robsion, Ky. Romjue Ryan Saba th Schaefer Schneider Schuetz Shannon Smith, Va. Snyder Taber Taylor, Colo. Thom Werner Woodrum

1935 _CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3061 General pairs~ Mr. Bankhead With Mr. Cooper of Ohio. Mr. Mead with Mr. McLean. Mr. Drewry With Mr. Gilchrist. Mr. Romjue With Mr. Robsion of Kentucky. Mr. Doxey with l4r. Taber. Mr. Mcswain With Mr. Andresen. Mr. Woodrum With Mr. Hartley. Mr. Taylor of Colorado With Mrs. Kahn. Mr. Lea of California With Mr. Marshall. Mr. Arnold with Mr. Lambertson. Mr. Buchanan with Mr. Schneider. Mr. Mansfield With Mr. Thom. Mr. DeRouen With Mrs. Greenway. Mr. Burch With Mr. Shannon. Mr. Beam with Mr. Werner. Mr. Montet With Mr. Houston. Mr. Sabath with Mr. Cooley. Mr. Smith of Virginia with Mr. Snyder. Mr. Johnson of West Virginia with Mr. O'Brien. Mr. Fulmer With Mr. Brooks. Mr. Gasque With Mr. Lloyd. Mr. Haines With Mr. Ashbrook. Mr. Jones With Mr. Coffee. Mr. Beiter with Mr. Clark of Idaho. Mr. Maloney With Mr. Pierce. Mr .Gambrill with Mr. Dunn of Mississippi. Mrs. Jenckes of Indiana lVith Mr. Gillette. Mr. Schaefer With Mr. Pfeifer. Mr. Fernandez with Mr. Schuetz. · Mr. Larrabee with Mr. Colmer. Mr. Kramer With Mr. O'Malley. Mr. Claiborne with Mr. Lee of Oklahoma. Mr. Carden With Mr. Buckley of New York. Mr. Robinson o! Utah with Mr. McGroarty. Mr. Cummings with Mr. Ryan.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. On motion by Mr. BLANTON, a motion to reconsider the

vote by which the bill was rejected was laid on the table. SENATE Bll..LS REFERRED

Bills of the Senate of the following titles were taken from the Speaker's table and, under the rule, referred as follows:

S. 147. An act to alter the amount apportioned to certain states for public employment offices affiliated with the United States Employment Service; to the Committee on Labor.

S. 209. An act for the relief of Carmine Sforza; to the Com­mittee on Claims.

S. 236. An act for the relief of the heirs of Burton Stearns Adams, deceased; to the Committee on Claims..

S. 243. An act for the relief of CUrtis Jett; to the Commit­tee on Military Aft' airs.

S. 279. An act to extend the time for the refunding of cer­tain taxes erroneously collected from certain building and loan associations; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 428. An act authorizing adjustment of the claim of Korber Realty, Inc.; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 535. An act for the relief of William Cornwell and others; to the Committee on Claims.

s. 537. An act for the relief of C. O. Meyer; to the Com­mittee on Claims.

S. 713. An act granting jurisdiction to the Court of Claims to hear the case of David A. Wright; to the Committee on War Claims.

S. 741. An act for the relief of the Union Shipping & Trad­ing Co., Ltd.; to the Committee on War Claims.

S. 857. An act to authorire the Department of Labor to continue to make special statistical studies upon payment of the cost thereof, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor. ·

S. 872. An act for the allowance of certain claims for extra labor above the legal day of 8 hours at the several navy yards and shore stations certified by the Court of Claims; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 937. An aet for the relief of the J. M. Dooley Fireproof Warehouse Corporation, of Brooklyn, N. Y.; to the Committee on Claims.

s. 998. An act to carry out the findings of the Court of Claims in the case of George Lawley & Son Corporation, of Boston, Mass.; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 1037. An aet authorizing adjustment of the claims of Sanford A. McAlister and Eliza L. McAlister; to the Commit­tee on Claims.

S. 1038. An act authorizing adjustment of the claim of Elda Geer; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 1056. An act authorizing adjustment of the claim o! Schutee & Koerting Co.; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 1180. An act to amend section 4865 of the Revised Statute8y as amended; to the Committee on Education.

S. 1266. An act for the relief of Robert E. Masters; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

S.1360. An act for the relief of Teresa de Prevost; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 1392. An act conferring upon the United States District Court for the Northern District of california, southern divi­sion, jurisdiction of the claim of Minnia C. de Back against the Alaska Railroad; to the Committee on Claims.

S. 1472. An act for the relief of the First Camden National Bank & Trust Co., of Camden, N. J.; to the Committee on Claims.

S. J. Res. 21. Joint resolution authorizing the President to proclaim October 11 of each year General Pulaski's Memorial Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; to the Committee on the Judi· ciary.

COMPACTS BETWEEN STATES

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I call up House Joint Resolution No. 146, to authorize the several States to negotiate compacts or agreements to promote greater uni­formity in the laws of such States affecting labor and industries.

The Clerk read the resolution as follows: Resolved, etc., That the consent of Congress ls hereby given to

the several States to negotiate and enter into compacts or agree­ments among them or any of them providing for greater uni­formity in the laws of the several States affecting the relation of employers and employees.

SEC. 2. Upon the request of the states negotiating under this act the President may designate a representative to attend upon such negotiations.

SEC. 3. No such compact or agreement shall be binding or oblig­atory upon any State a party thereto unless and until it has been approved by the legislatures of each of the States whose assent is contemplated by the terms of the compact or agreement and by the Congress.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, it was suggested f;o me a moment ago that probably the Judiciary Committee ought not to call up other bills at this time; however, I go on the theory that this House cannot be wrong all the time, so we ealled up another one.

I want to make only a very brief statement with regard to the character of this resolution. We have a provision in the Constitution which prohibits States from entering into contracts without the consent of Congress. This resolution is permissive only. When the Constitution was framed, there was concern evidently that the States might enter into com· pacts with each other and break up the Union. Therefore this provision was incorporated in the Constitution that no compact among the States would be- effective unless approved by the Congress.

Under the provisions of this bill. whatever is agreed to by the difi'erent States must be brought back to Congress for approval. The gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. HEALEY] made the report for our committee; therefore, I yield the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. HEALEY] such time as he may require.

Mr. HEALEY. Mr. Speaker, at the outset may I say that this measure was before the Seventy-third Congress and passed? It was too late in the session of the Congress, how­ever, for the Senate to consider it.

The object of this resolution is to permit the several States or any of them to enter into compacts with reference to labor laws or regulatory industrial laws governing the relationship of employer and employee. The Constitution provides that any compact entered into between States must have the consent of Congress. This particular resolution provides that the Congress give consent to the various States to enter into compacts or agreements providing for greater uniformity in the laws of the several States affecting the relation of eniployer and employee. There is not anything obligatory or compulsory about this resolution. It is merely a permissive proposition.

3062 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 Any compact drawn up between one or more States would

probably be drawn up for a term of years and would un­doubtedly provide a reservation permitting any one of the parties to the compact to withdraw under certain condi­iions; any compact entered into between the States would, after ratification by the legislatures of the States involved, require final approval of Congress thereafter.

Mr. Speaker, I understand this movement had its origin back sometime in 1931, when the now President of the United States was Governor of the State of New York, and several of the States, through their representatives or com­missioners, held a conference in the State of New York. After discussion on this matter, a movement was started to bring about a greater uniformity of laws governing the re­lationship of employer and employee. Later in 1933 a simi­lar conference was held in Massachusetts. This resolution is the result of a conference held by seven States, five New England States and New York and Pennsylvania. . Of course, in the highly industrialized States the labor laws and the industrial regulations are more severe than in the States which have only recently become industrialized. During the depression this situation has been accentuated. We have had a migration of factories from State to State, seeking the States that had the most lenient labor condi­tions. Obviously that puts the State with the more severe regulatory laws at a disadvantage. It will have a tendency to lower the standards in that State in its desire or necessity to try to compete with States that have lenient labor regu­lations. The result will be that the State having the lenient regulations will further lower its standards, and our whole economic situation will be affected thereby. ·

This legislation merely provides the opportunity for the States to get together to make agreements concerning labor laws, and then the resolution provides, if the States so desire, they may ask the President of the United States to assign a representative to meet with them while these agreements are being negotiated.

Mr. CULKIN. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. I yield to the gentleman from New York. Mr. CULKIN. Do these compacts or agreements between

the representatives of the different States have to go back to the legislatures of those States?

Mr. HEALEY. Yes. They will have to be ratified by the · 1egislatures of the various Stat~s affected.

Mr. CULKIN. In other words, ultimately the agreement between the representatives of those States will be written into the statute laws of the States affected?

Mr. HEALEY. That, in my opinion, will be the ultimate result, after the respective State legislatures ratify any such compact and Congress subsequently approves.

Mr. CULKIN. And this is simply a preliminary step look­ing to that end.

Mr. HEALEY. Of course, this is a preliminary step. If they enter into a compact, the legislatures of the various States will have to enact legislation which will take care of the situation, and then the whole matter is brought back to Congress for its approval.

Mr. BOILEAU. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. I yield. Mr. BOILEAU. I notice in reading the resolution it

states that the agreement must be approved by the State legislatures.

Mr. HEALEY. Yes; that is true. Mr. BOILEAU. It does not say anything about approval

by the Governors. Is it the gentleman's understanding that the language "approved by the legislatures" practically as­sumes the enactment of the law and approval by the Gover­nors of the States?

Mr. HEALEY. That would be determined by the provi­sions of the constitutions of the States involved. I think the Governors of the States affected would be authorized to delegate representatives to draw up these compacts, to sit in at these deliberations, and such representatives would bring back the compact, if they had agreed upon it, and the legis­lature would then act.

Mr. BOILEAU. And that compact must be approved by the legislatures?

Mr. HEALEY. Yes. Mr. BOILEAU. And does not the gentleman also antici­

pate it would have to be approved by the Governors? Mr. HEALEY. I asswne that would follow, depending on

the constitutions of the States involved. Mr. CULKIN. I have assumed that is the language, al­

though I have not had an opportunity to go into that phase of the matter.

Mr. HEALEY. The arrangement provides for approval by the legislatures- of the various States affected.

Mr. BOILEAU. Assuming that the legislature approved it and the Governor did not sign it--

Mr. HEALEY. The State constitution would control that situation.

Mr. MO'IT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. Yes. Mr. MOTT. Is it propased under this bill'for certain per­

sons to be delegated by the Governor to actually make a compact or a contract which, upon ratification by the legis­latures, will be binding?

Mr. HEALEY. No. It would not be binding until after ratification by the legislatures of the States affected and after the consent of Congress.

Mr. MO'IT. Let me carry that a little further. Suppose the commission delegated by the Governors of two States actually made a compact on ai certain subject and it was approved by the legislatures, would that in itself have the effect of law?

Mr. HEALEY. Not until final action by Congress. Mr. MO'IT. I mean, under .this bill. Mr. HEALEY. Under this bill, it will be necessary for the

ratification by the various legislatures affected of the agree­ment and then it would necessitate the consent of Congress.

Mr. MO'IT. Under this bill? Mr. HEALEY. Under this bill. Mr. MO'IT. This bill, I understood, gives permission in

advance. Mr. HEALEY. It gives permission to enter into nego­

tiations and when the negotiations are completed and a compact is agreed upon, it will require the final consent of Congress.

Mr. MO'IT. Is there any laiw or series of laws on a par­ticular subject that the legislatures of two States can enact without authority of this bill or without violating the pro­visions of the Constitution? In other words, would it not be possible to do the same thing at present without this law?

Mr. HEALEY. No compact or agreement can be entered into between the various States without the approval of Congress, under the Constitution. , Mr. MO'IT. I understand that, but why is a compact or

contract necessari? Mr. HEALEY. In order to be a binding agreement. Mr. MICHENER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. Yes. Mr. MICHENER. Fundamentally, under the Constitution,

no State can enter into an agreement with one or more States without the consent of Congress.

Mr. MO'IT. I understand that. I may say to the gentle­man that we are doing that in the States of Oregon and Washington in regard to legislation on fisheries without any violation of the Constitution and without any trouble what­ever.

Mr. HEALEY. You have an understanding in that case. Mr. MOTT. After the legislatures meet, they simply send

conferees from one State or the other and they decide upon what fisheries legislation ought to be put into effect on the rivers separating the States.

Mr. MICHENER. That is a gentleman's agreement. Mr. HEALEY. You have an understanding, but not a

binding agreement. Mr. MOTT. It is not a binding agreement, a.Ild we do not

need it. We just go ahead and pass the legislation we want to, and the other State does the same thing.

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3063 Mr. MICHENER. In -this case -there will . be something

binding. Mr. WOOD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentl~man yield? Mr. HEALEY. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri. Mr. WOOD. This is a very unique legislative ' proposal.

I should like to ask the gentleman, in case a group of States had entered into a compact and then the Congress had to approve the compact, say, on child-labor legislation or re­stricting the hours of labor of women, and the Congress would approve the compact entered into by and between a number of States, then in accordance with this proposed legislation, if passed, would any State have the right, after Congress had approved this compact, or would any of the States that are parties to the compact, have the authority in succeeding sessions of the legislature to enact legislation that was not in conformity with the compact?

Suppose it was the 8-hour day for women in 7 or 8 States, then would any State which had a part in that com­pact have the right at the next session of the legislature to enact legislation that would either increase · or decrease the restriction?

Mr. HEALEY. If States entered into a compact that would be binding on them, then, in my opinion, no future legislature could enact laws which would in effect destroy the compact. .

Mr. WOOD. I am not an attorney, but I seriously question the constitutionality of it, because it interferes With State rights. I think it is a very dangerous piece of legislation.

Mr. McCORMACK. Will the gentleman yield? I am the author of this bill, and I want to say that there seems to be a complete misunderstanding. The gentleman is no more a friend of labor than I am, and I do not want him to go off half-cocked.

Mr. WOOD. I am not going off half-cocked. I simply wanted. to know who is the sponsor of the bill, and I want to know what the effect of the bill would be.

Mr. DONDERO. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. I yield to the gentleman. Mr. DONDERO. Is there anything in the bill that would

permit a State to withdraw from the compact? Mr. HEALEY. That would be according to the agreement

entered into. If the agreement provided for a length of time for the compact to be enforced, it probably would pro­vide a method of withdrawal.

Mr. MICHENER. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. I yield. Mr. MICHENER. There is nothing in this except that if

these States want to enter into an agreement they submit the request to Congress that they may be permitted to get together and work out the agreement, and after they work it out they bring it back to Congress and Congress determines whether or not it wants to give its consent to the compact.

Mr. HEALEY. That is true. Mr. LEHLBACH. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. I yield. Mr. LEHLBACH. The gentleman has stated that if the

legislation passed by the States is in derogation of the com­pact that it would be invalid.

Mr. HEALEY. I did not intend such a flat statement, but it is my opinion that subsequent legislation would not have the effect of vitiating the agreement.

Mr. LEHLBACH. If the legislature of a State that was a party to the compact passes legislation contravening the terms of the compact, how could the terms be enforced?

Mr. HEALEY. That will be a question for the courts to determine.

Mr. BOILEAU. It seems to me that if the agreement becomes binding we will be setting up an organic law which is more organic than the Constitution as method of amendment.

Mr. HEALEY. I think the gentleman should understand that these agreements may provide methods of amendment and also for withdrawal. I am satisfied that the agreements will not be entered into unless they provide some measure to take care of the matter the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. BOILEAU] has in mind.

Mr·. PERKINS. Is it ·not true that thts resolution does not really confer any power upon the States that they have not at the present time?

Mr. HEALEY. That is true. Mr. PERKINS. And is it not also true that the purpose

of this is really expressed in section 2, that the President may designate a representative of the Federal Government to cooperate in the making of their compact?

Mr. HEALEY. That is true. Mr. PERKINS. In answer to the gentleman from Wis~

consin [Mr. Bon.EAU], if two States now enter into a treaty, unless it is provided in the ti·eaty that they can withdraw therefrom, they are bound., so this confers no other power. The States have now the power to enter into treaties with each other, and those treaties are not binding until approved by the Congress. ·

Mr. HEALEY. That is true. Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield? Mr. HEALEY. Yes. Mr. DINGELL. Why is the bill limited specifically to

labor compacts? Mr. HEALEY. Of course other matters may be later

dealt with by proper legislation. There have been many cases where States have entered into compacts concerning boundary lines and other matters. This, I believe, is the first time that legislation has been introduced affecting labor questions.

Mr. LEHLBACH. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order. The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state it. Mr. LEHLBACH. It is evident that this is a matter that

is not very well understood by the Members present. · I make the point of order that there is no quorum present. I think the Members of the House ought to be present.

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman from New Jersey withhold his point of order?

Mr. LEHLBACH. The gentleman from New York moves that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. McCORMACK. There is some question I think can be explained very easily. I hope the gentleman will not press his point of order. I certainly would not do it with reference to him.

Mr. LEHLBACH. In view of my consideration and esteem for the gentleman from Massachusetts, :Mr. Speaker, I with­draw the point of order.

Mr. HEALEY. I am going to yield to the author of the bill now.

Mr. DINGELL. Has the committee taken into considera,­tion the possibility of authorizing compacts pertaining to certain features of social legislation where it might be of advantage between States to enter into a compact?

l\1r. HEALEY. The committee considered only the mat­ters that are contained in this bill.

Mr. DINGELL. Does the gentleman realize that we are going to have all of these pensions and unemployment insurance?

Mr. DUFFEY of Ohio. The several States of the Union now have the right to enter into compacts, which must be submitted to the Congress, under our Federal Constitution.

Mr. DINGELL. Why in this instance provide for this special thing?

Mr. HEALEY. This is a simple proposition. We are encouraging negotiations of compacts by the valious States to the end that the standard of living may be generally advanced.

Mr. DINGELL. I have no objection to it, but I wondered about the underlying cause or reason for it.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Massa­chusetts has expi!'ed.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McCoRMACKJ.

Mr. McCORMACK. M."r. Speaker, I want to address my­self to my friend from Missouri [Mr. Woon]. It is to con­vey to the gentleman what the resolution contains. Sev­eral States now have the right to enter into negotiations

3064 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 and compacts. This is nothing new. This bill does not and cannot change existing constitutional law. The procedure is for the legislatures of two or more States to pass special acts authorizing commissioners to be appointed to enter into negotiations with each other on a particular question. In the past the usual subject has been a matter of bc(mdary line or such as the Port Authority of New York City,' where New Jersey and New York have entered into a compact respecting New York Harbor. New York Harbor is in two States, and they had to do that, in order that the use of the harbor might be consistent with the best interests of the two States, and the cities bordering thereon. In the past these compacts have been confined to such limited ques­tions. Back a few years ago five of the six New England States, New York, and Pennsylvania entered into negotiations respecting a pact relating to some of the problems pertaining to employer and employee, to try to bring about uniform laws in those States with reference to the subject considered and with reference to which there was community of interest. That right exists now under the Constitution. However, when negotiations are concluded this compact must go back to the legislatures of the several States, to have it ratified, and having been ratified, then the States have to come to Congress and Congress has to in turn ratify · the compact. This resolution does not change the law at all. The only thing it does is to enable such States on matters relating to employer and employee to ask the Federal Government to send a representative to sit in on the negotiations. That is what this resolution means. It means nothing moTe. It means nothing less. ·

Mr. WOOD. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield. Mr. WOOD. The gentleman says this does not change

the present law whatsoever. Mr. McCORMACK. The present constitutional law. Mr. WOOD. Then why the introduction of this bill? I

will have to disagree with the gentleman. It has just been explained if a gi·oup of States should enter into a compact it would have to be ratified by Congress, and that after Con­gress had 'ratified this compact, no State would have au­thority, in a subsequent session of the general assembly, to propose legislation that was not in accord with this pact.

Mr. McCORMACK. This is what happens: Each State, of course, in its compact reserves to itself certain rights. It makes reservations. This is nothing new.

Mr. WOOD. Is not the gentleman willing to trust this to the States? Is it necessary to have Congre~s ratify these pacts and tie the hands of the States so that they cam1ot, after entering into the pact, suggests legislation not in con­formity with the pact?

Mr. McCORMACK. We do not change the existing law now. The present Constitution requires that. There is no change in this resolution.

Mr. WOOD. Then why the introduction of this bill? Mr. McCORMACK. The introduction of this bill is to

inspire. Mr. WOOD. Oh, that is it? Mr. McCORMACK. Yes. The introduction of this bill is

to enable States entering into negotiations on matters relat­ing to employer and employee, to ask the Federal Govern­ment simply to send a representative there to confer, so that they may sit in on the negotiations. What is wrong with that? This compact has to go to Congress sooner or later. It is proper to have representatives of the Federal Government sit in if the States request it.

Mr. CHURCH. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield. Mr. CHURCH. The gentleman says it must come back to

Congress. Where are the words in this bill which require that?

Mr. McCORMACK. To begin with, the Constitution re­quires it. Section 3 of this bill provides:

No such compact or agreement shall be binding or obligatory upon any State a party thereto unless and until it has been

approved by the legislatures of each of the States whose assent is contemplated by the terms of the compact or agreement and by the Congress.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Massa­chusetts [Mr. McCORMACK] has expired.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gen­tleman from Massachusetts 2 additional minutes.

Mr. WOOD. I should like to ask the gentleman a ques-tion.

Mr. MARCANTONIO. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield. Mr. MARCANTONIO. Is section 3 part of the law now? Mr. McCORMACK. It is a part of the constitutional

law, yes. If several States, through their legislatures, authorize commissioners on a particular subject, when they meet they can simply say to the Department of Labor, " We should like to have you send a representative here."

Now, my friend spoke about social legislation. This is related to employer and employee. Several industrial States might have many things in common with one another. It is a great legislative field whereby in the future State rights can be preserved against encroachment by the Federal Gov­ernment. They may negotiate a compact to an-ive at uni­form agreement as to what the law of each State shall be with relation to a particular subject with proper reserva­tions.

Mr. WOODRUFF. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. McCORMACK. I yield. Mr. WOODRUFF; Does this bill provide that a Federal

representative will not be sent to the States unless asked for by the States?

Mr. McCORMACK. Exactly. Mr. WOODRUFF. Then, the bill ought to become a law. Mr. McCORMACK. Exactly. That is the only thing in

this bill. The only purpose is to permit it. It does not change the existing law one iota. This does not stop the several States from having negotiations and entering into a compact on a social matter. It does not stop agricultural States from considering agricultural problems. As far as this bill is concerned, it permits, upon request, a Federal representative to attend.

The SPEAKER. The time of the gentleman from Massa­chusetts [Mr. McCORMACK] has again expired.

Mr. SUMNERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I move the previous question on the passage of the joint resolution.

The question was taken; and on a division (demanded by Mr. Woon) there were-ayes 36, noes 53.

Mr. LEHLBACH. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that it is obvious from the vote on the previous question that Members desire further discussion, I make the point of order of no quorum.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. O'CONNOR. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly <at 4 o'clock and 50 minutes p. m.) , the House, pursuant to its order heretofore entered, adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, March 7, 1935, at 11 o'clock a. m..

COMMITI'EE HEARINGS COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

The Subcommittee on Judiciary of the Committee on the District of Colwnbia meets Thursday, March 7, at 10: 30 a. m., room 345, old House Office Building, to consider bills CH. R. 5809 and H. R. 5850) providing for amendment of the liquor law.

COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION

Continue hearings Thursday, March 7, 10 a. m., room 445, old House Office Building, on bills providing for restriction of habitual commuting of aliens from foreign contiguous territory.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. Under clause 2 of rule X..."TIV, executive communications

were taken from the Speaker's .table and referred as follows:

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3065 251. A communication from the President of the United

States, transmitting schedules of claims amounting to $381,945.63, allowed by the General Accounting Office, as covered by certificates of settlement, the numbers of which are shown in the first columns of such schedules, under appropriations the balance of which have been carried to the surplus fund under the provisions of section 5 of the act of June 20, 1874 m. S. C., title 31, sec. 713), and for the services of the several departments and independent offices <H. Doc. No. 122) ; to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

252. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting a list of judgments rendered by the Court of Claims and which require an appropriation for their payment, amounting to $165,803.06 <H. Doc. No. 123); to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

253. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting three supplemental estimates of appro­priations for the Post Office Department to provide addi­"tional funds for clerks and carriers at first- and seeond­class post offices and for stationery, etc., for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1935, aggregating $3,049,000 <H. Doc. No. 131); to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

254. A communication from the President of the United states, transmitting records of judgments rendered against the Government by the United States district courts, which require an appropriation for their payment of $181,150.74 <H. Doc~ No. 124); to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

255. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting a deficiency estimate of appropriation submitted by the War Department to pay a claim of the Colt's Patent Fire Arms Manufacturing Co. certified by the Comptroller General of the United states in the sum of $7,082.54 <H. Doc. No. 130); to the Committee on Appropria­tions, and ordered to be printed.

256. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting schedules of claims allowed by the General Accounting Office pursuant to certain private acts of the Seventy-thh·d Congress, amounting to $1,784.92 <H. Doc. No. 125); to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed. ·

257. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting a supplemental estimate of appropria­tion for the payment of claims allowed and certified by the General Accounting Office for interest on amounts with­held from claimants by the Comptroller General of the United States in the sum of $4.,015.62 <H. Doc. No. 126) ; to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

258. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting estimates of appropriations submitted by the several executive departments and independent of­fices to pay claimS for damages to privately owned prop­erty, in the sum of $43,695.67, which have been considered and adjusted under the provisions of the act of December 28, 1922 (H. Doc. No. 127); to the Committee on Appropria­tions, and ordered to be printed.

259. A communication from the President of the -qnited states, transmitting schedules of claims allowed by the General Accounting Office, as shown by certificates of set­tlement forwarded to the Treasury Department for payment, covering judgments rendered by the United States district courts against collectors of customs, amounting to $29,601.23 <H. Doc. No. 128); to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be printed.

260. A communication from the President of the United States, transmitting an estimate of appropriations sub­mitted by the Navy Department to p9,y claims for damages by collisions with naval vessels in the sums of $3,777.02 <H. Doc. No. 129) ; to the Committee on Appropriations, and ordered to be prtnted.

REPORTS OF COMMI'ITEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII, Mr. BLOOM: Committee on Foreign Affairs. H. R. 4901.

A bill to authorize approp1iations to pay the annual share of the United States as an adhering member of the Interna­tional Council of Scientific Unions and associated unions; without amendment <Rept. No. 307). Referred to the Com­mittee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. DRIVER: Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds. H. R. 6290. A bill to authorize acquisition of land to provide appropriate means of access to the post-office building at Jonesboro, Ark.; without amendment <Rept. No. 308) . Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. HILDEBRANDT: Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads. H. R. 5540. A bill excepting the imposition of demurrage charged on collect-on-delivery parcels exchanged between the continental and iaand possessions; with amend­ment CRept. No. 310). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union.

Mr. KELLER: Committee on the Library. H. R. 6371. A bill to authorize an increase in the annual appropriation for books for the adult blind; without amendment (Rept. No. 311). Referred to the Committee or the Whole House on the state of the Union.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII, Mr. ::ijEITER: Committee on Wai· Claims~ H. R. 2706.

A bill to con:f er jurisdiction upon the Court of Claims to hear, determine, and render judgment upon the.claim of the Velie Motors Corporation; without amendment (Rept. No. 305) . Referred to the Committe of the Whole House.

Mr. BEITER: Committee on War Claims. H. R. 3101. A bill to confer jurisdiction on the Court of Claims to hear and determine the claim of A. C. Messler C-0.; without amend­ment (Rept. No. 306). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. HARTER: Committee on Military Affairs. H. R. 1963. A bill for the relief of Edgar H. Taber; without amend­ment (Rept. No. 309). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House.

Mr. SWEENEY: Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads. H. R. 4036. A bill for the relief of Ralph C. n·win; without amendment (Rept. No. 312). Referred to the Com­mittee of the Whole House.

CHANGE OF REFERENCE Under clause 2 of rule XXII, committees were discharged

from the consideration of the fallowing bills, which were referred as follows:

A bill <H. R. 6260) for the relief of Theodore John Camp­bell; Committee on Military Affairs discharged, and referred to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

A bill (H. R. 5633) for the relief of Sarah Abbott; Commit­tee on Pensions discharged, and referred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 3 of rule XXIL public bills and resolutions

were introduced and severally referred as follows: By Mr. CONNERY: A bill <H. R. 6450) to accord labor

proper opportunity for protection of rights granted by the Congress, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Labor.

By Mr. HARLAN (by request): A bill <H. R. 6451) provid­ing for the taxation of receipts of street railroad companies, gas companies, electric and telephone companies in the Dis­trict of Columbia, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

3066 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 By Mr. HOBBS: A bill (H. R. 6452) makjng it unlawful to

use the mails to solicit or effect ~urance or collect and transmit insurance premiums in any State without comply­ing with the insurance laws thereof; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

By Mr. WEST: A bill <H. R. 6453) to amend the act of May 13, 1924, entitled "An act providing for a study regarding the equitable use of the waters of the Rio Grande'', as amended by the public resolution of March 3, 1927; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. _

By Mr. COCHRAN: A bill <H. R. 6454) to provide for the payment of veterans' adjusted-service certificates in bonds of the United States; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By M~. FERGUSON: A bill <H. R. 6455)_ to provide for the control of flood waters in the United States by creating a permanent Soil Erosion Service; to the Committee on Flood Control. _ ·

By Mr. FORD of California: A bill CH. R. 6456) authoriz­ing the Reconstruction Finance Corporation to make direct loans for emergency relief of mortgage indebtedness on residential property, and for other purposes; to the Com­mitt~e on Banking and Currency.

By Mr. GOODWIN: A bill <H. R. 6457) to authorize the coinage of 50-cent pieces in commemoration of the one hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the founding of the city of Hudson, N. Y.; lo the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures.

By Mr. HILDEBRANDT: A bill CH. R. 6458) to equalize employment conditions of substitute postal employees, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

By Mr. MEAD: A bill <H. R. 6459) to regulate the pro­cedure for the award of contracts by the Post Office Depart­ment; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

By Mr. MERRITT of New York: A bill CH. R. 6460) ·pro­viding for commercial and industrial loans to small indus­h'ies by the Reconstruction Finance Corporation; to the Committee on Banking and Currency. - By Mr. MORITZ: A bill <H. R. 6461) to increase the sal­aries of chief clerks and clerks, employees of the railroad companies; to the Comreittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. ·

By Mr. RANDOLPH (by request): A bill <H. R. 6462) to improve the Government service, and for 'other purp0ses; to the Committee on the Civil Service.

By Mt. WADSWORTH: A bill <H. R:- 6463) to make· fur­ther provision concerning the m"ethod of amending the Con­stitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary,

By Mr. WELCH: A bill <H. R. 6464) to provide means by which certa,in Filipinos can emigrate from the United States; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

By Mr. DEROUEN: A bill (H. R. 6465) to accept the ces­sion by the State of Arkansas of jurisdiction over ·all fands now or hereafter included within the Hot Sprlngs National Park, Ark., and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Public Lands.' · -·

Also, a bill (H. R. 6466) to modify the homestead laws and to repeal certain provisions thereof; to the co'mmittee on the Public Lands. · · - - ·

By Mr. DOBBINS: A bill CH. R. 6467) to classify certaui positions in the Railway Mail Service, and for other pur­poses; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

By Mr. ROGERS of Oklahoma Cby depa.rtniental request) : A bill CH. R. 6468) to promote the development of Indian arts and crafts and to create' a board ·to assist therein, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Indian Affairs.

By Mr. GASQUE: A bill <H. R. 6469) granting- uniform pensions to widows •. children, and dependent parents oI _per­sons who served the United sfates in time of peace or war, and for other purposes; to the Committ~e on ~e~ions. - By Mrs. NORTON (by request): A bill (H. R. 6470) to provide for the construction of an office building-for · the recorder of deeds of the District of Columbia; to the 'Com­mittee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

Also (by request), a bill CH. R. 6471) to amend an act of Congress entitled "An act to establish a Code of Law for the District of Columbia'', approved March 3, 1901, as amended, by adding three new sections to be numbered 802 (a), 802 (b)., and 802 (c), respectively; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

By Mr. PETI'ENGILL: A bill CH. R. 6472) to prohibit and to prevent the trade practices known as" compulsory block­booking " and " blind selling " in the leasing of motion­picture films in interstate and foreign commerce; to the Com­mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. SANDERS of_ Louisiana: A bill CH. R. 6473) to provide for the construction of a post-office building in Covington, La.; to the conimittee on Public Builrungs and Grounds.

Also, a bill CH. R. 6474) to provide for the construction of a .post-office building in Donald.Sanville, La.; to the Com­mittee on Public Buildings and Grounds.

By Mr. FULMER: A bill <H. R. 6475) to provide for the establishment of subsistence homeste8.ds for persons with low income, and for other purposes; to the Committee on .Agri-cuttur~ · ·

By Mr. PARSONS: A bill (H. R. 6476) to amend the act of May 18, 1934, providing punishment for killing or assault­ing Federal officers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. COLDEN: Resolution CH. Res. 151) to authorize and empower the Secretary of the NavY to appoint a -com­mission to investigate the necessity of a naval establishment in the Los Angeles, _Long Beach, and San Diego areas of California; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. CULKIN: Resolution (H. Res. 152) directing the Administrator of the Public Works Administration to fur­nish certain information to the House of Representatives; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. LEMKE: Resolution CH. Res. 153) to make H. R. 4298, a bill to amend title I of an act entitled "Agricultural Adjustment Act" (Public, No. 10, 73d Cong.), and to pro­vide additional relief by securing to the farmers a minimum price for agricultural commodities of not less than the cost of production thereof, and for other purposes, a special order of business; to the Committee on Rules.

By Mr. ROGERS of Oklahoma: Resolution <H. Res. 154) for the appointment of a select committee of the House to investigate special Indian problems; to the Committee on Rules. _

By Mr. KELLER: Joint resolution CH. J. Res. 195) to pro­vide for the reappointment of Frederic A. Delano as a mem­ber of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution; to the Committee on the Library.

By · Mr. DUNN of Pennsylvania: Joint Resolution CH. J. Res. 196) proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States providing for proposing and ratifying amendments_ to the Constitution of the United States by the direct voice of the people; · to the Committee on the· Judiciary.

By Mr. DIMOND: Joint resolution CH. J. Res. 197) au­thorizing a preliminary examination or survey of Skagway Harbor, Alaska; to the Committee on Rivers and Harbors.

By Mr. BACON: Joint resolution (H. J. Res. 198) accept-· ing the invitation of the Government of France to the United States to participate in the International Exposition of Paris-Applied Arts and Technique in Modern Life, to be held in Paris, France, in 1937 ;- to the Committee on Foreign A:ff airs. · ·

MEUORIAL Under clause 3 of rule XXII, a memorial was presented

and referred as follows: · · _ By the SPEAKER: Me_morial of the Legislature of the'

State of Oklahoma, memorializing Congress to amend the Bankhead Cotton Control Act; to the Committee on Agri-· culture.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private bills and resolutions

were introduced and severally referred as follows:

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3067; By Mr. ASHBROOK: A bill <H. R. 6477) -for · the relief of

Tracey O'Brien Potter; to the Committee on Naval Affairs. By Mr. BEAM: A bill CH. R. 6478) for the relief of James

W. Blair; to the Committee oii Claims. · By Mr. CANNON of Wisconsin: A bill <H. R. . 6479) for

the relief of Paul Brinza, father of the late Anton Brinza; to the Committee on Claims. ·

Also, a bill <H. R. 6480) for the relief of Vincent Brenner; to the Committee on Claims.

Also, a bill CH. R. 6481) for the relief of Andrew Brenner; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. CHURCH: A bill CH. R. 6482) granting the Dis­tinguished Service Medal to Albert W. J. Johnsen; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. HILDEBRANDT: A bill <H. R. 6483) for the relief of George C. Widlon; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. HOOK: A bill (H. R. 6484) to provide for a basic data survey of the natural resources of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan; to the Committee on Mines and Mining.

By Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia: · A bill CH. R. 6485) granting a pension to Clara L. Dolman; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. KNIFFIN: A bill CH. R. 6486) granting an increase of pension to Sarah Marks; to the Committee on Invalid Pensions.

By Mr. SUTPHIN: A bill (H. R. 6487) for the relief of the High Clothing Co., Inc.; to the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. LESINSKI: A bill <H. R. 6488) for the relief of Wayne M. Cotner; to .the Committee on Claims.

By Mr. McSWAIN: A bill <H. R. 6489) for the relief of J. A. Cobb; to the Committee on War Claims.

Also, a bill CH. R. 6490) for the relief of William Marion Wilcox; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

Also, a bill (H. R. 6491) for the relief of Frank Roland; to the Committee on Naval Affairs.

By Mr. PATrERSON: A bill <H. R. 6492) for the relief of S. K. Plum; to the Committee on Claims.

Also, a bill CH. R. 6493) granting a pension to Mary J. Whistler; to the Committee on Pensions.

By Mr. PIERCE: A bill (H. R. 6494) for the relief of cer­tain counties in the State of Oregon; to the Committee. on Claims.

By Mr. RANDOLPH: A bill <H. R. 6495) for the relief of Frederick Strahin; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. SOUTH: A bill (H. R. 6496) authorizing the Sec­r~tary of War to award a posthumous Distinguished Service Cross to John H. Stafford; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

By Mr. WEAVER: A bill <H. R. 6497) granting a pension to Mrs. William B. Raper, widow of William B. Raper; to the Committee on Pensions. · Also, a bill <H. R. 6498) authorizing the United States

Employees' Compensation Commission to consider the claim of O. G. Anderson; to the Committee on Claims.

PETITIONS, ETC. Under clause 1 of rule XXII, petitions and papers were

laid on the Clerk's desk and referred as follows: 2728. By Mr. ROGERS of Oklahoma: Petition of R. M.

Savage and numerous other citizens of Piedmont, Ala., favor­ing House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RocERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2729. Also, petition of Jack Rudulph and numerous other citizens of Benton, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2730. Also, petition of J. C. Smith and numerous other citizens of Troy, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress~ man WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2731 Also, petition of G. W. Faitlk and numerous other citizens of Tennille, Troy, and Banks, Ala., favorillg House

" . - . - -·

LXXIX-194

blll 2856, by ·congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. - 2732. Also, petition of 0. E. Grover and numerous other

citizens of Glenwood, Andalusia, and Opp, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. · 2733. Also, petition of Flemming Tibbs and numerous

other citizens of Madison, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2734. Also, petition of Rev. J.E. Davis and numerous other citizens of Carbon Hill and Glen Allen, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RocERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2735. Also, petition of J. A. Stricklin and numerous other citizens of Carbon Hill, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2736. Also, petition of G. W. Benson and numerous other citizens of Jasper, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2737. Also, petition of John McClesky and numerous other citizens of Jasper, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. . 2738. Also, petition of R. H. Lovelace and numerous other

citizens of Florence, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensio.ns of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2739. Also, petition of Web Richardson and numerous other citizens of Russellville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit­tee on Ways and Means.

2740. Also, petition of Lee J. Luker and numerous other citizens of Decatur, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2741. Also, petition of J. M. Vest and numerous other citizens of H~rtselle, Ala., fav01ing House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. · 2742. ·Also, petition of Albert Richardson and numerous

other citizens of Rehoboth, Alberta, and Gastonburg, Ala .• favoring House bill 2850, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a. month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2743. Also, petition of Robert Smith and numerous other citizens of Nashville, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

· 2744. Also, petition of F. H. Helm and numerous other citizens of Gates, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal olc,i ':" age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and M;eans. .

2745. Also, petition of Mack Weatherall and numerous other citizens of New Albany and Etta, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS_, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

· 2746. Also, petition of Alfred J. Henry and numerous other citizens of Pascagoula, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by

3068 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 Congressman Wn.L RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. · 2747. Also, petition of H. Nicholas and numerous other

citizens of Harperville, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2748. Also, petition of Lim Cherry and numerous other citizens of McClain, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age peMions of $3.0 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2749. Also, petition of G. W. Lloyd and numerous other citizens of Picayune, Miss., favoring House bill 2850, by Con­gressman WILL RocERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means-.

2750. Also, petition of Charles Grigge and numerous other citizens of Itta Bena, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $3-0 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2751. Also, petition of Mitchel Stafford and numerous other citizens of Clarksdale and Duncan, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2752. Also, petition of Josh Payton and numerous other citizens of Carrollton, Colla, and Greenwood, Miss., favoring House bill 2&56, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

27-53. Also, petition of J. C. Jones and numerous other citi­zens of Grenada and Duck Hill, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2754. Also, petition of F. R. Taylor and numerous other citizens of Oakdale, Hattiesburg, and Hawthorne, Miss., fa­voring House bill 2.856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2755. Alswpetition of H. C. McKenzie and numerous other citizens of Barnett, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. · 2756. Also, petition of L. D. McNiece and numerous other

citizens of Tremont and Smithville, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2757. Also, petition of Willis Howell and numerous other citizens of Utica. Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $SO' to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2758. Also, petition of G. W. Davis and numerous other citizens of New Albany, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wm:. ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2759. Also, petition of John Bryat and numerous other citizens of Greenwood, Miss., favoring House bill 2858, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $3'0 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2760. Also, petition of Mellatha Hooker and numerous other citizens.of Lexington, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for dh·ect Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2761. Also, petition of Dennis B~t.Skin and numerous other citizens of Buena Vista and Houston, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL HoaERS, the Pope plan for

direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Wacys and Means.

2762. Also, petition of Taris Stockton and numerous other citizens of Bland, Loves Prairie, and Belle, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2763. Also, petition of John Transue and numerous other citizens of Orrick, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2764. Also, petition of Lawrence Ringland and numerous other citizens of'Laclede and Brookfield, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pension of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2765. Also, petition of Harry Daniel and numerous other citizens of Scott and Grady, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit· tee on Ways and Means.

2766. Also, petition of Miles Vance and numerous other -citizens of Parkdale, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2767. Also, petition of G. B. Clardy and numerous other citizens of Millport and Ethelsville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2768. Also, petition of M. L. Sales and numerous other cit­izens of Andalusia and Gantt, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit­tee on Ways and Means.

2769. Also, petition of J. E. Barnes and numerous other citizens of Pigeon Creek, Camden, and Monroeville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2770. Also, petition of J. W. Myrick and numerous other citizens of Deatsville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; ta the Committee on Ways and Means.

2771. Also, petition of J. J. Henderson and numerous other citizens of Speigener, Mount Creek, and Montgomery, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2772. Also, petition of Earl Kuykendall and numerous other citizens of Alpharetta and Woodstock, Ga., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direqt Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2773. Also, petition of H. A. Reddoch and numerous other citizens of Troy, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress­man WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2774. Also, petition of Thomas Mitchel, and numerous other citizens of Brantley, Ala., favoring House bill 2'856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit­tee on Ways and Means.

~'775. Also, petition of W. H. Hutchcraft and numerous other citizens of Flomaton and Pollard, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2776. Also, petition of T. J. Brown and numerous other citizens of Peterson, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3069 old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2777. Also, petition of Charles Troddy and numerous other citizens of Timpson and Tenaha, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2778. Also, petition of John Legate and numerous other citizens of Cerro Gordo, N. C., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2779. Also, petition of D. A. Ivey and numerous other citizens of Fairfield and Chandler, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2780. Also, petition of Emmitt Russell and numerous other citizens of Eustace, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2781. Also, petition of J. M. Denison and numerous other citizens of McKinney, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2782. Also, petition of Emmitt Gray and numerous other citizens of Telephone, Honey Grove, and Windom, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2783. Also, petition of C. Halliburton and numerous other citizens of Dilworth and Moulton, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL- ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2784. Also, petition of Roger Reid and numerous other citizens of Wortham, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2785. Also, petition of C. E. Casey and numerous other citizens of Tom Ball and Shepherd, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2786. Also, petition of J. H. Moore and numerous other citizens of Warren, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2787. Also, petition of Paul Boldware and numerous other citizens of Karnack, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2788. Also, petition of W. D. Murphy and numerous other citizens of Kirbyville, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2789. Also, petition of J. C. Mater and numerous other citizens of Seymour, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to · the Committee on Ways and Means.

2790. Also, petition of Will Smith and numerous other citizens of Holly B!Uff, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2791. Also, petition of Charley Block and numerous other citizens of Pace and Clarksdale, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WI.LL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct

Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2792. Also, petition of Robert Criss and numerous other citizens of Alligator, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2793. Also, petition of Harrison Strong and numerous other citizens of West Point, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2794. Also, petition of William Baldin and numerous other citizens oi Shaw, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2795. Also, petition of Frank Stemmons and numerous other citizens of Fayette and Rocheport, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2796. Also, petition of W. T. Ghess and numerous other citizens of Lilbourn, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to. $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2797. Also, petition of Elder E. L. Ganes and numerous other citizens of Joplin, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2798. Also, petition of W. M. Ballinger and numerous other citizens of Cape Girardeau, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2799. Also, petition of R. E. Lewis and numerous other citizens of Rolla and Dillon, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit­tee on Ways and Means.

2800. Also, petition of Walter Dean and numerous other citizens of Hindman, Ky., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2801. Also, petition of Robert Moore and numerous other citizens of Hanson and Slaughters, Ky., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2802. Also, petition of Moorman Payne and numerous other citizens of Sample, Ky., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2803. Also, petition of James Allen and numerous other citizens of Jefferson County, Ky., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-a.ge pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2804. Also, petition of Albert Ferguson and numerous other citizens of Jenkins, Ky., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions ·of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2805. Also, petition of George Everheart and numerous other citizens of Morganfield, Waverly, and Spotsville, Ky., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2806. Also, petition of Frank E. Jordan and numerous other citizens of Topeka, Kans., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed-

3070 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2807. Also, petition of Phillip Taylor and numerous other citizens of Cairo, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress­man WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2808. Also, petition of Rudolph Weiss and numerous other citizens of Granite City, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2809. Also, petition of E. Davis and numerous other citizens of Murphysboro, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress­man Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2810. Also, petition of Nat Hinton and numerous other citizens of Harvey, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress­man Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. -2811. Also, petition of Everett Shoemaker and numerous other citizens of Alvin, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for dil'ect Federal old­age pensions of $30 to· $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2812. Also, petition of M. Durden and numerous other citi­zens of Sandersville, Linton, and Mitchell, Ga., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2813. Also, petition of W. C. Burdine and numerous other citizens of Ball Ground, Dawsonville, and Gainesville, Ga., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2814. Also, petition of W. L. Wheeler and numerous other citizens of Lawrenceville and Decatur, Ga., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2815. Also, petition of W. E. Coley and numerous other citizens of Savannah, Ga., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2816. Also, petition of Frank Washington and numerous other citizens of Altheimer, Ark., favo1·ing House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2817. Also, petition of James Ricks and numerous other citizens of Sherrill, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman Wn.L Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2818. Also, petition of A. N. Retter and numerous other citizens of Little Rock, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2819. Also, petition of James Scales and numerous other citizens of McGehee, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2820. Also, petition of R. F. Meeks and numerous other citizens of Hamburg, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gi·essman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2821. Also, petition of Allen Wills and numerous other citizens of Dermott, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-

age pensions· of $30 to $50 a month; to the Comm~ttee on Ways and Means.

2822. Also, petition of J. R. Bland and numerous other citizens of Havana, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on· Ways and Means.

2823. Also, petition of Wiley McRae and numerous other citizens of Waldo, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee of Ways and Means.

2824. Also, petition of Benjamin Wright and numerous other citizens of Waldo, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2825. Also, petition of J. J. Wilson and numerous other citizens of Bassett, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old· age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2826. Also, petition of C. H. O'Bryan and numerous other citizens of Cloverdale, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old .. age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2827. Also, petition of C. Holmes and numerous other citizens of Jefferson County, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed· eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit­tee on Ways and Means.

2828. Also, petition of Will Dale and numerous other citi­zens of Brickeys, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress­man WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2829. Also, petition of W. L. Williams and numerous other citizens of Hodges and Hamilton, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L RoGERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2830. Also, petition of B. Colter and numerous other citi­zens of Huntsville and New Market, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2831. Also, petition of J. S. Carr and numerous other citi­zens of Russellville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means..

2832. Also, petition of Elmo White and numerous· other citizens of Anderson. Athens, and Rogersville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and M::eans.

2833. Also, petition of W. A. Kennedy and numerous other citizens of Fairfax and Girard, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com .. mittee on Ways and Means.

2834. Also, petition of Howard Malone and numerous other citizens of Athens, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2835. Also, petition of J. R. Stone and numerous other citizens of Troy, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con· gressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2836. Also, petition of Clarence Walker and numerous other citizens of Pinson, Remlap, and Oneonta, Ala., favor­ing House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3071 . plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.'

2837. Also, petition of Tom Wooten and numerous other citizens of Florence, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2838. Also, petition of Ben Padgett and numerous other citizens of Davidson, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2839. Also, petition of Everett Bolling and numerous other citizens of Wise and Big Laurel, Va., favoring House bill ~856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2840. Also, petition of Harry Stevenson and numerous other citizens of Norton and Harrisonburg, Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2841. Also, petition of J. E. Reagle and numerous other citizens of Blencoe, Iowa, favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2842. Also, petition of William Gallaher and numerous other citizens of Moundsville, W. Va .• favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2843. Also, petition of J. W. Bailey and numerous other citizens of Cyclone, W. Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WIL.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2844. Also, petition of Hugh G. Keenan and numerous other citizens of Knob Fork and Littleton, W. Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2845. Also, petition of E. L. Bean and numerous other citi­zens of Rock Oak and Stephen City, W. Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2846. Also, petition of Roy Carter and numerous other citizens of Starke and Lawtey, Fla., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2847. Also, petition of W. M. Hughes and numerous other citizens of Grand Ridge, Fla., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2848. Also, petition of Vernon Allison and numerous other citizens of Chandler and Phoenix, Ariz., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2849. Also, petition of N. D. _Vigil and numerous other citi­zens of Arroyo and Taos, N. Mex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit­tee on Ways and Means.

2850. Also, petition of W. A. Armstrong and numerous other citizens of Gray Court, Pelzer, and Laurens, S. C., fa­voring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2851. Also, petition of D. H. New and numerous other citi­zens of Troy and Bradley, S. C.,, favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed-

eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2852. Also, petition of L. J. Spear and numerous other citizens of Laplace, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RocERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2853. Also, petition of Manuel Harper and numerous other citizens of Dry Creek and Sugartown, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2854. Also, petition of Louis Blanchard and numerous other citizens of Marrero, Westwego, and Larose, La., favor­ing House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2855. Also, petition of J. W. Thames and numerous other citizens of Dry Prong and Pollock, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2856. Also, petition of Sonny Williams and numerous other citizens of Bastrop, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2857. Also, petition of"E. M. Pettygrew and numerous other citizens of Shreveport and Robson, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com-mittee on Ways and Means. ·

2858. Also, petition of C. Moore and numerous other citizens of Idabel, Okla., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2859. Also, petition of John Edwards and numerous other citizens of Wagoner, Okla., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2860. Also, petition of G. W. Walker and numerous other citizens of McAlester, Okla., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WI:tiL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2861. Also, petition of R. H. Mann and numerous other citizens of Sulphur and Big Canyon, Okla., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2862. Also, petition of J. H. Williams and numerous other citizens of Yadkinville, N. c., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2863. Also, petition of G. O. Edwards and numerous other citizens of Furches and Stratford, N. C., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2864. Also, petition of J. S. Griffin and numeral.is other citizens of Cerro Gordo, N. C., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2865. Also, petition of John Phipps and numerous other citizens of Nashville, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2866. Also, petition of Frank Brasul and numerous other citizens of Coalmont and Pelham, 'Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct

3072 CONGRESSIONAL_ RECORD-HOUSE MARCH~

Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2867. Also, petition of John Richardson and numerous other citizens of Smyrna, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2868. Also, petition of C. A. Barlow and numerous other citizens of Jonesboro, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman Wn.L RoGERs~ the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2869. Also, petition of Easau Roberson and numerous other citirens of Memphis, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2870. Also, J?etition of Edward Tucker and numerous other citizens of Kerrville and Lucy, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2871. Also, petition of Paul Freeman and numerous other citizens of Jackson, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee

. on Ways and Means. 2872. Also, petition of Louis Palmer and numerous other

citizens of Montgomery, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2873. Also, petition of Simon Hudson and numerous other citizens of Whiteville and Bolivar, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. _

2874. Also, petition of John D. Lasater and numerous other citizens of Nashville and Dickson, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2875. Also, petition of Clifton Smith and numerous other citizens of Clarksville and Memphis, Tenn., favoring . House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2876. Also, petition of Joe Buford and numerous other citizens of Humboldt, Alamo, and Gadsden, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2877. Also, petition of Henry Ross and numerous other citizens of Adams, Springfield, and Cedar Hill, Tenn., favor­ing House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2878. Also, petition of J. J. Rutledge and numerous other citizens of Taft, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2879. Also, petition of Charles Roundtree and numerous other citizens of Halls, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2880. Also, petition of Leonard Jones and numerous other citizens of East Chattanooga and Jasper, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2881. Also, petition of C. A. Goodwin and numerous other citizens of Chattanooga, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal

old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2882. Also, petition of John H. Clark and numerous other citizens of North Little Rock, Ark., favoring House till 2856. by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed .. eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Commit .. tee on Ways and Means.

2883. Also, petition of George Hayner and numerous other citizens of Tinsman, Hampton, and Woodbury, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month: to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2884. Also, petition of W. Hampton and numerous other citizens of Parkin and Earle, Ark., favoring House bill 2856. by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed· eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. _

2885. Also, petition of Jim Averton and numerous other citizens of Forrest City, Round Pond, and Widener, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by CQngressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2886. Also, petition of George Webster and numerous other citizens of Lexa and Rondo, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means .

2887. Also, a petition of Sam Gordon and numerous other citizens of Crawfordsville, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2888. Also, petition of B. C. Clark and numerous other citizens of Dumas, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con .. gressman Wn.L RoGERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2889. Also, petition of Louis Ollis and numerous other citizens of Wynne, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Con-:­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. ·

2890. Also, petition of Henry Perry and numerous 0th.er citizens of Arkadelphia, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2891. Also, petition of H. D. Davidson and numerous other · citizens of Centerville, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL Roans, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2892. Also, petition of Hugh Johnson and numerous other citirens of Batesville, Eufaula, and Comer, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2893. Also, petition of Jim Harper and numerous other citizens of Brundidge, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old':' age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2894. Also, petition of Tom Roberson and numerous other citizens of Courtland and Town Creek, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2895. Also, petition of Booker J. Curry and numerous other citizens of Selma, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2896. Also, petition of Joseph Matthews and numerous other citizens of Dixiana, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal

1935 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD-HOUSE 3073 old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2897. Also, petition of J. T. Allen and numerous other citizens of Atmore, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; . to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2898. Also, petition of Edgar Darby and numerous other citizens of Florence, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope pfan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. .

2899. Also, petition of Wright J. Smith and numerous other citizens of Bessemer, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2900. Also, petition of Walter Hickerson and numerous other citizens of Murfreesboro, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2901. Also, petition of M. J. Watkins and numerous other citizens of Finger, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; . to the Committee on Ways and Means. '

2902. Also, petition of R. W. Richardson and numerous other citizens of Mason, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2903. Also, petition of Preston Owens and numerous other citizens of Moscow, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the ·Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2904. Also, petition of John Woody and numerous other citizens of Union City, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee ori Ways and Means.

2905. Also, petition of R. L. Sneed and numerous other citizens of Milton and Lascassas, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2906. Also, petition of Chester Carr and numerous other citizens of Jackson and Bemis, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com: mittee on Ways and Means.

2907. Also, petition of U. 0. Collier and numerous other citizens of Nashville, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2908. Also, petition of Hayes Watson and numerous other citizens of Cumberland Gap, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2909. Also, petition of Van H. Williams and numerous other citizens of Manchester, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2910. Also, petition of E. D. Lovins and numerous other citizens of Dyersburg and Friendship, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $40 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2911. Also, petition of Mose Blandon and numerous other citizens of Ripley and Halls, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed-

eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2912. Also petition of A. C. Schroeder and numerous other citizens of Red River, Gresham, and Embarrass, Wis., fa­voring House bill 2856, by Congressmi:µi WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2913. Also, petition of Richard W. Peterson and numerous other citizens of Shawano, Wis., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month, to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2914. Also, petition of M. H. Cif ers and numerous other citiZens of Nickelsville, Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30. to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2915. Also, petition of Oliver Part and numerous other citizens of West Point, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2916. Also, petition of Mark Strong and numerous other citizens of West Point, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; . to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2917. Also, petition of George Harris and numerous other citizens of Scott, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2918. Also, petition of Will Rubin and numerous other citizens of Mendenhall, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoctRs, the Pope plan Jor direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2919. Also, petition of Will James and numerous other citizens of Scott, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2920. Also, petition of Dock Carter and numerous other citizens of Louisville and High Point, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2921. Also, petition of I. G. Herrin and numerous other citizens of Bragg City, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2922. Also, petition of Frank Smith and numerous other citizens of Hunter, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for diiect Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2923. Also, petition of Cornelus Augustus and numerous other citizens of St. Louis, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2924. Also, petition of Alvin Heitman and numerous other citizens of Jenning and St. Louis, Mo., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a· month; to the Com-mittee on Ways and Means. ·

2925. Also, petition of James F. Irvin and numerous other citize.ns of Goldonna, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2926. Also, petition of Paul Harries and numerous other citizens of McDade, Sligo, and Doyline, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan fo~

3074 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD~HOUSE MARCH 6 direct Federal old-age pensions of $30' to $50 a month; to. tlle pensions. &f $:?0· to $5C> a month~ to the Committee on Ways Committee on Ways and Means. and Means.

2927. Also, petition of Ben Fredici and numer()US other 2942. Also., petition of J: .. E. Francis and numerous other citizens of Clarence and Dry Prong, La., favoring Hol:l.Se bill citizens of Tennille, Ga .• favoring House bill 2856'. by Con-2856, by Con.:.aressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direet gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to Ure Cam.- age pensi~ns of $'30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on mittee on Ways and Means. Ways and Means.

2928. Also, petition of A. C. Smith and numerous other 2943. Also, petiti-on of W. P. Hentierson and numerous citizens of Robeline, La., favoring House bill 2856, by; Con- other citizens of Ga.mesville, Ga,, favoring House bill 2856, gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old~ by Congressman Wru.. ROGERS, the Pope plan for direet Fed­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on era! old-age pensions e>f $lfrto $5.0 a.month., to-the C-Ommittee-Ways and Means. on Ways and Means.

2929. Also, petition of Walter Delphin and numerous other mA. Also, petition of John Burks and numerous other citizens of Natchez and Natchitoches, La., favormg House citizens of HHlsbor& &lild Harperville, Miss., f av0ring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pe>pe plan for 'bill 28-56, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Po-pe plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $56 a month; to the direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $5-0 a month; to the-Committee on Ways and Means. Committee on Ways and Means.

2930. ·Also, petition of Noah Pierre and numerous.. other 2945'. Also, petition of Eddman Montgomery and numer-citizens of Folsom and Osceola,, La., favori_ng Hause bill 285&.. ous other c1tizen.s of Cocoa, Fla., favoring House bill 2356, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for d.il"ect Fed- hy Congressman WILL ROGERS~ the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month;_ to the Committee : aal old-age pensions of $30 to $.SO a month; to the. C0mmittee on Ways and Mea~ on Ways and Means.

2931. Also, petition of Jordan Freeman and numerous 2'946. Also-, petition of Newton Pitts and numerous other other citizens of Violet, La., favoring Hause bill 2856-, by citizens of Williston, Fla., favoring House hill 2856, by Con­Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan tar di:rect FerleraJl gressman W"ru.. Roons, the-Pope plan for di:reet Federal old­old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month;. to the Committee on age pensions of. $3G to· $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. Ways and Means.

2932. Also, p~'tian of William Miller and numerous other 2.947. Also, petition of Benny Bums and numerous other citizens of Lutcher, La., favoring House bill. 2.856',. by Con- citizens of Greensboro-,, Fla., favoring House bill 2856,. by gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old- Congress-man Wrr.r. RooERS, t~ Pope plan for direct. Federa1 age pensions of $30 to $50 a. month; to the Committee on old-age-pensions of $3& to $-5-0 a. month; to the Committee on Ways and Means. Ways and Means.

a933. Also, petition of Landris Louviere and numerous a948:. Also, petitM>n cf Geo-rge King and numerous other other citizens of Matthews and Raceland, La.,. favoring citizens of Century Fla., favoring ID>use bill 285'6, by Con­House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan gressman Wn.L Rocns. the-Pope plan for di:reet Fed€ral old­ior direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to age pensions of $30. to- $59 a month~ to the Committee on the Committee on Ways and Means. Ways and Means. ·

2934. Also, petition of John Littleton and mnnerous other 2949 Alro, petition of G. C. Hudson and numerous other citizens of Keatchie, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Con- citizens of Marie and Osceola, Ark., favoring House bill 2856., gressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old- by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­age pensions of $30 tO' $50 a month; to the- Committee on eral0ld-age pensions Qf $30 to $50 a month; ta the Committee Ways and Means. on Ways and Means.

2935. Also, petition of W.W. Fleenor and nnqrerous other 2950. Also, petition Qf G. W. Ellis and other citizens of citizens of Millstone, Ky., favoring House bill 2i'56r by Con- North Little Rock, Ar~ tavaring House bill 285&, by Con­gressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old- gressman WILL RoGEas, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on age pensions of $30 to. $50. a, month; to the Committee- on Ways and Means. Ways and Means.

2936. Also, petition of Joe Barrow and numerou& other 2951. Also, petition of W ~ L. Sanders and numerous other · citizens of Knight and Hamlin, Ky., favoring House bill citizens ill Burdette, Luxora, and Blytheville,. Ark .• favoring 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope p1an for direct House bill 2856, hy Congressman Wn.L RoGERs~ the Pope plan Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; t& the-Com- fQr direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $5.0. a month; to mittee on Ways and Means. the Committee on Ways and Means.-

2937. Also, petition of V. M. Shelton and numerous other 2952- Also,, petition of Earnest Taylor and numerQus other citizens of Belton, Dunmor, and Beech Cfeekw Ky-., favoring citizens of De Valls Bluff, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS._ tire Pope plan Cangressn:i,an WILL RoGERS. the Pape plan for direct Fedei:al for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $S& a month~ old-age pensions of $30. to $50 a. month; to the Committee on to the Committee on Ways and Means. Ways and Means.

2938. Also, petition of Calvip H. Jackson and numerous 2953.. Also, petition .of. W. M. Kleckley and numerous other other citizens of Magazine, Ky., favoring House bill 2g5a-, by citi2ens of Pine Bluff, Ark.,. favOJJing House bil1 2856. by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for- direct. Federal Congressman W1u.. RoGE.Rs~ the Pope- plan fax direct Federal 9Id-age pensio:ris of $30 to $50 a month; to the. Committee old-~e pensionS of $l0 to $50 a. month;, to the Committee on on Ways and Means. Ways and· Means. ·

2939. Also, petition of Sidney Goodman and numerous 2954. Also, petiti-0n of Wanier Gossett and numerous other other citizens of Adolphus, Ky.,_ favoring House bill 28'56, citizens of camden, Ark., favoring House bill 2856, by Can­by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan :fo:r direct Fed- ~essman WILL RoGER&r the Pope plan for direc Federal old­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 am0nth; ta the Committee age pen&ions of $30 to $50 a month; to the CDmmittee on on Ways and Means. · Ways and Means. ·

2940. Also, petition of Jeff Parmley and numeirous other 2955 .. Also, petiti-0n of Lewis Sharpe and numerous other citizens of Parnell, Ky., favoring House bill 2a5.&, ~ C1im- citizellS Qf &wes a.nd Crossett, Ark., favoring Rouse. bill 2856, gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old- b.y Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan fo::i: direct Fed­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month· to the Committee an· eral old-age pensions. of $3.0 to $50 a month; to. the Committee Ways and Means. · · on Ways and Means.

2941. Also, Petition of J.C. Page and numerous other citi- 2~6. Al~ petition Qf Filmore Copley and numerous other zens of Canton, Ky., favoring House bill 2856. by Congress- citizens of Dunlow and Missouri Branch, W. Va., favoring ~n Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope- plan _for direct Federal ol.d-age Ho_use bili ~BM. by C~ngr~s.5man. Wn.L ;RoGERS, the Pope plan

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3075

for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to-$50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2957. Also, petition of L. Shelton and numerous other citizens of West Hamlin, W. Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2958. Also, petition of J. D. Bates and numerous other citizens of Rice, Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Congress­man WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2959. Also, petition· of John Welsh and numerous other citizens of Buck Grove, Iowa, favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2960. Also, petition of Henry C. Murphy and numerous other citizens of Jerseyville, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways an(\ Means.

2961. Also, petition of Floyd Jones and numerous other citizens of Jasper and Parrish, Ala., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2962. Also, petition of L. R. Ashmore and numerous other citizens of Kenton and Rutherford, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2963. Also, petition of R. A. Brasher and numerous other citizens of Decaturville, Bath Spring, and Parsons, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2964. Also, petition of W. E. Lord and numerous other citizens of Nashville, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2965. Also, petition of E. E. Parker and numerous other citizens of Shelbyville, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for-direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2966. Also, petition of Hurm.on Bell and numerous other citizens of Center and Timpson, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2967. Also, petition of Howard Lyemons and numerous other citizens of San Antonio, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2968. Also, petition of Edward Strouther and numerous other citizens of Tell and Estelline, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2969. Also, petition of Preston McGowen and numerous other citizens of Blanchard and Livingston, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2970. Also, petition of J. W. Gibson and numerous other citizens of Midway and Madisonville, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2971. Also, petition of Chester Fowler and numerous other citizens of Colmesneil and Emilee, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct

Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2972. Also, petition of J. N. Rusamand and numerous other citizens of Elkhart and Palestine, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2973. Also, petition of D. W. Williamson and numerous other citizens of Teague, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2974. Also, petition of Joe Glenn and numerous other citizens of Pineland and Silsbee, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means. · 2975. Also, petition of A. Albert and numerous other citi­zens of Cold Springs, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2976. Also, petition of L. E. Smith and numerous other citizens of Victoria, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2977. Also, petition of David Cowe and numerous other citizens of Beaumont, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2978. Also, petition of James Hollie and numerous other citizens of Washington and Brenham, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2979. Also, .petition of Buck Powell and numerous other citizens of Hillview and White Hall, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2980. Also, petition ' of James Clark and numerous other citizens of Venice, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2981. Also, petition of James Wellington and numerous other citizens of Mounds, Ill., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2982. Also, petition of J. S. Candill and numerous other citizens of Sophia, W. Va., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2983. Also, petition of Ramon Mascarenaz and numerous other citizens of Vadito, N. Mex., favoring House bill 2'856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a. month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

~'984. Also, petition of E. Aragon and numerous other citizens of Cordova, N. Mex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2985. Also, petition of Bob Burgess and numerous other citizens of Buncombe County, N. C., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

2986. Also, petition of E. H. Butler and numerous other citizens of Canadian, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con4 gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old•

3076 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE MARCH '6 age pensions of $30 ro $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2987. Also, petition of Jim Montgomery and numerous other citizens of Lewisville, Tex., favoring House bill 2855, by Congressman WILL P..oGERs, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2988. Also, petition of Dan Williams and numerous other citizens of Hillister, Woodville, and Georges Creek, Tex., fa­voring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2989. Also, petition of J. T. Wilbourn and numerous other citizens of Commerce, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Cominittee on Ways and Means.

2990. Also, petition oi Ezra Stout and numerous other citizens of McKinney, Renner, and Dallas, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2991. Also, petition of Jackson Busby and numerous other citizens of Kountze, Honey Island, and Woodville, Tex., fa­voring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope.plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Mea.nsJ

2992. Also, petition of Ira Dean and numerous other citi­zens of Shelbyville, Tex., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2993. Also, petition of Gifford Davis and numerous other citizens of Brownsville, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2994. Also, petition of E. H. Smith and numerous other citizens of Peakland, Tennille, and Decatur, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a montJ.1; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2995. Also, petition of W. M. Murphree and numerous other citizens oi Piedmont and Greenville, S. C., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGEB.3, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2996. Also, petition of Jim Alls and numerous other citi­zens of Greenwood, S. C., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a ·month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2997. Also, petition of A. P. Smith and numerous other citizens of Shamrock, Okla., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Fed­eral old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2998. Also, petition of W. E. Lewis and numerous other citizens of Bowlegs and Seminole, Okla., fav<>ring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

2999. Also, petition of J. J. James and other citizens of Osage, Okla., favoring · House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pen­sions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3000. Also, petition of Lewis Fleming and numerous other citizens of Shannon and Pontotoc, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

3001. Also, petition of P. J. Walker and numerous other citizens of Brandon, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL RoGERs, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-

age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3002. Also, petition of R. E. Kitchen and numerous other citizens of Belden and Tupelo, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

3003. Also, petition of Eddie Seal and numerous other citizens of Carthage, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Conunittee on Ways and Means.

3004. Also, petition of Mack Moore and numerous other citizens of Columbus, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3005. Also, petition of Calvin Secus and numerous other citizens of Aberdeen, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $"30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3006. Also, petition of Elliott Buchanan and numerous other citizens of Roxie, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for ct:rect Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3007. Also, petition of Willie Hinton and numerous -0ther citizens of Waynesboro, Miss., favoring House bill 2855, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3008. Also, petition of Joe Taylor and numerous other citizens of Brandon, Jackson, and Pelahatchee, Miss., favor­ing House bill 2856, by C-0ngressma11 WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $5D a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3009. Also, petition of Walloc Crook and numerous other citizens of Brandon, Pelahatchee, and Morton, Miss., favor­ing House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3010. Also, petition of Robert L. Hammons and numerous other citizens of Tutwiler, Miss., fav01ing House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3011. Also, petition of James B. Erwin and numerous other citizens of Guntown and Blue Springs, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3-012. Also, petition of Frank Austin and numerous other citizens of Vaiden and Carrollton, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

3013. Also, petition of J.B. Townsend and numerous other citizens of Pioneer and Lake Providence, La., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3014. Also, petition of F. L. Campbell and numerous other citizens of Grapeland and Shaw, Miss., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

3015. By :rvrr. ANDREWS of New York: Nineteen petitions containing approximately 300 names of residents of the Fortieth Congressional District of New York, protesting against enact ment of the public-utilities bill; to the Com­mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3016. By Mr. BUCKLER of l\iiinnesota: Petition of Edward D. Rydeen, of Clearbrook, Minn., president of the Leon Town­ship Unit of the American Farm Bw·eau of Clearwater

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3077 County, Minn., John Skog, of Clearbrook, and other members of the resolution committee, urging that Federal funds be made available to provide for the continued testing of all herds of livestock and for the payment of reasonable in­demnities for reacting animals, to the end that human health may be safeguarded and the livestock industry protected, and that the test for the Bang's disease be made compulsory; to the Committee on Agriculture.

3017. Also, petition of Edward D. Rydeen, of Clearbrook, Minn., president of the Leon Township Unit of the American Farm Bureau of Clearwater County, Minn., John Skog, of Clearbrook, and other members of the resolutions committee, urging that Federal funds be made available for the exten­sion and expansion of our highway system without the matching requirements; to the Committee on Roads.

3018. By Mr. COLDEN: Resolutions of Harbor Post No. 1253, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, San Pedro, Calif., endorsing House bill l, which provides for the immediate cash payment of World War adjusted-compensa­tion certificates, and urging that favorable action be taken on this measure; and endorsing House bill 100, providing for the restoration of previous rights of Spanish War veterans relative to pensions, hospitalization, domiciliary care, etc., and petitioning for favorable action on same; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

3019. By Mr. CONNERY: Resolution of Group No. 630, Polish National Alliance, of Lawrence, Mass., memorializing the Congress to enact House Joint Resolution 81 and Senate Joint Resolution 11, directing the President of the United States of America to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3020. Also, resolutions of Group No. 2383, Polish National Alliance, of ·Lawrence, Mass., memorializing the Congress to enact House Joint Resolution 81 and Senate Joint Resolution 11, directing the President of the United States of America to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3021. Also, resolutions of Group No. 967, Polish National Alliance, of Peabody, Mass., memorializing the CoD.c,oress to enact House Joint Resolution 81 and Senate Joint Resolution 11, directing the President of the United States of America to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3022. Also, resolution of the Common Council of the City of Peabody, Mass., memorializing the Congress to enact House Joint Resolution 81 and Senate Joint Resolution 11, directing the President of the United States of Ariierica to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memo­rial Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3023. Also, resolutions of the General Court of Massa­chusetts, memorializing Congress to repeal the cotton-proc­essing tax or the spreading of the tax over industry in general; to the Committee on Agriculture.

3024. Also, resolution of the General Court of Massa­~husetts, memorializing the Congress of the United States relative to the prevention or punishment of the crime of lynching; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3025. By Mr. CROWTHER: Petition of citizens of Schenec­tady, N. Y., protesting against enactment of House bill 5423 · to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. '

3026. By Mr. DARROW: Memorial of the Philadelphia Board of Trade, protesting against the passage of the Ray­burn utilities bill <H. R. 5423); to the Committee on Inter­state and Foreign Commerce.

3027. By Mr. DEEN: Memorial of the State Legislature of Georgia, condemning the Wagner-Costigan antilynching bill, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3028. By Mr. DEMPSEY: Memorial of Legislature of New Mexico; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3029. By Mr. DEROUEN: Petition of citizens of Beauregard Parish, La., urging Congress to enact into law House bill 2856; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3030. By Mr. DORSEY: Petition of citizens of Philadelphia, Pa., urging support of the principles of health management as promulgated by the American Medical Association, in connection with the security bill; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3031. Also, petition of residents of Philadelphia, Pa., urging the passage of House bill 2827, by Congressman LUNDEEN, providing for the establishment of unemployment, old-age, and social insurance, and for other purposes; to the Com­mittee on Labor.

3032. By Mr. EKWALL: Senate Joint Memorial No. 16, of the Thirty-eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, petitioning the President of the United States and the Secretary of State of the United States to refrain from declaring any reduction of the present tariff rates on :filberts~ shelled or unshelled, to the end that this industry of the Pacific Northwest may be protected fully and amply against destructive foreign competition; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3033. Also, Senate Joint Memorial No. 15, of the Thirty­eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, peti­tioning Congress to pass adequate laws to require that each branch of every national bank publish, at proper intervals,, in like manner as bank reports now are published, statements showing the assets and liabilities of such branch bank or affiliated institutions, and setting out the total amount of deposits standing in the names of residents of the community where such branch bank is situated and the total amount of loans and discounts made to such residents; to the Commit­tee on Banking and Currency.

3034. Also, Senate Joint Memorial No. 12, of the Thirty­eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, petition­ing Congress to refrain from reduction of present tariff on cherries; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3035. Also, Senate Joint Memorial No. 10, of the TI:lirty­eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, petition­ing Congress to provide funds to clear dead timber, debris, etc., from Crane Prairie Reservoir site in Deschutes County. Oreg.; to the Committee on Appropriations.

3036. Also, Senate Joint Memorial No. 8, of the Thirty­eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, petition­ing Congress to make appropriation for the eradication of Bang's disease among cattle; to the Committee on Appropria­tions.

3037. Also, House Joint Memorial No. 5, of the Thirty-eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, petitioning Con­gress to pass appropriate legislation to provide military de­fense for the State of Oregon and the Pacific Northwest; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

3038. Also, House Joint Memorial No. 2, of th~ Thirty-eighth Legislative Assembly of the State of Oregon, providing for segregating the costs of navigation and electrical energy on the Bonneville project, Oregon; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

3039. By Mr. GOODWIN: Petition of the Parent-Teachers Association, Kingston, N. Y., urging the omce of Education of the United States Department of the Interior to encourage the use and development of motion pictures for visual in­struction, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Education.

3040. Also, petition of the Board of Supervisors of Colum­bia County, N. Y., urging the repeal of section 55 Cb) of the Revenue Act of 1934, relating to the publicity of income-tax returns; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3041. By Mr. GRANFIELD: Memorial in favor of the adoption by the Senate of the United States of a resolution now pending before it relating to religious persecution in Mexico; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

3042. Also, memorial of City Council of Northampton, rel­ative to General Pulaski's Memooial Day resolution; to thQ Committee on the Judiciary.

3078 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD-HOUSE MARCH 6 3043. By Mt. ·HART: Resolution of the House of Assembly

of.the State of New Jersey (senate concurring), memorializ­ing the Federal Congress to enact appropriate legislation ex­tending the powers of the Home Owners' Loan Corporation; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

3044. Also, resolution of Group No. 2787, of the Polish National Alliance of the United States of North America, memorializing Congress to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorj.al Day, for the observance and commemoration of the death of Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski.; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3045. By Mr. HIGGINS af Massachusetts: Resolution of the City Council of the City of Worcester, Mass., adopted February 18, 1935, that we hereby memorialize and petition the Congress of the United States to pass, and the President of the United States to approve, if passed, the General Pulaski's Memorial Day resolution now pending in the United States Congress; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3046. By Mr. HILDEBRANDT: Petition of the South Dakota Senate urging the passage of legislation or allocating of funds for the development by the United States of America of the hydroelectric and irrigation sites u:Pon the Missouri River and its tributaries, within and upon the boundaries of the State of South Dakota; to the Committee on Military Affairs.

3047. Also, petition of Mobridge Post, No. 2741, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, being a representative body of the taxpayers as well as ex-service men within their community, to go on record as being solidly in support of the Patman bill <H. R. 1), to the exclusion of all others, and respectfully demand support of said bill by their respective Senators and Representatives in Congress; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3048. By Mr. KENNEY: Concurrent resolution of the One Hundred and Fifty-ninth Legislature of the State of New Jersey, adopting a concurrent resolution memorializing the Congress to extend the pawers of the Home Owners' Loan Corporation in order to liquidate tax indebtedness; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

3049. By Mr. JOHNSON of Texas: Memorial of R. D. Elliott, Irene, Tex.; T. E. Elliott, Penelope, Tex.; and R. V. Dunbar, Malone, Tex., favoring House bill 3263; to the Com­mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3050. Also, petition of Wright Kincheloe, of Mexia, Tex., opposing House bill 5423; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3-051. Also, memorial of Hon. J. L. Morris, Maypearl, Tex., favoring House bill 3263; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3052. Also, memorial of J.M. Dillon, secretary Tyler Divi­sion, No. 97, Benefit Association of Railway Employees, Tyler, Tex., favoring House bill 8100, the Pettengill bill; to the Com­mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3053. Also, petition of Joe Jefferson, city commissioner, Corsicana, Tex., and R. F. Sikes, Ennis, Tex., opposing House bill 5423, the Rayburn bill; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3-054. By Mr. KV ALE: Petition of 558 residents of the State of Minnesota, in the counties of Yellow Medicine, Renville, and Redwood, urging adoption of the Townsend plan of old­age pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3ll55. Also, petition of 386 residents of the State of Minne­sota, in the counties of Lyon, Murray, and Nobles, urging adoption of the Townsend plan for old-age pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3056. Also, petition of 459 residents of the State of Minne­sota, in the counties of Nobles and Lac qui Parle, urging adoption of the Townsend plan for old-age pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

&057. Also) petition of 542 residents of the State of :Minne­sota, in the counties of Kandiyohi, Lac qui Parle, Pipestone, and Rock, urging adoption of the Townsend plan for old­age pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3058. Also, petition of 1,807 residents of Swift County, Minn., urging adoption of the Townsend plan for old-age pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3059. By Mr. LESINSKI: Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, of the Legislature of Michigan, memorializing the Congress of the United States to pass suitable legislation, or the Post­master General take suitable action, to deed to the State of Michigan the old post-office site and building in Lansing, Mich., for the use of State purposes; to the Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads.

3060. Also, Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 6, memorial­izing the Congress to pass suitable legislation proclaiming October 11 as General Pulaski's Memorial Day; to the Com­mittee on the Judiciary.

3061. By Mr. LUCAS: Petition of Rev. H. R. Brown and other citizens of Pike County, m., endorsing old-age pension legislation; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3062. By Mr. MERRITT of New York: Petition of Miss Kathryn Hinnenkamp, of 923 Wa!tin Avenue, New York City, N. Y., and other residents of New York City and vicinity, urging Congress to def eat the Rayburn bill; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3063. Also, petition of F. A. Rutz, of 69-27 Sixty-sixth Street, Glendale, N. Y., and other residents of Glendale and vicinity, urging Congress to defeat the Rayburn bill; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3064. Also, petition of Leslie L. Lawrence, of 93-18 Two Hundred and Fortieth Street, Queens Village, Long Island, N. Y., and other residents of Queens Village and vicinity, petitioning Congress to defeat the Rayburn bill; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3065. Also,- petition of Mrs. J. A. Roberts, of West New Brighton, Staten Island, N. Y., and other residents in that vicinity, appealing to Congress to defeat the Rayburn bill; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

3066. By Mr. PFEIFER: Petition of the Geiger Products Co., Inc., New York City, favoring the passage of House bill 70 by Congressman BLAND; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3067. By Mr. PETTENGILL: Petition signed by Groups Nos. 2597, 1812, 2752, 1745, 2765, 2313, 2200, 759, 1612, 1461, 398, 672, 545, 924, 2163, 887, 2195, and 1792 of the Polish National Alliance of the United States of North America, directing the President of the United States to proclaim October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day; also like resolution of common council of the cities of Mich­igan City, South Bend, Frankfort, and Mishawaka, Ind.; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3068. By Wu. PLUMLEY: Resolution of the American Legion, Hartford Post, No. 26, White River Junction, Vt., urging the passage of House bill 3896; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3069. By Mr. POLK: Petition signed by H. A. Moore, adjutant, Pike Post No. 498, the American Legion, Piketon, Ohio, with 33 other veterans and 89 citizens not veterans, urging passage of the Patman bill CH. R. 1) for immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates, etc.; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3070. By Mr. RUDD: Petition of Marine Workers Metal Trades District Council, port of New York and vicinity, re­garding the McCarran amendment to the work-relief bill; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3071. Also, petition of American Federation of Govern­ment Employees, New York Naval District Lodge, No. 36, Brooklyn, N. Y ., concerning House bill 200; to the Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Departments.

3072. By Mr. SADOWSKI: Petition of Council No. 15 of the Polish National Alliance, asking that October 11 of each year be set aside as General Pulaski Memorial Day; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3073. Also, petition of Group No. 2039 of the Polish Na­tional Alliance, asking that October 11 of each year be set aside as General Pulaski's Memorial Day; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3074. Also, petition of Group No. 2628 of the Polish Na­tional Alliance, petitioning that the resolution be passed set­ting aside October 11 of each year as General Pulaski's Memorial Day; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

1935 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 3079

3075. Also, petition of city council, Dearborn, Mich., asking that October 11 of each year be set aside as General Pulaski's Memorial Day; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

3076. By Mr. SUTPIITN: Petition of the New Jersey As­sembly, Trenton, N. J., urging Congress to enact legislation extending the powers of the Home Owners' Loan Corpora­tion; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

3077. By Mr. ',I'ARVER: Petition from Oscar M. Reed and 22 other citizens of Whitfield County, Ga., favoring old­age pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3078. By Mr. TINKHAM: Petition of residents of Boston, Mass., favoring Townsend plan of old-age revolving pensions; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3079. By Mr. TOBEY: Petition of State of New Hampshire, for the procurement of Federal cooperation in the stabilizing of the Merrimack River; to the Committee on Flood Control

3080. By Mr. TRUAX: Petition of Harold E. Bowers and other citizens of Toledo, Ohio, regarding income-tax pub­licity as a wanton, meddlesome, and pernicious invasion of their privacy-it being their opinion that the responsibility for apprehending violators of the income-tax laws rests upon the duly constituted agencies of the Government and not upon busybodies, meddlers, snoopers, and self-appointed spies-and protesting against a law that will permit and en­courage every citizen to spy upon his neighbor and meddle in his affairs; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3081. Also, petition of members of Toledo Stereotypers and Electrotypers, Toledo, Ohio, by their secretary, Alfred H. Hosfeld, asking support of the McCarran amendment to the public-works relief bill and also of Senate Resolution 69, sponsored by Senator LEWIS B. SCHWELLENBACH; to the Com­mittee on Labor.

3082. Also, petition of the Montpelier (Ohio) Townsend Club of 250 members and over 2,000 petitioners, by their president, Charles M. Newell, and their secretary, Henrietta Heth, asking support in bringing the McGroarty bill CH. R. 3977) out of committee to the floor of the House and for a speedy and favorable consideration of same; to the Com­mittee on Ways and Means.

3083. Also, petition of August W. Bankey and other citi­zens of Gibsonburg, Ohio, urging support of a bill obligating the Government of the United States to pay every citizen of said Government whose record is free of criminality and who has attained the age of 60 years a monthly pension of $200 until the end of his life upon the sole condition that he agree, under oath, to spend the entire amount of the pension within the confines of the United States during the current month in which it is received; to the . Committee on Ways and Means.

3084. Also, petition of Massillon Trades and Labor Assem­bly, Massillon, Ohio, by their secretary, Robert J. Siffrin, urging support of the prevailing-wage amendment to the public-works relief bill; to the Committee on Labor.

3085. Also, petition of Canal Zone Women's League, by Mrs. M. F. Bradney, urging support of Senate bill 3241, granting annuity to widows of Canal Zone employees, and urging the retention of the Panama Railroad Steamship Line and the maintenance of cheap fares for employees and their families as it is of vital importance to every American civilian employee on the Isthmus because it is necessary for them to spend vacations in a cooler climate and they naturally, in most cases, prefer the United States; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3086. Also, petition of the First Ward Democratic Club of Akron, Ohio, by their secretary, J. T. McCaffney, urging sup­port of the Patman bill CH. R. 1) , which provides for imme­diate cash payment of the veterans' adjusted-service certifi­cates, as they believe the certificates should be paid in full at once in order to settle a debt that is long past due, and believing that the Patman bill should be passed, as its enact­ment will not cause additional taxation and will provide for a needed expansion of the currency; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3087. Also, petition of John Paulding Post, Veterans of Foreign Wars. Paulding, Ohio, by their post commander, A. F.

Ptak, urging Congress to pass legislation that will provide for the immediate payment in cash of said certificates in the amount of their face value, with cancelation of accrued in­terest and refund of interest paid, as the payment of the certificates at this time will not create an ·additional debt and would reduce by an equal amount the debt owed by the Gov­ernment; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3088. Also, petition of General Marion Council, No. 162, unior Order United American Mechanics, Marlboro, Ohio,

by their recording secretary, Harry Wearstler, favoring the passage of House Joint Resolution 69, creating in the Depart­

. ment of Justice a bureau for deportation of aliens; to the Committee on Immigration and Naturalization.

3089. Also, petition of Trumbull County Building Trades Council, Warren, Ohio, by their secretary, Lawrence Elston, requesting support of the Davis-Bacon prevailing rate of wage law; to the Committee on Labor.

3090. Also, petition of E. A. Gildea and 11 other citizens of Gibson, Ohio, urging favorable consideration of the Frazier­Lemke refinancing bill; to the Committee on Agriculture.

3091. Also, petition of Arizona Joint Legislative Board of Transportation Brotherhoods by their secretary, Leroy Magers, Tucson, Ariz., endorsing the bill which will prohibit the employment of noncitizen labor on private works as there are now gainfully employed in the United States millions of noncitizen workers and many others who do not intend to become citizens; to the Committee on Immigration.

3092. Also, petition of 167 veterans and voters of Wads­worth, Ohio, by Ralph s. Robinson, urging full support and passage of House bill l, providing for the immediate payment of the adjusted-service certificates; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3093. Also, petition of Clan Stewart 274, Order of Scottish Clans, Canton, Ohio, by their secretary, Harval B. Stewart, asking favorable consideration of unemployment-insurance bill CH. R. 2827), as they consider it the only bill that deals adequately with the problem and has the merit of liquidat­ing the expense incurred; to the Committee on Labor.

3094. Also, petition of workers, organized and unorgan­ized, employed and unemployed, 500 in number, of Bellaire, Ohio, vigorously protesting against the passage of any un­employment and social-insurance bill other than the House bill 2827, and demanding their Congressmen to support and endorse House bill 2827 when it comes up for consideration; to the Committee on Labor.

3095. By Mr. TURNER: Petition of Ray Tucker and numerous other citizens , of Iron City and Ethridge, Tenn .• favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman Wn.L ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3096. Also, petition of Mack Martin and numerous other citizens of Lawrenceburg, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3097. Also, petition of Leonard N. Fox and numerous other citizens of Lawrenceburg anii Leoma, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Congressman WILL RoGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways ·and Means.

3098. Also, petition ©f John Hunt and numerous other cit­izens of Loretto, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­·gressman WILL ROGERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old­age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3099. Also, petition of T. G. Cook and numerous other citi­zens of Columbia, Tenn., favoring House bill 2856, by Con­gressman Wn.L Ro GERS, the Pope plan for direct Federal old-age pensions of $30 to $50 a month; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

3100. By Mr. WIGGLESWORTH: Petition of General Court of Massachusetts, in favor of the adoption by the Sen­ate of the United States of a resolution now pending before it relative to religious persecution in Mexico; to the Com­mittee on Foreign Affairs.